If you don't support Hillary, then you're against women? This is ridiculous.

This is exactly the reason I dont bother going to the polls to vote anymore!! Its not about what is best for the citizens of the US its about how each candidate and support groups can go about badmouthing and putting down eachother and fighting among themselves. Okay so he endorsed someone that he felt he backs, is this not still a FREE country where we are able to make choices ? Do people actually expect that someone is owed something and it will automatically go the way they want. Its time to stop this crap and all people look at where we are headed if we always fight amongst eachother.

Wow, this is soo important that you have to run it at the top of the page for 2 days in a row… It's really no wonder everyone thinks that CNN is the official publicist for Obama. I personally don't care about Teddy… After all he did not have the guts to take responsibility for his own actions in the death of another person so long ago.

And he surely does NOT look like a good backing for a change candidate. Ted is about as old school as you'll find in the party…

Just because you're a woman, doesn't mean you have to vote for a woman.

The Kennedys may really believe Obama is the best qualified but I think that nostalgia plays a significant part in this endorsement. They have never really gotten over the abrupt end to Camelot and the loss of the Kennedy hegemony over American politics. However, this is not 1960 and Obama is not JFK or even RFK. But he may be more malleable and subject to Kennedy influence than Clinton or Edwards would be.

Biggest betrayal America has ever faced! Benedict has competition because Kennedy spoke out and supported the candidate he liked the best! Might as well move to Canada!

These NOW women are saying Clinton is far more experienced, and its just another show that the status quo will 'hire' a inexperienced man over a more experienced woman.

These are the things women have been fighting against for years. Nothing new here.

This is sad. Now someone can't even support a candidate without being a sexist person. Cnngratulations Clinton &co for using the sexist card once more…..

Clinton, You have lost my support. YOu were good in the 90s, but sadly you are outdated today. Let the young politicians that you once, long ago, represented take your place.

Perhaps this will make HRC the woman candidate, and she will understand how it feels to be put into an identity box.

As a female, I listened to the positions of both candidates. And I have tried to listen to her more and understand her better for the prospect of having a woman president, but to no avail. The past few weeks have fully convinced me that she is the wrong person for the job.

I do applaud her for getting this far and making it that much easier for the next woman who seeks higher office. But I do not think it should be her. And I do hope, though, that her relying so much on her husband does not set the feminist project back to far. Likely the next female candidate seeing to be POTUS will not have an ex-President husband to stump for them so vigorously.

Maybe, just maybe, Sen. Kennedy actually agrees with the views of Sen. Obama more than the views of Hillary Clinton. Have the members of the New York state chapter of NOW thought of that? Maybe it has nothing to do with gender but with the fact that Kennedy might think that Sen. Obama could lead the country in a better direction than Sen. Clinton.

WHAT A SURPRISE!!!!!!!!!!!!! HE IS PREJUDICE AGAINST WOMEN AS WELL!!!!!!!!!!!!! PERSONALLY I AM GETTING REAL TIRED OF ALL OF THIS. I THINK SOME PEOPLE WERE NIEVE ENOUGH TO THINK THAT WOMEN WERE EQUALS!!!!!!!!! THIS MEANS WE NEED TO GO TO THE POLLS IN RECORD NUMBERS TO VOTE!!!! NO ONE CAN CHANGE THAT. HILLARY IS MORE QUALIFIED THAN ALL THESE MEN PUT TOGETHER AND I BELIEVE SHE WILL PREVAIL. THE PRESS HAS PORTRAYED HER VERY BADLY, THAT IS WHEN THEY COVER HER AT ALL. COME ON LADIES AND ANYBODY ELSE THAT BELIEVES IN HILLARY WE CAN DO THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GO HILLARY 2008!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Whar a bunch of hypocrites NOW is. When Bubba was wagging his finger lying to all of us AND his wife, When Hillary was humiliated into claiming Bubbas woes were a "right wing conspiracy", when the Clintons spun more lies to cover-up All the other women Bubba was screwing, ALL women were humiliated.

To think that NOW wants a "woman" president at all costs instead of the most qualified candidate is absurd. Maybe they should put their weight (no pun intended) behind Condoleeza Rice!

Of course he choose Obama because he can't stand the thought of a woman in the White House. It couldn't possibly be because he thinks Obama would make a better president. That's crazy talk.

Way to go NOW, and it is about time you get Hillary's back in all of this mess.

What a crock! These women are sexist to imply that Kennedy by default had to endorse Hillary or he doesn't care about women. These people make mountains out of every ant hill. So from what they are saying, every woman should also by default support Hillary. What a bunch a hypocrites. I have the utmost respect for women, just not these women.

Isn't it prudent to pick the best candidate regardless of sex or race? If the NOW supports Hilary on the sole basis that she is a woman, I as a woman want no part of that.

Now Hillary's supporters are playing the gender as well as the race card. One would have believed she had more intelligence than this but apparently not. I'm changing my vote to Obama.

As a woman, I appreciate the enthusiasm over voting for a woman as President. As a person, I also will not vote for a candidate based solely on gender. There is so much noise about voting for a our first woman president. It's more startling for me that we've never had a non-Christian president.

Old school rearing its ugly head? Who let Ted out of the closet? As with Oprah, Ted's endorsement doesn't mean anything either. He needs to just go back to his chair and remain nuetral since that suits the people best. Duct tape works wonders on wide openings.

I am 55 year old women. I am a registered indepentent. I have ALWAYS supported women's rights and NOW. But this retoric has me cringing. This is about change and hope. Any chance Clinton had is now being bogged been down by the idiots advising her husband and these women who should be part of a support system for change not a devisive group intend on destroying any unity the democrats have Hillary, keep it up……. by the time you get nominated …if there is even a slim chance of it…….the women in this country will be SO disturbed by this crap that we'll vote for McCain

Why is because he doesnt endorse a woman he now against women. He thinks Obama is the best PERSON fro the job. So I guess that even if Kennedy thinks that he should endorse Clinton instead. Wow how stupid is that, please people think a little. Just because he endorses a man doesn't mean he thinks a woman can't be president. More ridiculous crap.

Betrayal besmayal.
As I New Yorker I am still amazed that anyone, but not surprised about a group like NOW, can believe that Senator Clinton had any intentions of "serving" NY in any way other than using the foolishness of those who voted for her to give her a platform to run for the Presidency.
What does an Senator Kennedy have to gain. The mess of his life, regardless of his power in the Senate, was supported by such as NOW and why should they be surprised that he even at this late stage of his career makes what hew sees as a wise political move. Idealism in politics is absurd. If we were genuinely more pragmatic, we would be better served. To imagine that anyone holds the course completely once in a major polical office at level of government is naive. The best women or man may win but they will not be the better by the end of it all. Cynical? No, it's the truth. I am in that demographic group called "evangelical Christians" which is a very broad term and losing true historical meaning since the Reformation. I am not a member of the religious right and do not support it nor would I vote for a person because of their religious beliefs because in the end they are bound by the constitution and certain personal convictions may not be supported by it. I desire a leader, a communicator, one who can build relationships across party lines andone who can work in the muck of politics but at least knows how to take a shower at the end of the day and start fresh the next.. Give me one who cares for the country not their personal -lace in history, one who is not already looking how to win the next 4 years but will give all to the first and then see what occurs.

