You call this sexism?

"However, as a political scientist, the first point needs some attention. Pew polls have consistently..." What are "Pew polls?" The errors in your commentary are too numerous to address point by point and you're giving the nutty loon of this site "Purl Gurl" a run for her money.

Anonymous, do you care to share you opposing contentions to the article? This article in no way compares to the drivel normally posted by Purl. It turned the sexism argument on its head by questioning how the response would be if Barack had made statements similar to what Hillary has. I don't see what is erroneous about fair comparisons.

I think the writer meant "few" where he wrote "pew". I thought Associate Professors at schools like UCLA were versed in "spell check", I also thought people who publish commentary took it serious enough to spell check their work. I understand using a mouse, pointing and clicking is cumbersome and burdening endeavor, but how do you suppose the good professor here responds when his students lack the basic journalistic integrity to spell check? It's one thing for posters to disregard grammar, but when the contributors and this site and its editors are to be held to a higher standard, and certainly a "professor"? But we make excuses for Blacks, and I suppose on this site, this professor and their lack of interest in bothering with spell check, this site's lack of editing it's contributors words will be excused somehow, misspelling accepted (by their contributors). How low might our standards go here? How long will it be before outright Ebonics rules the front page here?

Funny show she is now using the sexism card, I guess its her last hope, and, with no proof, since her use of the racism card has all but went down the drain. Its not sexism HRC, its just you that people don't like for so many reasons.

Why is it not possible that Hillary Clinton has earned and warranted the characterization of "B*tch"? Is it sexist if it's true? If the shoe fits?... A lot of people that who have been around her (men and women), who have worked with her for years have characterized her as a pure straight up B*tch. "it is also clear that women's interests and issues will not be well served by John McCain, who has promised to appoint anti-choice judges, has voted against legislation allowing law suits for unequal pay" - Contributor. As a so called, "Political Scientist", I find your views narrow and poorly thought through. It's a fact that there are women who are 1) Against a woman's right to choose or Roe v. Wade and against the ERA. You're basically speaking to issues centered around ERA subject fare. You are declaring women's interest are not well served by McCain when there are a great deal of women who would disagree with you. Your choice in words suggest that body, that group of women does not exist. What you're saying is fundamentally wrong, to the letter. It just depends on your views. There are millions of women who are anti choice, and anti-ERA. As a political scientist, you should know to recognize the very large number of women in America that are anti-choice and anti-ERA and these women see their interest served by John McCain and far more conservative types.

Do you guys read the newspaper? Pew is the name of a very reputable polling agency. That's what the writer meant. They're always quoted in the news.

Burl their interest will not be served if they can not eat, sleep or live in an America which may become more like Czarist Russia before the 1917 revolution due to McCain adoption of the failed policy of this present Washington Administration. Soon it appears we will have an economy similar to post WWI Germany were you needed a barrel of money to buy a dozen of eggs. Germany had an excuse they lost the war and were saddled with paying restitution. We won the war. Do they believe it is fair for children and seniors to go hungry? While these same pro-life Supreme Court justices approve capitol punishment and reverse Roosevelt’s antitrust Legislation. So we are back to the days of Hoover and laisez faire business practices while the people are not given the freedom of the sleeping dogs which lay, and the necessities of life like milk and gas are out of the reach of the average American. That all right to life should include all life and look to what kind of like we provide for old and sick of our communities. These have always been the signs of a just society when the anawim ,the poorest of the community ,are cared for. We can no longer survive with one sided issue voting we must address the full picture.

