http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0108/Clinton_fights_tears_Its_not_easy.html because i'd say there's enough estrogen in the country as is. do we really need our leader of the greatest nation of the world to be crying when things get rough? if she thinks the "campaign trail" is hard, she's gonna have some bad news when she steps into the white house. what say you?
Dont mean to sound femanist, but I'm a Christian, and the bible teaches that women should not take authority over men.
This was brilliant and well scripted. She's playing the sympathy card, and no one can call her on it, or they will be painted as a big old mean man. Can't stand the Clintons, but you have to appreciate their campaigning acumen.
women can lead just as well as men, maybe even better considering they're not that much into "pissing contests" as we are
how can you lead when you're stressed out over your duties all the time? plus that "time of the month", there's gonna be like 40 white house staffers fired in a period of 3-5 days. women are not equal to men, men are not equal to women, if we were - we would have the same reproductive organs. i don't know why people can't understand that. we're designed for different things, and no women will ever be able to write her name in the snow. so good luck being "equal".
I'm not talking about equality here. Of course there are areas where women are better than men and viceversa. But when it comes to leadership I think they can do a good job too and there are plenty of examples of this
ehh i'd beg to differ on that. maybe somewhere there is one, but hillary.. definitely not. she's a typical power hungry woman, who just wants more power and fame.. like most women in skilled positions. she doesn't know a scoop of politics. (not that many of the candidates in this election do)
it doesn't sound feminist (i have a feeling you don't understand what that word means.) i would tell you what it does sound like but there's that rule against personal insults that i may be overstepping if i were to do so. so i'll refrain
I agree about Hillary but what makes you think women can't lead? isn't that what politics actually IS and what politicians what regardless of their gender?
that's just my personal opinion. i'm sure there's women who have the ability to lead but if you just want to hold a high position of power because, "you're a woman who thinks she can lead" you're definitely not getting my vote because that's annoying. if you believe in something - then shoot for it. but if you just want to do something to get fame and power and be "the first woman president" you're in it for the wrong reasons.. for some reason one person's ego should be held higher than the future of the nation? no, that's bullsh!t. you don't see men running saying, "i'm a man and i believe i can be a firm leader because i'm male". but the hillary supporters i've talked to say just that, because she's a woman she should be catapulted to the highest position in politics.. and i don't think she has said that herself, but if we are using that argument then that's my 2 cents.
Sorry i left out the "anti-". and of coerce i know what it means. My point was women, even in Christianity, do not belong in positions of authority over men. You can call it what you want, i call it truth.
I call it you need help Must be a scared little man if you are afraid of having a big old mean woman in control of you
Can not agree on this one bit. Thinking like this however is why it will be hard for a woman to get into the whitehouse.
I don't think it's too fair to bag on someone for having their opinions.. i'd say everyone's entitled to them.. if he doesn't think women should have authority over women then big deal. i think women should have a chance at the same things as men but hillary will never dream of getting my vote.
IMO being sexist like this is not any better than being racist. Yes you can be racist if you want for example, it does not mean I will not 'bag' on someone for their opinion.