Expecting loyalty from Edward Kennedy is like expecting your house cat to recite poetry.

Poppycock!!! Teddy likes Barack over Hillary because is less qualified. To say it is because she is a woman degrades her.

What malarky to think that just because someone does not want Bil..oops I mean Hillary for president that they are opposed to women as president. There are many women who would make a good president. Hillary just doesn't happen to be one of them. With Hillary those that love her, love her…those that don't, really don't! She would be an extremely divisive president and nothing will get done as usual. Of course NOW has to endorse her….unfortunately they would endorse any woman running. It would be interesting if two women were running and they would have to pick one over the other.

Kennedy is blasted for supporting Obama and Clinton should have gotten his endorsement simply because she is a woman? N.O.W. is clearly showing its sexist stripes. I thought we were all supposed to be color-blind and sex-blind, evaluating everyone on their individual merits?

I won't vote for Obama or Clinton (I am anti-socialist - rather than anti-woman or anti-woman - if you'd like to pin a label on me), but Kennedy should be free to endorse whoever he wants to endorse. Apparently N.O.W.'s attitude is simply, "Vote our way, or else!" That doesn't sound very open-minded to me.

really cnn? your running this story twice on the same ticker, are u serious, what agenda are you pushing this time?

first you try and tell us that Israel isn't apartheid state and now this junk. Stop pushing your agenda. News for sale to the highest bidder, huh?

In typical fashion, the "National Organization of Whiners", tries to shoot anyone who dares go against their extreme agenda. A vast majority of males, including this one, have not one iota of a problem with a woman President. Like her male counterparts, she should be accomplished in her own right, be obviously running her own show and speak truthfully and with great clarity plus not bring to the table so much controversy and negatives as to continue the great divide in this country.

There are a number of women who meet the above criteria. Nancy Pelosi, Janet Napolitano, Olympia Snowe, Susan Colliins and last night's "State of the Union" responder, Kathleen Sebelius. NOW forgets Senator Kennedy's decades long support of Roe vs Wade, equal opportunity and support of the downtroden.

The race card has been played and it backfired. NOW's playing the gender card and that will have the same result. In 2008, voters are looking at character, judgement and the capacity for change. They are seeing that in Barack Obama and John McCain. Either will be a strong supporter of NOW's agenda. Like the Clinton's, I can't help but wonder if this organization's time has not come and gone!

After insulting SC and suggesting that Obama could only win there because of his race. Then insulting GA and African-Americans everywhere and insenuating MLK was just a pawn in Lyndon Johnson's civil rights war. Now Ms. Clinton has NOW playing the sex card for her? She trying to line up all of the femi-nazi's nationwide behind her campaign, for what - one must admit as an intimidation factor it's pretty sad. Isn't it WELL PAST TIME that Ms. Clinton focus on the ISSUES and stop focusing on the SEX or RACE of a candidate. This is a pretty veiled attempt by the Clinton camp to make all men 'insecure' and 'facist' for not voting for a woman. Thank God Obama's camp hasn't started the 'you have to vote for me because if you don't your racist' card. At least one candidate has some dignity.

It's this kind of reverse-feminism that really ticks me off…

Whatever their intention, NOW is communicating to millions of Americans that, "Sen. Kennedy betrayed us for supporting a man over a woman; his decision was not about the policies, the candidate's potential, or any other factor but gender. He's a sexist, so don't take his endorsement seriously."

I mean, I'm not pushing for complete gender-blindness, and it is important to recognize the magnitude of what Sen. Clinton has done (I'll be the first to admit that she doesn't get nearly enough credit), but to attack and try to discredit Kennedy (Title IX, ERA, etc) simply because he endorsed Sen. Obama is pretty low.

A little hint for NOW:

1) Don't burn too many bridges with Sen. Kennedy. Attack politics put people's backs up and make cooperative policy initiatives much more difficult to achieve.

I am also very upset about Sen. Kennedy's endorsement. Is there any way, either thru the internet or TV, to unite all the women & make them aware? We must get out our vote. It's about time in America women get the respect of our ability, our rights, equal pay, etc. Go Hillary!!!!

Well, the NOW doesn't speak for me. I have zero problem with a woman president. Just as long as it's not Hillary Clinton. She had culpability in many of the scandals during Bill's tenure in office, too. Do we honestly need more of that garbage?
Well, guess what? I'm a woman voter, technical professional, college graduate, military reservist, spouse and mom. She is the LAST person I would vote for. Period.
I think that NOW is out of touch (and certainly not representative of women in general) if they only choose her because she's a woman.

Glad to know the national NOW distance itself from the state chapter. That is sad. Get over it. It is not about gender, race or whatever. It really is about a change. Or, at least a chance for it.

Hey people,

Go to the link at the end of this entry. Many feminist scholars and activists are coming out against Hillary Clinton on the basis that her presidency would not be any different than that of a man's. There are many interesting articles linked from the link that I am pasting. Try to spread the word. Hillary is not in the best interest of women.

Frances Kissling writes:

"The sad fact is that Clinton has felt compelled to run as a stereotypical male. In her own mind it is only a certain kind of man who is qualified to be president and she will be that man: tough on everything from war, flag burning, kids' access to video games, illegal immigrants and Palestinians. She has missed the opportunity to talk about what it really means for women to be equal in this country. She has shown no interest in using her extensive international experience to push for more women in party leadership, state legislatures and even the Senate. A woman candidate who considered her gender a strength (as opposed to something she needed to overcome) would announce a series of measures specifically designed to ensure that women's needs and rights were at the forefront of her agenda."

In 30 Ways of Looking at Hillary, a recently published anthology in which thirty well-known women writers reflect on the candidate,

Susan Morrison (who edited the book) says:

"As I talked with women about their reactions to Hillary, some themes came up again and again. Many women were divided within themselves as to how they feel about her, and I noticed a familiar circle of guilt: these women believe they should support Hillary as a matter of solidarity. But, because they expect her to be different from (that is, better than) the average male politician, she invariably disappoints them; then they feel guilty about their ambivalence. Some feel competitive with her. Having wearily resigned themselves to the idea that "having it all" is too much to hope for, they view Hillary as a rebuke: how did she manage to pull it off–or, at least, to appear to pull it off? Other women say they want to like her but are disturbed by the anti-feminist message inherent in the idea of the first woman president getting to the White House on her husband's coattails."

Link

Maybe Kennedy just thinks Obama is the right person at the right time. How sad that a group like NOW would only support a "women" even though Clinton is not what this country needs at this time.

Cancelled all the posts from last night?How "censorly" of CNN.