Jason places some participants as risk, "Pew is the name of a very reputable polling agency." Be careful, Jason. You are placing some participants at risk of having their brains explode. Their minds are clearly set and firm. Confusing those people with truth and facts places them at serious risk of losing it. --- This is an article of mine imported from the web site of gracious Joni Reynolds, a proud black mother. Seems appropriate for this topic of Mark Sawyer who strikes me as a nice man and strikes me as a man whose mind's eye is blinded by Terminal Testosterone Poisoning. --- (my article from the web site of Joni Reynolds): This is proving to be rather interesting. My somewhat sarcastic response to our host, Joni Reynolds, has earned a response from one of my gender and two from the opposite sex. One writes with a voice smoothed with estrogen, two write with voices of testosterone confrontation. Women negotiate, men confront. A friend of my gender comments on male sexism, "You young girls who don't get it...let's not get to a point here in America when with EXPERiENCE you WILL." Young girls are already experiencing sexism. However, because of efforts of many women over many centuries, today's sexism is quite subtle in nature, most of the time. Like sexism, racism has also become equally subtle. A difference is sexism is wired into our very being through estrogen and testosterone. Racism, on the other hand, is taught to us by our parents and by our peoples. Roots of sexism are based in women's passive nature and in men's aggressive nature. As our peoples entered into more civilized times, sexism came right along and began to be more expressed in male attitudes and male behavior, related to their opposite sex. Men experience much difficulty recognizing sexism and men are well known for a behavioral habit of deep denial. Sexism is now so often subtle men cannot recognize sexism and when men are advised of sexist behavior, a typical response is denial. I have compassion for men; there is no doubt we women drive men crazy. Both intensity of and type of sexism are affected by cultural aspects. I am raised by both Anglo grandparents and by my Choctaw elders. Our Anglo society is patriarchal based, my Choctaw culture is matriarchal based. Anglo family line is determined by father's bloodline, Choctaw family line is determined by mother's bloodline. Anglo families are typically headed by a man, Choctaw families are typically headed by a woman. I am gifted to be raised by both Anglos and Choctaws. I have learned of differences between and similarities between Anglo families and Choctaw families; a man rules part of my upbringing, a woman rules part of my upbringing. Differences between family behaviors and attitudes, between Anglo and Choctaw, are very dramatic. Similarities between families tend not to be male nor female based. Joni is certainly an expert on this and perhaps she will comment. My experience gained by working with and, at times, living with black people is our Black American culture enjoys quite a different perspective on sexism. I am not writing sexism does not exist within our black culture rather I will write what Anglos view as sexism is often not seen as sexism by black people. This is a distinct cultural difference much like cultural differences, related to sexism, between a male dominated Anglo culture and a female dominated Choctaw culture. Packaging all this up for our election year, perception of sexism will vary depending on gender and depending on culture. Most Anglo women well understand Ferraro's contentions about sexism. Few Anglo men are able to recognize this sexism highlighted by Ferraro. Members of our black community have a perspective of their own but in my heart-of-hearts, I do believe black women do recognize this sexism pointed to by Ferraro but they are torn between allegiance with women and allegiance with their black culture. I understand this quandary. My understanding derives from a multi-cultural upbringing, an upbringing afforded by my Anglo family and afforded by my Choctaw tribe; I know sexism very well. Another benefit of my being a half-breed is I know racism as well as or better than most black Americans. Ferraro is right, sexism is an important factor this election year as is racism. Difference is half of our society, men, experience difficulty recognizing sexism. However, all of us, regardless of gender, have no problem spotting racism. However, sexism and racism are not major issues this election year. America's major issue is related to cultural identity; we are torn between a white woman and a black man while wishing we could elect both to be our president. Joni Reynolds, I appreciate your willingness to present diverse opinions and appreciate your willingness to provide opinions which oppose your own opinions. Okpulot Taha Choctaw Nation

Clinton’s sexist and racist behavior and remarks as excuses for her inability to run decent campaign will forever damage the cause. Her crying wolf everyday and her inability to accept personal responsibility is frightening. Even when she was caught in an out right lie not to mention all the others that fall from her month on a daily bases, at one point it was funny, then sad. Then embracing and now pitiful, Defiance with a lie as a starting point is just sorry. One thing that she has made abundantly clear she is that she not the woman for the job of first female President, we need person with the dignity of Pelosi who stood and stands on her on feet apart and separate from her husband. A president not a monarch

