Comments on: Parable of a girl from Kansas (or Louisiana)…..

By: Mary Beth

Mary Beth — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 21:19:42 +0000

Goesh…you said it all and you said it well.
Enough bickering!!

By: Anne-Marie

Anne-Marie — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 11:33:30 +0000

Here, here goesh.

By: goesh

goesh — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 16:38:35 +0000

The total lack of any expressed outrage by NOW over the sexist attacks on Hillary and Sarah says it all. The 2cd only woman candidate for VP was hung in effigy for God’s sake and she was openly called a cun* and not one damn peep of protest from the NOW camp. Hillary was trashed, called a ball crusher and literally robbed and not a peep of protest – she then was symbolically groped for God’s sake and not a word of outrage from NOW. How obtuse can people be to simply overlook this and pretend it has no significance?

By: Jill

Jill — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 03:12:11 +0000

fsteele:

you wrote:

“Jill,

Was it you who thought TNA was a nest of PUMAs? If so, gratuitously accusing McPalin of negative campaigning, and then pursuing the subject with a cite from CBS — might be considered, er, somewhat non-exemplary in a post about sweetness and light.

F. Steele (PUMA)”

No, I didn’t think this site or organization is a “nest of PUMAs.”

Thanks for asking and giving me a chance to be extremely clear.

By: Thia, GA

Thia, GA — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 03:07:37 +0000

fsteel- I guess I missed the Palin conversation…

I like Palin, PUMAs, pretzels, poptarts, plantains, popsicles, pimentos, mmmm pizza, pumpernickel, pumpkin pie, pomegranates, pickles, peaceful discourse…

By: Amy Siskind

Amy Siskind — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 02:58:16 +0000

Wrdfrk,

If you want to see our accomplishments and battle scars, read our press releases and media. We have been in the trenches.

We happen to prefer four other candidates. Can you explain to us why Gandy is better than our four picks?

By: Wrdfrk

Wrdfrk — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 02:53:20 +0000

Sexism in the media and politics is only one of many, many issues that NOW works on. During the election, NOW had to keep track of the candidates’ positions on the entire range of women’s issues, carefully navigating the changing political landscape so that at the end of it all, it would be in the best position possible to help women. This could not have been easy, but New Agenda chooses to target Gandy for ONE issue out of many, sexism. And frankly, though sexism is an important women’s issue, it is not nearly as important as other issues, such as wage equity and women’s health which directly effect women’s lives on a daily basis, and on which NOW and other women’s advocacy orgs are currently in a strong position to advance with the new administration. So far, New Agenda does not seem to have accomplished much but criticize OTHER battle-scarred women for not doing enough? Where are your battle scars, Amy Susskind? It’s one thing to prefer other candidates, but it’s quite another to actively target one individual — one who has been fighting the good fight for decades and proven her commitment time and again — with nothing but opinion and mean-spiritedness for your own mysterious reasons. This is all very destructive and divisive. I am disappointed because when I first learned of New Agenda and visited your site, I was impressed that you were about “working together on the issues we have in common,” which has proved to be not true at all.

By: fsteele

fsteele — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 02:49:59 +0000

Thia,

Not if Jill keeps pursuing irrelevant charges against Palin.

By: Thia, GA

Thia, GA — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 02:37:08 +0000

Oy I’m begging ya can’t we let the PUMA thing go? Everyone is welcome here! See my above posts re PUMA’s.

By: Thia, GA

Thia, GA — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 02:32:21 +0000

Jill- I don’t have kids so I can run amok!