Calm down ladies.It's Ted Kennedy,for crying out loud.Nobody much cares what he says about anything anymore.
Notice how he waits until there is a clear front-runner before he decides and even then he will support whoever the nominee is.

UPDATE: It would only be news if he DIDN'T betray women.

UPDATE :Kennedy is supporting whoever wins.It would only be news if he stuck his neck out early in support of someone.Even Caroline Kennedy spoke up sooner.

UPDATE: This typical,hysterical over-reaction by NOW isn't news.It would be news if they behaved like rational adults.

NOW's constant over-reaction to almost everything does nothing to help their credebility and actually sets women's rights back.Until NOW gets a grip on themselves they actually hurt as many women as they help.Maybe NOW should learn the value of saying nothing.Sometimes that says it all.

I'm certainly not going to vote for Hillary Clinton simply because she's a woman. I look at more important qualities such as the ISSUES. Thank goodness I'm not a member of the New York state chapter of NOW! Her statements suggest that we will vote in a pack without looking at the issues. Mr. Kennedy is endorsing Mr. Obama because he represents a new dream in America. It's time for the Clinton's to go home. They had their chance for 8 long years and I, for one, wish them well and good-by.

Ahhh I see we should instead support Hillary not because she is the best candidate, or the one with the most progressive ideas and definately not because she has experience. NO! The only reason we should be supporting Hillary is because she is a WOMAN! If I had any notion of NOW being irrelevant and representing themselves as noting more than a proverbial sore loser, that notion has been confirmed.

I have a great deal of respect for woman and I certainly treat them as my equal and in some cases my better. But I certainly don't offer any handouts or support simply because of their gender. This would be and is disrespectful both to women in genral and everything they have fought for, the woman in specific as it is demeaning to her more than anything else a man could do. Oh yeah and very demoralizing for me.

So NOW, do us all a favor stop playing the gender card and if you are going to represent women's interests do so in a way that elevates a woman, not trivialize her.

Thank you….

From a MAN, a dedicated, caring husband and father, my wifes best friend and stuanchest supporter.

Good to hear NOW criticize Ted Kennedy.What would now have said of Ted if he endorsed Hilary Clinton?The issue here is not of sex.It's about who can deliver on all issues including women rights,empowerment,emancipation etc.By coming out to criticize Ted Kennedy on the basis of sex,NOW is belittling the goals it stands for and the main issues at stake in this years presidential elections.Is NOW saying that there are no men on the Clinton campaign?Is Now saying that no men have voted for Clinton?Is NOW saying that Clinton is not married to a man?Is NOW saying that men are not important in American politics?

That is nonsense The Kennedys can endorse whom ever they feel can lead this Country in a postive direction and Obama is the man for such a time like this, Shame on this Woman Group.

As a "progressive man" who supports Barack, I would like to point out that my wife is a Wellesley graduate, an accomplished attorney, and an Obama supporter. She has thoroughly considered the candidates and believes that Obama is, as Kennedy recognized, the President of a new generation.

The statement by NOW that men cannot fathom a woman leader is blatant and unthinking sexism. There are numerous reasons that Hilliary would be a poor choice in this race for President, including her ideas that (1) President Musharaff of Pakistan is our best option to "control" the region, (2) that a mandatory head start program would be useful when our school systems need resources for the education they currently provide, or (3) her incredibly slow plan to address global warming.

The polls show that educated Americans (women and men) are responding to Barack, not because he is a man, but because he is inspiring, creative, and thoughtful - Hillary Clinton is not - Kennedy, Leahy, and millions of Americans think so too.

Hell!!?
Why haven't these women in the same breath cussed out the GOP? I do not see the GOP fielding a woman to run for president much less a none white alpha male, what is their problem what's wrong with this picture?
They have sat down for the past eight years and not a word from them about all the atrocities that have taken palce in this nation and now they are cussing out a plodding old pragmatist because he favors the new kid with a vision over the older more mature female with all her frailties.
Get a life women, your aspirations is not the only one, nor does it reflects the aspirations of all. All you are doing is making it more abundantly when the GOP said that Hillary is a divisive element and this is one time when I am sorry to say I have to accept the word of the conservatives.

Maybe Ted Kennedy doesn't want the nation to have to handle the prospect of a shrill and self-absorbed golddigger as President. Stop whining, ladies.

I appreciate that the national chapter of NOW distanced itself from these comments. As a woman, I have never understood that "liberation" should entail lock step loyalty to other women, giving more value to what is between a person's legs than what is between their ears (not to mention in their heart or character). For either sex, that type of thinking is intellectually insulting. Yes, it would be wonderful to have a qualified female president. But the Presidency is hardly the place for affirmative action.

BETRAYAL? Isn't that all the Kennedy men's specialty?

HILLARY 08

SEATTLE

Wonder what the NAACP would have said if he had come out for Clinton?

Again, where is my first comment??????

How ridiculous is it for American women to be expected to vote for a woman just because she is a woman? Are we supposed to forget the issues and the fact that we cannot respect Hillary Clinton? I think not. I'll vote for the candidate who is capable of leading our great nation, but it will not be based on gender.

This illogical, venomous thinking is indicative of the people that support the Clintons.

NOW NY should be ashamed especially considering the fact that all of Hilary’s major political achievements have been directly on the coattail of a man.

If Hilary had never married Bill does anyone honestly think that she would have been a viable candidate for president or the NY senate seat for that matter?

I guess NOW would have Kennedy endorse Hillary only because she is a woman. Maybe he thinks Obama would serve women's rights and be a better President. Statements like this cause me to dismiss anything groups like this say as irrelevant and does their causes harm.

Wow, that was shrill of them.

Because Kennedy backed Obama doesn't mean he turned his back on women. Maybe he just felt Obama made the better President. Because women have backed Kennedy doesn't mean he owes them a favor. He's entitled to his opinions as well.

Apparently N.O.W. feels that Ted Kennedy’s lack of endorsement for Hillary Clinton is based solely on the fact that she is a women. I am sure that Mr. Kennedy had other considerations before making his decision.

my name is Chrissy and I am a women and I don't want a women president
so does that mean I am going to get yelled out by fellow women? If so that is fine everyone has a right to their opinion but stop making it sound like that all women want to vote for Hillary Clinton. Because not all women do!

Sounds to me like Teddy had a deal with the NY NOW leaders and reneged.

I can't say it makes much difference to me though, so I'm not sure what you expect this headline to produce other than more bickering among the various supporters and people making this somehow Hillary Clinton's fault.

Why do they feel betrayed? I am a woman and it would be a cold day in hello that I would vote for that she-male Hillary for President. Since she is getting her tail kicked again don't be suprised if she turns on some more tears this week. Hillary Clinton does not embody what a successful woman is in this country- she is a disgrace to all intelligent successful woman. Which Clinton is actually running for president anyway? After the last 2 weeks I can't tell.