Jason, sadly too few people read newspapers and get all their news from cable television with its slanted points of view from right wing Fixed Noise, to too liberal CNN, and, hence the reason the well regarded Pew Poll is not known. But, it funny that Hillary Clinton has the gall and nerve to say that its sexism, no dear, its you and your nasty way of running this race. You have cried, used the race card, and, when all else fails, its sexism. Child please let someone but this woman a clue, the country is ready for a woman to lead, just not this woman. If she were a man, or not married to one of the worst Presidents other than Bush, she would have never got as far as she had with this hate filled, lackluster campaign of hers.

Citychick: "Ebonics"-Wow, how racist. The worst part about is you are dead wrong. Please read below. You should post an apology to the Professor for your ignorant comment. http://people-press.org/ The Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan "fact tank" that provides information on the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. It does so by conducting public opinion polling and social science research; by reporting news and analyzing news coverage; and by holding forums and briefings. It does not take positions on policy issues. The Center's work is carried out by eight projects: * Pew Research Center for the People & the Press * Project for Excellence in Journalism * Stateline.org * Pew Internet & American Life Project * Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life * Pew Hispanic Center * Pew Global Attitudes Project * Social & Demographic Trends The Center is a non-profit, tax-exempt corporation which operates under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Service code. It was established in 2004 as a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts, a Philadelphia-based public charity.

I never see shirts calling Obama the N-word (but Hillary is called a B). Nor have I watched comedy skits where Obama is called the N-word (but Hillary is called a B). Nor do I see Obama nutcrackers (but Hillary nutcrackers are in every airport). Nor have I seen a HillaryBoy showing of his wares but we're all fine with ObamaGirl doing her thing. Nor do I see unflattering pictures of Obama (but the press love to use the most uncomplimentary pictures of Hillary possible). Nor did I ever see Hillary call a reporter "a boy" (but Obama can call reporters "sweetie"). Nor did I ever hear Hillary's pastor damn the whole country but Obama's pastor did. Nor did Hillary ever call Obama "likeable enough" but Obama referred to Hillary this way. Nor did we spend the last eight months talking about gender, gender, gender with Hillary's campaign people throughing out the "gender race" at every drop of the hat but that's exactly what Obama's campaign did the minute anything sounded remotely racist. This campaign race has talked about nothing but race for almost a year and now it is shocked to learn there are MILLIONS of other people who care about other forms of oppression too. Does the African American world care about other forms of oppression? Why do you make it sound like you don't? Don't Black women suffer from sexism too?

What is this tendency on here to make issue of the smallest things on this site? "What are Pew polls?" and "I think he meant "few" not "Pew." Citycheck, it's one thing for you to provide counterarguments to those being presented here. But, it's another to not do enough due diligence to ensure that your criticism is above what you accuse the author of. Every newspaper across the country daily publishes retractions on stories that are erroneously printed. The Daily Voice is and will not be the exception. Since we shouldn't make excuses for blacks, let us not also lower our standards by justifying your lack of comprehension skills. That said, anyone who attempts to correct the authors use of "pew" vs. "few" is not very intelligent.

Pastor you have to distinguish between what is said by random passers by and what is said by the campaign. "Obamagirl" has nothing to do with the campaign. She is on her own. There has been violence and vandalism at Obama offices, monkey tshirts. etc. There has been plenty of racism. The Clinton campaign. To say someone is "likeable enough" makes no reference to gender. If you did not notice Wright is an "American" a veteran. What he meant was US foreign policy not "white people" But the point is those words did not come out of Obama's mouth. The article above points to a series of kinds of things Clinton has said, but Obama has not.