I thought so too. The sadest part was JFK's daugther. She claimed she was going it for her daugthers. Which in itself is a lie.

I am a black man and I will vote for Hillary for my daugthers sake. So they too can grow up knowing one day they can become president or get the highest job in Human history. It is simple.

Their endosement has something else to it and the simple truth they gon't want a female president. Period.

She will win though and I wonder what their words will be then.

Isn't this interesting? Could it be that Ted Kennedy just see's the Clintons as slick talkers who only lust for power. This is not a sexist move rather it is an anti Hillery move.

Wow, this article is a blow for the Hillary campaign if she's still trying to avoid being accused of using the "gender card."

I can't tell you how sad this makes me. To see my party divide in this way….

I know it will spell defeat in the November elections. Cuz, there will be no such publicized rancor amongst GOP candiated and their constituants.

Oh well…..

During polling Hilary’s supporters have indicated that the motives behind their support of her are:

1) Her relation to Bill.

2) The fact that she is a woman (in that order).

This counter progressive reasoning is detrimental to say the least.

I'm no Obama fan by any means, but is this the gender card being pulled out?

this kind of response is an example of individuals who are willing to back clinton for the fact that she is a woman, which is as bad as any african-american wanting to back obama simply because he is black. clinton and obama need to be evaluated for what they offer and bring to the table, and it seems that many, men and women, see obama as the person who has more to offer. the endorsement is less about women's rights as it is about a politician wanting to back whom he feels is the person best suited for the position of president of the US

Attention Females: Stop whining and find a better candidate.

Just wanting a woman to be president doesn't mean she is the RIGHT woman. I want more in my candidate than his or her sex - or color. I want substance. Obama '08!

Burn my membership card with that group. A person endorses/votes for the person he/she feels is the most qualified. What kind of voter just "gives" away a vote because of gender. Shame on them-the Kennedy's owe no one anything-this group did not buy his endorsement.

If people truly want equality across race and gender, they should not be supporting a candidate just because of race or gender. Supporting Hillary Clinton simply because she is a woman is not a step toward equality. The best candidate should win, regardless of race or sex.

I am a woman in the Armed Forces and I am so sick and tired of other women thinking we should vote for Hilliary Clinton because she is a woman. The last time I checked people including women can vote for whoever they want and it should not be based on sex or race instead it should be based on merit. I voted for Obama in the primary becaus I WANTED to. Sen. Kennedy endorsed Obama because he WANTED to. Its a sad day when the Women's Sufforage is used in such a selfish and narrow minded view.

Ridiculous. Let's nominate the candidate that honors integrity, is genuine, intelligent, creative, etc. It would be more insulting to me as a woman to be voted for because of what is between my legs than what is in my mind and my abilities. Geeze. This is disgusting. People say Obama supports played the race card which I think is also a silly claim but that then Hillary supports can play the gender card! So hypocritical.

Get over it, NOW NY. Maybe you should support the best candidate, too, Obama 08! He is very pro women's rights and 100 percent on prochoice issues!

Kennedy's endorsement was a net negative that the Hillary camp would rather have had go to Obama. All the hype about it being a positive for Obama is spin. Since all Obama's support is coming from McCain supporters and not Democrats, it doesn't really matter. Remember "no child left behind"???

I find it interesting that the organization slamming Kennedy and all women who support Obama is interested in only one thing, and that is a woman for President. After Hillary's behavior in the debate and campaign in SC, many who supported her turned to Obama because he appears to be the more balanced person for the job.

Look at the issues and who is the best person, not what their gender is. Hillary would make a good president, and Obama would make a great leader. The other thing I witnessed that turned me his way is the way he handles the press. On the Sunday morning news shows, when Hillary was asked direct questions, she gave vague or non-answers, and turned back to her platform. Obama, actually answered the questions, and the tough ones to boot. He seems to have a much greater integrity, and you can see in his eyes that he is about helping and leading, and not just the status of winning.

Hillary comes across as though she has some entitlement, and I have to say, that will be her undoing.

I don't think he's slighting women. He just realizes that Hillary Clinton is the second most politically dividive personality in the US behind George W. Bush. He also realizes that this election is the Democrat's to lose, and the chances of that loss go up exponentially with Clinton as the nominee. The easiest way to motivate GOP voters is to threaten them with another Clinton Presidency. And if these women truly believe what they are saying, where are their calls for Bill to butt out? I mean, surely Hillary can do this on her own, can't she? Does she really need her husband;s coat tails to win? If she does, then I think some people need some perspective on whom they are really supporting.

I've never considered myself a feminist, or a traditionalist, but I have always believed and known through experience, that women have more insight into how to shape the future, and the consequent strength to act on it than men do - generally speaking. The only problem is, of course, that we've seldom had the opportunity to demonstrate that unless we're either - 1) supporting 'our' man, or 2) struggling to escape his control over our lives.

In exit poll numbers, CNN itself has shown that black men overwhelmingly vote for Obama, but white men seem to favour John Edwards. Usually the split is seen as 'proof' that "race trumps gender". Thanks to Senator Kennedy's behaviour over the last year and his "close communications" with Senator Obama (based on Obama's own admissions), I think the 'split' could also be explained as proof of the fact that many "men don't like the idea of a woman leading a nation" - no matter what they say in public.

As for Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg rising to the forefront in support of Obama "twice" in 2 days - I think her eagerness to demonstrate public political support for anyone for the first time ever has, in part, been influenced by Senator Kennedy's long term and 'veiled to the public' support of Barack Obama. That's unfortunate. I thought she was more of an independent thinker, like her mother, than that. Oh well, sad how money still speaks more loudly than common sense.

I am so dissapointed by the news media, particulary CNN and MSNBC…especially the news anchors Wolf and Chris…it is unbelivable just to feel the bias that exists against Hillary…it is ok when she is attacked ; but whenever she responds its not ok with you people…I think you guys have the fear of having someone who can actually change things when she gets there…so you have decided to back Obama because you know he wont get things done, that way nothing changes for you, which is what you want, with your fat paychecks…I just hope American people will wake up on this one…inspiration is not going to feed my kids or guarantee a better future for them..in Africa we say, when you aducate a woman you aducate the world…and this scares the hell out of you guys…for two hundred years we have men in the leadership and its time for a woman, because all these men including you, have been raised by the good women to get where they are and it just make sense to have a woman up there…God I hate Politics.

how stupid, let's vote for her JUST because she's a woman!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I guess that Kennedy wants to see another rep in the whitehouse next year. Do you?

The statement issued by the NY chapter of NOW sounds more like a helpless, victimized group. (Betrayed, abandoned) Stop playing gender and racial bias. Isn't it possible Senator Kennedy simply endorsed the candidate, his niece, believes to be the better candidate at this time? In reality that is the ultimate respect for a female opinion.

Go NOW. Its time for change . Undoubtedly Obama hasn't gotten his own message. Seems like the Kennedys have been running the Dems for eons.

This whole thing makes me sick to my stomach.

you have got to be kidding me. so when a guy won't vote for hillary he's a misogynist pigs??!?!? sounds like people are already laying the groundwork to justify her defeat.

look, i don't care what anybody says. i won't pull the lever for anyone who voted for this god forsaken war. end of story.

and hillary deserves the disdain of women everywhere. for 30 years she stayed with a man who cheated on her and disrespected and publicly humiliated her and chelsea. is that the sort of example we want to be setting for our daughters?? stay with a guy who doesn't respect you because he's powerful?? real feminists loathe hillary.

this, combined with the clintons' two fisted tactics and lies and the prospect of entrenching yet another dynasty in the executive office leads me to support obama.

I never heard Kennedy say that he was supporting Obama because he was a man. I heard him say he was supporting Obama over his views and leadership skills. I think that these Sexist groups are asking for equality but still want special treatment. Like Kennedy said in his speech. It's not about gender, race, gay or straight. It's about coming together as one. I guess these Women are hoping for special treatment from a female president. To vote for someone because of gender is absolutley ridiculous and anyone who does so should be ashamed of themselves. Any woman should be proud to vote for Obama. Just look at the undying love and affection he has for his wife.

I'm for Hilary. But this is an idiotic statement by what seems to be a paranoid organization frantically grabbing the spotlight.

They're saying that anyone who doesn't vote for Hillary is betraying women? That's the stupidest thing I ever heard.

Barack Obama is a great candidate. He's the second best one out there, which says a lot. It is natural that the Kennedy's want to support such a strong African-American candidate, given their long involvement in issues of civil rights and race relations.

We must, as a country, move away from this destructive rhetoric of "If you not for us, you are against us."

Just because he has the womens' movement in the past, he has to now support Clinton? Sorry, that's not how it works. Let him make up his own decision. His decision shouldn't impact your decision on who you're going to vote for.

They endorse a candidate because she is a woman, and criticize men for endorsing a male candidate? Not only that, but they say he's " joined the list of progressive white men who can’t or won’t handle the prospect of a woman president." What, should the American people vote her into office just because she is a female?

How about this….vote for the candidate who you agree with on the issues…whether that candidate is male, female, black, white, or any other such variation of color or gender. I support the fact that Hillary is making it even more viable for women to be taken seriously in politics, but I'm not going to vote her in on that alone.

i want to know who much Ophra is paying the people from the news to attack clinton, becouse what ophra wants, she gets, and she wants more power and Obama is her ticket.

Did the members of NOW ever consider that endorsements aren't going to come to Hillary Clinton simply because she is a woman? Let's "imagine" for just one second that Kennedy may believe Obama is the better candidate? Oh my! I think by turning this into a "woman vs. man" thing, women's groups show a complete lack of respect for themselves. It's like they're saying "we're not good enough to win by any other virtue but being a female, so vote for Hillary" . It would be the same thing if Obama didn't get a key endorsement and started playing the race card.

Vote For Billary simply because she is a woman. I DON"T THINK SO!!!!! Its great to have the whole field we have had so far this year, a hispanic, black, woman, mormon…the diversity is good. but to simply vote for one becuase of their race or gender is WRONG. Vote for who you feel best could lead the country…not just on one topic but across the board.

Did they ever consider that maybe it has more to do with Hillary being a Clinton than it does with her being a woman? I know I'm really tired of the fact that for the majority of my life there's been a Bush or Clinton in the Whitehouse. Time for a real change.

Former President of NOW changes vote to Barack Obama, because shes tired of being lied to. Its not an issue of race/gender anymore. Its about character. Whose more fit to be President? Is lying the major pre-requisite that we need?

Does anyone really believe it has to do with women's rights?! As a very strong woman myself, I'd love to see a female president in our great nation; but Hillary Clinton is not the one. Personally, I'd not vote for Obama either, but merely being a woman does not qualify one for the Presidency - to be the leader of the free world!

I wish people would grow up and stop accusing people of choosing one way or the other because of race or gender. He's supposed to back the women because they've stood by him for previous issues…please! He didn't betray anyone! He is a human being who chose what he feels to be right, where is the harm in that? It's sad how many people these days go around accusing people of other people's problems…I am a woman, and I do not support Hillary OR Obama, and I sure as heck will NOT vote for Hillary just because she's a woman…she's in it for ALL the wrong reasons and I do not feel she cares about the American people at all. Grow up and start looking at the BIGGER picture. Thank you for the laugh of the day!

"He’s joined the list of progressive white men who can’t or won’t handle the prospect of a woman president who is Hillary Clinton."

I think the key phrase is the last one: like the rest of us, Kennedy can't handle the idea of a woman president "who is Hillary Clinton". Give us a woman who actually isn't a carpetbagging racist maniacal flip-flopper, I think Kennedy (and I) would gladly vote for her.

What! You have got to be kidding me. So, according to NOW, Sen. Kennedy must support a female candidate regardless?. Gender aside, Hillary Clinton is one of the most devisive ("if you're not with us, you're against us"), slash and burn politicians of the day. She certainly not one who inspires and the last thing America needs.

I am all for a female President however, she must at least have certain leadership skills at her disposal of which one of the most basic is the ability to tell the truth. Lying and subterfuge come so easy to Hillary (and her women-are-my-playthings spouse) that I don't believe she could tell the truth if her life depended on it.

I thought NOW stood for equal opportunity regardless of gender. Hillary is being judged against others for her ability to lead. Isn't that how it's supposed to work?

I hope the idiots who accuse Sen. Kennedy (and that obvious chauvinist Caroline Kennedy) of the "ultimate betrayal" are but a small, renegade faction within the larger organization. This is extremist ideology at its worst.

Obama's incivilities toward Hillary is the kind of behavior that caused him to lose the NH primary. Such aloofness is indistinquishable from chauvenism and stirs a repugnance deep in the psyche of us all, and reveals a sharp inconsistency with his profession to reach out in all and new directions.

I believe if Hillary was leading her campaign instead of Bill, then she would be perceived as a leader. However, it appears that she could not control him. How are we supposed to have confidence in her to control international affairs when she can't even control her husband.

Voting for a woman because she is a woman is just as sexist as not voting for a woman because she is a woman. Maybe Kennedy thinks Obama will make a better president. Ever think of that?

It's sad that by taking the position that Sen. Kennedy did this based on gender NOW looks so foolish and extreme. It seems impossible to them Obama may be a better candidate. NOW could do and had done a lot of good but it's difficult to take them seriously after such astonishingly shortsighted comments.

Oh brother, NOW has totally lost perspective. This statement reflects an infantile sense of entitlement that disregards broader issues of what is best for the country as a whole rather than a special interest within it. I never had an opinion about NOW before. But I sure as hell do now.

The NAACP should slam now for being racist. This is just stupid.

Is NOW more concerned about having a woman, any woman, in the White House rather than the most qualified Democrat in the White House? It seems to me that their own blind ambitions has betrayed themselves.