Burl, is it fair to suggest that the Republican party does not serve African-American interests? Does that mean that there are not any blacks who feel as if there interests are better served by republicans? Republicans are spearheading the anti-gay movement, is it narrow-minded and poorly thought out to say that homosexual interests are lesser served in a Republican administration? It does not take a political scientist to sample majority interests against minority interest and conclude as the author has.

Citychick, Even if one uses spellcheck, its likely not to show the word "Pew" as a mistake since it is actually a word. It seems as if you don't use it yourself. You should reread/proofread your work before submitting it. Your third sentence/paragragh doesn't make sense. - "It's one thing for posters to disregard grammar, but when the contributors and this site and its editors are to be held to a higher standard, and certainly a "professor"?"

Sit down sweetie the men will give you your shot when they are good and ready.

GayPastor you forgot to call yourself gay female pastor,be honest.Which may translate into gay feminist pastor.

Gay (Feminist) Pastor, i actually like your attention to fine detail.

This article is patently absurd. First, the Clinton campaign has not race baited Obama. This is a myth. They have discussed demographic and historical facts. In fact, we know from leaked internal memos that part of the Obama campaign strategy was to brand the Clintons racist to drive down their support in the black community. Stop peddling this lie, Mark. Second, the Obama campaign, and the pro-Obama media, has pursued a blatantly sexist campaign against Clinton. The examples of Obama and his campaign engaging in sexist attacks against Clinton are numerous and not subject to interpretation. From brushing her cooties off his jacket to saying she wouldn't be in this race if her name wasn't Clinton, Obama has shown himself to be a male chauvinist. And this only scratches the surface. Clinton has claws. She cries crocodile tears. Professional women are "sweeties." You could write a book about it and not want for material. So when you write, "Senator Obama has not even come close to saying anything that raises gender as an issue in the campaign," you are either lying or ignorant of the facts. Either way, please learn to care for the truth, Mark. Persons in your position are not supposed to be ideologues. You're supposed to be truth tellers. One more thing, can you help me understand why the black community is supporting a candidate who represents the new racism of colorblind liberalism? Can you tell me how black people could so overwhelming support a candidate who runs on post-racial politics, which are necessarily post-civil rights politics, which necessary assume that racism is largely a thing of the past? This puzzles me. Is the black community this big on identity politics that they would vote for a man who stands contrary to their material interests? Why would the African American community drop the struggle for racial justice and adopt the illusion that the white establishment wants to achieve with the Obama candidacy? What are so many black people supporting a candidate who wants to dissimulate white supremacy? Why haven't black leaders - many of who have been harassed into supporting Obama - explained this to the community? Are blacks not offended when Obama says his vision is much more hopeful than Martin Luther King Jr.'s? Because I have to tell you, this deeply offends me. Are blacks really not bothered when Obama says that Jeremiah Wright is a bitter and frustrated old relic who essentially keeps racism alive by manufacturing racial strife? I don't want to assume that you know the answer merely on account of the fact that you're a black man posting in a black news outlet. But since you're an associate professor of political science at UCLA, I thought maybe you might have a scientific answer for me.

Andrew Austin, I know you are writing to Mark, but you are writing from here. Your accusation that Mark is an ideologue is probably true. But the 2nd half of your own commentary is even more dense with your own ideology. I just dont get why, except for ideological reasons, you would be offended if someone offered you a dream better than MLK's? That is assuming nothing of the 1960's dream can be made better. Why are race politics materially better for blacks? Maybe in the short term they would be, like Clinton's attempt at making gains by race baiting, but in the long term racism in all its forms has to die if America will ever transcend its current psychotic condition. And that would be a big plus for blacks. Any case wasn't that Martin's dream? Not only are you yourself an ideologue but your views are also inflicted with contradiction. Martin's dream of non racialism was very similar to Obama's, that's why Obama draws the parallels. Or is it that you are also just jealous?. That someone else and not you or your buddies is taking King's vision farther? You strike me like some real loser