I'm a woman and I'm voting for Obama. The Kennedys can endorse anyone they want. Barack Obama has the values and ideas that the Kennedys can agree with. This is not a personal jab against Hillary or even women. You put your support behind the candidate who you agree with. Period.

These ladies have some crazy nerve!!!! They are talking about all of the equality and democratic rights then get mad at somebody making their own decision to back who they feel is the right candidate!!!!!! Then they make it a women thing????!!! Every argument that they are using and every ounce of anger that they are displaying, can be turned against them.

If they were not in agreement with some of the moves Kennedy made, then why would you overlook them/let them slide/keep quiet??? That questions your morals. Does it matter if it is a man or woman? Or… Does it matter that it is the right person for the job?

Let's get something straight. WE DONT CARE ABOUT YOUR LITTLE EMOTIONS AND HURT FEELINGS THE ISSUES WE ARE FACED WITH NOW ARE FAR GREATER THAN YOUR LITTLE COMMITMENT ISSUES AND FEELINGS OF BETRAYAL!!!!! Get over it.

I refuse to vote for Clinton just because she is a woman. I truly appreciate what the earlier generations of women went through to get more rights and equality for me under the law, but the statement from the NY chapter of NOW's statement is the ultimate hypocrisy. We want equality, but give us special treatment!

Discrimination comes in all shapes and flavors, including the discrimination of blasting someone for making an educated choice in who they endorse. If NOW's only criteria for picking Clinton is her gender, then they have seriously damaged their own cause.

This is political divisiveness at its worst.
Only N.O.W. could make Ted Kennedy seem sympathetic.

Well excuse me, NOW- I am a woman. I do not appreciate being told that a vote for Obama is a "betrayal" to women. There have been many male candidates over the decades that are not worthy of my vote, and so it is with this particular female. Ms. Clinton surely cannot garner the vote based solely on her gender. SHE ISN'T RIGHT FOR THE JOB. Not because she is a woman- but because she is ethically flawed. So, before you publically go on record as speaking for "women," perhaps you should note that many of us have made up our own minds on which candidate we wish to support. I do not need NOW to speak for me, or vote for me. I was given that right many years ago- I can most certainly exercise it with care- and to me that means voting for a candidate- not a gender.

endorsing obama before the super tuesday by sen kennedy is a big betrayal to women voters.. it shows that sen. kennedy is a seasoned politician. its high time that us has a woman president. if other countries have women presidents and prime minister, why can't the u s have one..it shows that this country has woman
discrimination..what a life…why dont you let sen.. obama and clinton present their
platforms to the people and let the voters decide..seasoned politicians should stay out in the political arena..

Get over it! I am a member of NOW also and I am voting for Obama. I have been a woman's advocate most of my adult life. Just because a woman is running for President does not mean that Obama will not support the rights of women or, for that matter, that Clinton will. Dare I say it? The position of NOW sounds sexist.

These remarks by the state chapter of NOW are reprehensible. Do they want to suggest that Caroline Kennedy's endorsement was similarly motivated by an inability to handle electing a woman? I notice they were careful to keep their guns pointed away from her, yet it was the whole Kennedy family that endorsed Obama. How about Toni Morrison's endorsement of Obama on Monday? Where was the criticism of that? Is Toni Morrison also a blantent sexist? What about the dozens of other influential and important leaders, both women and men, who have endorsed and supported Obama? Do they too share a narrow view of the President as only a post able to be held by a man?

Apparently the New York chapter of NOW can't handle that Ted Kennedy wants something more in a President than gender (or race) - he wants someone who can inspire a new generation of Americans to lead our country through the 21st century, like his brother did in the 1960s. Or maybe they are just following the script of the Billary campaign?

If this is not about race or sex why would NOW even be involved??? Fro the very reason that HillBilly gains much of her support from women. Don't kid yourself it is about these things. I have been a Democrat for 60 years and will vote Republican for the first time if HilllBilly is nominated. I also thought that Bill Clinton should have been impeached for moral corruption and lieing while President. I like the way she has suddenly become a softer candidate after her early fire and brimstone posturing. Don't believe her, don't trust her no how, no way. NOW is yesterdays news. Lets" move on with out the Clintons.

Kennedy's attitude towards women is well documented.

In fact Kennedy would call the police if a woman was hurt in a car accident.

Economy Romney is looking better all the time, he seems to be the only one with the right balance.

I'm continually amazed by the fact that so many people claim they want a society where race, gender, ethnic origin, sexual orientation etc. do not matter, but they still want to blatantly promote their own agenda. Sen. Obama is campaigning on these very issues that race or gender should not matter, yet NOW evidently still believes that it should by blasting Sen Kennedy for not endorsing the "woman" candidate. There has been no outcry against the people who didn't endorse the "black" candidate. Sen Kennedy's niece Kathleen even used the phrase "As a woman" in her endorsement of Sen. Clinton. All I can truly say is that the hypocrisy in this country is just like the Energizer Bunny. It just keeps going, and, going ad
infinitum. Former president Clinton also continues to add fuel to this campaign by his references to the SC primary win by Sen Obama as comparative to Jesse Jackson's win there in '84 and '88, adding we're going on to the rest of the country where "MILLIONS" of voters will be heard. ( not just an over abundance of black voters voting for the black candidate.) Let us base our lives and decisions on the words of Thomas Jefferson, that "All men(and women) are created equal."

Waahhh….

Quit whining, NOW. This country NEEDS someone like Obama who inspires and who can fire us all up and get us going. With him, we have the chance to positively change the world's opinion of our country. I haven't been too proud of us lately. I want to feel that pride again. We have a perfect chance to end this American Nightmare and at least have a fighting chance to once again have hope for the American Dream.

One of the most respected, humble and most politically active woman on the whole planet, Caroline Kennedy, supports Obama. I didn't hear of NOW blasting her.

I emailed Kennedy last week when it was rumored he was calling Bill out when Obama said he was going to have to stop Bill.

I told him I didn't think he should.

I have never complained to any politican .

I am not affilated with any PAC. I make NO political donations. I have no ties to anyone but …..MY COUNTRY. I was a loyal, voting Democrat.

I am voting for Hillary. I am then changing to the Republican party, just as I told him I would.

It is obvious he doesn't want my Democratic female vote.

Senator Kennedy's endorsement of Senator Obama in no way indicates his disrespect for women's rights, their voices or oppression of the female gender. What Senator Kennedy is saying is that it is time to change the control of Washington from the Bush family and the Clinton family to a new voice. Being a woman, I have watched Senator Clinton and found her to be devisive, monotone and unable to let go of politics as usual. It appears that NOW is backing Hillary because she is a woman, not because of her "ideas" for America. Senator Clinton is not President Clinton. To think that we are getting President Clinton back is just wrong. Senator Obama is a breath of fresh air. His message appears to be, let's cross the aisle with a new offer of working together, bringing this country back to it's citizens and making friends in the world instead of enemies. As we all have found, name calling and strict party lines have not worked for the past seven years. It is time that the congress listen to it's citizens, take the responsibilty of making change and lead this country in a direction of respect in the world. It is something we have sorely missed during this presidency.

uuummm.. maybe these women should consider this: Kennedy actually likes Obama and his policies?? Why is this immediatley considered a diss to all women and not just to Hilary's policies?
I'm sorry, but lots of women vote for Obama such as myself. So am I disrespecting women too now? At the commencement of the race I was actually on Clinton's side because of her husband and her gender, I had no idea who Obama was. But gender, race, hype aside, Obama's policies agree with mine.

It is shameless for the NOW organization to play the gender card. Senator Kennedy has every right to endorse whomever he wants. This isn't about Mr. Obama's race or Mrs. Clinton's gender, it's about the issues!

The Kennedys in their judgment have felt that Senator Obama is the best choice. That's their opinion, take it or leave it. For all these posters and the NOW organization to wave the gender card smacks of having a sore loser mentality.

This has to be the funniest thing I've ever heard. All it does is make NOW look petty and superficial.

Sometimes I wonder if there would be this overwhelming support for Condolezza Rice if she ran for president, or would she be 'betrayed' by woments' organizatins.

I feel the same let down by the Senator K and of all people to endorse Carolyn K.
I bet their father and brother are rolling over in the grave. Obama is not and never will be a John K sr or jr.
Kennedy was an american at heart and his name held power. Obama's name hold nothing.
For someone who doesn't want any old , he sure is sucking up the OLD Lifer in the congress.
He said of Clinton, don't change the seat, what does he think Kennedy is. He has been there forever.
I can not believe the people of america is this stupid. If he was black it would be one thing, but he is NOT and everyone knows that, they are just over looking the muslin back ground. I really think we will live to regret this BIG TIME

So the National Organization of Women think people should vote strictly according to gender?

I guess that means every African American has to vote for Obama.

Don't they realize that is exactly what Sen. Kennedy and Sen. Obama is against?

Suck it up ladies. I don't think re-voting to re-Clinton the White House is exactly in the best interest of women.

As a fairly new senior citizen who set out in the mid-60's alone as a reluctantly single mom of two little ones, neither NOW nor justice were there for all the discriminations in jobs, housing, credit, etc., that I had to fight alone. NOW came later, and I was a supporter of women's rights - as I am a supporter of everyone's rights. But what the hell does that have to do with getting a woman for president today??

I'm shocked and appalled by that state's NOW organization speaking out so inanely, and find it incredibly offensive to women! Women's rights don't abrogate individual rights. Thank you, National NOW, for separating yourself from this idiot.

And, as a final note, I have not trusted HIllary Clinton's political motivations since she jumped into a state (powerful NY) she had never lived in to run for the Senate. That told me a lot about her vain rush to personal power. It also told me, gut level, I cannot trust her motivations. I'm proud to be a free-thinking, intelligently investigative, very independent voter, and she's not getting mine.

i believed that you can support anyone you feel is best for the country in terms of bringing changes and hope we deserve,but sen. kennedy have the right to pick anyone of his choice.So it doesn't make no sense for all these people to be questioning his support and views of endorsing Obama.We need think very well and see clearly that we should stop the politics that embrase discrimination but to see changes hope; Obama is the first to start talking or mentioning changes and hope for Americans then other start to use the slogan too this showed me clearly that there is only one candidate that can bring changes to this country and that is "BARAK OBAMA".

We all know what the Kennedy family thinks about women. Caroline should be ashamed of herself. The women in the Kennedy family sure know how to let boys be boys don't they?

Pick the best candidate, once and for all, and not the one who's the right gender or color. Thankfully, we have this choice — there was a time when neither of these gifted people could have run for President!
I am a woman and support Obama; there are many African-Americans supporting Hillary. Let's get over ourselves already… and be proud of the diversity, which the Republican party has yet to embrace.

get over it NOW ladies. you are so 20 minutes ago.

It's a straight issue. Why vote for someone merely because of their sex or race. NOW is just ridiculous. That kind of fanaticism bears little credibility.

Ok 1st Oprah is bashed because she backed Obama, supposedly because of his race. Now Kennedy is getting bashed because he backs Obama, supposedly because he's a man. Why is it that groups don't think that people have listened to what each candidate has said and then based their decision to support on that…Already this is getting really frustrating to me. I'm so glad I did the early voting here in FL, because I can just tune this junk out..At least for the next few months.

Personally, I don't see Sen. Kennedy's endorsement as a positive. As a woman, I don't feel that women should vote for HIllary just because she's a woman. That is ignorant and dangerous. I would love to see a woman president! But Hillary is not that woman, she's not someone I want to see in the White House. I think if she is elected, it will set women in politics back 30 years! It will be a long time before we see another woman president, thanks to her.

Ironic.

What could have unified the country like never before has turned into dividing the country like never before.

Maybe we're just not ready.

Although I am not a Kennedy supporter, he might have finally done something I can approve of…and that is choosing the less polarizing and more moderate candidate. It has nothing to do with gender. If the women want Hillary just because she is a woman, they are doing a disservice to all truly talented, competent and intellegent women. There will be a woman president in the future, and I just hope the group can realize that this is not the time. Hillary is not the best woman to represent this country….the Governor of Kansas would be a better example of poise and experience.

I guess "NOW" isn't the time for a black president either…

If you're simply voting race or gender, you're doing the country a disservice by showing up at the polls.

CNN please get control of yourself….you have bashed Clinton soooo much….please be fair….you are supposed to represent everyone's views, not just your own…isn't that what they teach you in journalism school???? Cover both sides?????

You sat there last night after the State of the Union, and questioned how Obama can turn the Super Tuesday votes more for him???? Are you trying to figure out how you can get him in the White House? You would NEVER ask how Hillary Clinton can maintain her lead, what does she have to do to keep her lead and add to it….no, just bash her….

Could Obama have been a decent person and shook Hillary's hand last night after Ted Kennedy reached out to her? No, he turned his back….but you at CNN will NEVER cover that….if Hillary had done the same thing, you would cover it to death…..

I'm sure this post for Hillary will not be left up…..yet again…….

Now is the time for Obama, and it is time NOW is for Obama.

Clara - It's attitudes of bitterness and hatred as in how your comment was worded & phrased which is exactly why I am supporting Obama. Just having a female isn't going to "right" the world….I would vote female if it were the right candidate. Hillary is all about power& ego. She's lacking the strength and graceful diplomacy for this position. She allienates people more than befrends them. Her tears in New Hampshire were all about the potential loss she was facing - not about the "country"…….give it up….she's not going to cut it. What experience is having dinner with dignitaries qualify her for? She's only stayed in her marriage because of power, that's all she's after here. Wake up America!

It is wrong for any woman to support Hillary because she is a woman. Feminists have fought for equality not one gender to be more equal than the other. What we have fought for over the decades is for women to be heard equally as men are in politics. Now when we are faced with an array of candidates all making their voices heard, let us listen carefully. Let us not cloud our minds by the notions of gender or race! Hillary Clinton is a candidate on the same platform with all other male candidates. But this does not make her the preferential candidate for women!. Lets celebrate she is running for proesident, but let us not put her on a pedestal. After all that is what we fought for.. putting women on the same footing with men. Choosing the best candidate is another issue. If Hillary has the best qualities, good! But if not, women should not be afraid to acknowledge this. America needs the right president at this moment. And this is a president chosen because of their own qualities and abilities and not what they look like of their gender!! Having said that, NOW New York have made an unfortunate statement, which they will live to regret. It gives a bad name to all other women activists!!!

It remains amazing to me that there is such nasty response about Kennedy's support of Obama, when the Clinton Campaign was seeking the same support. Would he be only known by his faults if he had turned the other way. As a woman, I'd like to believe that we support people based on what they mean for our country, not their gender. Likewise, as an African-American, I would expect that we select someone who represents our country, our future leadership, our hope for America fulfilling its full promise - not someone based on their race. What we see through is the thin disguise of what is good for the gander, should not be good for the goose. This is more about politics, coverage and spin than the momentum of this nation. We need someone who can lead - and we should all be clear, mistakes will be made. I simply do not subscribe to the belief that to be a woman you must support a female candidate - if you don't feel she is the best person for the job. NOW's criticism is a distraction from what is still on the horizon. I'd like to see their stance on the violation of playing politics in Florida, in the hopes that those delegates will get done what dirty politics, mud slinging, and entitlement has not. We have to look beyond endorsements, beyond politics, beyond fear and beyond old Washington - and as thinking people, we have the right to select whomever we decide. The Kennedy's had that right to make that choice, too.

I agree with Ashley above.

Get real people. It is not the idea of a woman President that bothers so many voters of both parties. It is just Hillary and her slick willie baggage that bothers so many voters!

You are right about one thing Clara. 'Inspiraion is not going to feed your kids or guarantee them a better future.'

YOU are responsible for feeding your kids and ONLY you. There is no "guarantee" of a better future and it's YOUR job as a parent to make sure your kids understand that. They need to work hard and help others who are less fortunate than themselves and not wait and hope for someone else to do anything for them.

Kennedy is supporting his party so they may win the presidency. Is it not that simple? He doesn't believe Clinton can win, and quite frankly, I hope she doesn't. I can't stand the thought of 8 more years of scandal in the White House. Can any of us imagine that Mr. Clinton has changed his ways. He will be remembered more for "sex" and White Water in the White House(?) than anything else. And she will be remembered for "standing by her man".

Thank you Clara for summing up my words for me.

The movement for women has lost whatever power they had due to a apathetic society
With the loss of relevance, so goes any concern over the wrath they may threaten
Thus, Kennedy will shrug it off and do what he wants……..
Sorry but this is the truth

Ashley - If people truly want equality across race and gender, they should not be supporting a candidate just because of race or gender. Supporting Barack Obama simply because he is black is not a step toward equality. The best candidate should win, regardless of race or sex.

Mr. Kennedy is a just another BIG disappointment for women….

Barbara from NJ

This once again shows how the agenda of NOW is not to promote women based on qualifications and integrity. They do not speak for many women who worked our way up the ladder not using gender, just working hard and making ourselves the best candidate for the position. Of course this is the same organization that thought abusing interns and other females by the president was acceptable. NOW has lost more credibility by this ridiculous claim.

I think NOW needs to grow up - nice grown up comments everyone…choose the best candidate for the job regardless of their race and gender - plain and simple. Are we a nation of 6 year-olds? I hope not. Even 6 year-olds may know better.

Obama '08

Senator Kennedy's endorsement of Senator Obama in no way indicates his disrespect for women's rights, their voices or oppression of the female gender. What Senator Kennedy is saying is that it is time to change the control of Washington to a new voice. Being a woman, I have watched Senator Clinton and found her to be devisive and unable to let go of politics as usual. It appears that NOW is backing Hillary because she is a woman, not because of her "ideas" for America. Senator Obama is a breath of fresh air. His message appears to be, let's cross the aisle with a new offer of working together, bringing this country back to it's citizens and making friends in the world instead of enemies. As we all have found, name calling and strict party lines have not worked for the past seven years. It is time that the congress listen to it's citizens, take the responsibilty of making change and lead this country in a direction of respect in the world. It is something we have sorely missed during this presidency.

This is ridiculous. I highly doubt Teddy Kennedy chose to support Barack Obama because he does not want a women to be president.

The comments from the NY chapter of NOW lead me to believe they are only supporting Hillary because she is a woman.

I wish our nation's citizens were not so narrow minded to only be voting for a candidate because they are a Democrat or a Republican, because they are a man or a women or because they are black or white.

Isn't it about the issues? I thought we were smart enough as a people to get past what's on the cover.

Looks like we have a long way to go.

Maybe Senator Clinton and Senator Edwards should boycott the upcoming debates until the Media become objective and unbias in it's reporting. I'd like to see that debate…

This is just as bad as Sharpton and Jackson on their way down to NC to persuade public opinion in a negative light on those innocent white kids that allegedly raped a black hooker.

Grow the hell up NOW, a white man just endorsed a black man - and you see wrong in that?

NOW is officially a joke.

A person should not endorse/vote for another person just because of their gender, race or religious preferance. These women wanting Hillary to be president just because she is a women is rediculous, they should be voting on who will do the better job. Maybe that is what Senator Kennedy see's, someone who will do a better job.

Yesterday I sent the following to Kennedy.

It is sad a day for USA. It is expected that today you are going to endorse Senator Obama over Hillary Clinton. You are being quoted that you think Obama has a unique message and unique opportunity. It is surprising to me because Hillary has unique message and unique opportunity too. It is obvious that in this election you and others are openly caving into so-called "race outcry" by African Americans. Your statement and endorsement tells me three things:

1. You chose race over gender
2. Qualifications and experience do not count
3. You are not a leader

In my opinion, leaders do what is right, stand for right things, and most importantly do not become hostage as it appears to be the case here.

What is so sad that the facts clearly reflect that it was Obama and his surrogates started crying "race" card minutes after TV projected Hillary as the winner in New Hampshire. During the debate in Nevada, Tim Russert even waved four-page document that Obama manager sent out about the race card and Obama accepted it to be the fact. Well, sir you are no different. You chose to support "opportunity for race" over "opportunity for gender."

It is sad that there are no individuals like Jesse and Clyburn in gender community making their case though gender is the largest community.

In my case, I wasted my 30 years with Democrats but enough is enough. I will vote for Hillary and will continue to support her until she is in the race. After that, I am no longer a democrat. You may say who cares - I only have one vote and that is OK. I just wanted to express my opinion.