GOOD FOR YOU, NOW!!! Kenndy is clearly the bloated alcoholic creep he always has been. Chapaquitik, anyone? Left a woman to drown to death, and got off scott free. He should probably be getting out of jail right about now if anyone had cared about justice back then for a blank, blank, blank. And then Willie Smith. Rapist in the clan and Teddy-boy backs him and gets him off scott free? Kennedys? Who gives a blank. Good for the New York chapter for saying it as it is. He's a mysoginist through and through. It's easier for white entitled men to back a black man because of the obvious issue of race inequality, harder for them to back a woman because of entrenched sexism within themselves. Don't back off NY NOW. Your sisters in the national administration of NOW are clearly cowering- don't want to piss off a Kennedy,eh? Gutless wonders ladies. Go NY!!!! Real feminists, i.e. real women and real men judge a candidate and other political figures on performance, not on media hype. Hillary is the best candidate- that is quite obvious to anyone with a modicum of sense. I worked in the senate as an intern and I can tell you no one who knows Ted Kennedy is in awe of him. He's just a nasty old white man. Why throw him undue respect?
As for Carolyn Kennedy, what has she ever done and who is she to even judge her father's legacy when she was a tiny kid when he died? Other Kennedys, 3 in fact, and one an actual environmentalist, have backed Hillary. Bark Obama
has said he won't be entrenched in Washington politics, Washington games and then he goes and picks up the grand daddy player of them all? What? Hypocrisy at its finest. He acts old school to any savvy observer.

NOW should stop and think. This election is not about gender it's about who is most qualified for the Presidency of the United States. Come on ladies "Get Over It".
OBAMA is the Man best qualified to be the new CHANGE, HOPES and DREAMS of the ALL the American people and will be ready for the Presidency on day ONE.

These NOW people are hilarious! I really love how they say "Ted Kennedy was always a friend of NOW." Yeah, right, ask that woman in the car with at Chappaquiddick how friendly he was to women.

I swear, NOW and PETA keep showing how fringe and worthless they are. NOW is a disgrace to women and PETA is a disgrace to true animal lovers.

What was N.O.W.'s reaction to Clinton having an extra-marital affair with his intern?

"We have better things to worry about"

I tihnk this is crazy, it seems like Hilary can sling mud, and Obama doesnt shake her hand and he is being childish, ok so what about president Clinton, what is he doing…this unfair

Obama has my vote

OBAMA 2008

Atlanta, GA

Who said Ted did not want a woman president! OMG this is crazy, a black man, a white woman or a white man, or a latino woman, or asian, or mized, or everything can hold racist beliefs, being a white woman doesnt make you automatically open for change, the same thing holds for other ethic groups, it is the person!!!! so stop this sex and race baiting!!! please

OBAMA 2008
Los Angeles, CA

Well is now really about women or for rich privildged women?

I am curious

A Woman
M.Lewis
Los Angeles, CA

Ted Kennedy should have kept his potato sack shut! Go HILLARY

Dear Friends:

Cells for the arm and leg or hand and foot growth. Please think in terms of several things.
1. Frogs and amphimbian have the ability to grow back their arms and legs.
This science and medicine has been trying to do for centuries and or figure out.
2. The male sperm are not like the female egg. The egg so many and they form at a certain ages. The male form thoughout most of their life. The woman uterus forms moist cells that flow and from the walls of her. This allows the transfer of hormones and nuriousment and energy into the area and wall of the uterous. The male like the female has this but it takes all the cell, dna, gernones and teledones ( check it out in the Saramento Bee ) for accuracy in spelling ) are and enable the male to have his cells fromed in the active and live sperm.

3. Cells move to the surface of the skin. Through the connective tissue and the involuntary organ and skin cells. In this a full organ mico of the entire body essentially. Unlike the skin cells the waste material leaves mostly flued through the urine and stool. Yet science can take cells from the skin and make or clone a human and or mammal. In otherwords the skin cells have all the nourishment and cells life dehydrated or not in them.

4. Does the organs? Can cells of say the eye replicate the entire body or are they just that organ?

5. Muscles they can grow, skin they can grow, but say the right and left arm or leg they have not yet they can stimulate and mend a leg by putting it together and then slow excercise or stimulation. Cells should match or scaring and or elongated cells.

6. The brain connects the blood and nervous system. Can you create a human or clone of a mammal from blood cells and or nerve endings alone? Why not. They are the souce that moves the energy through and feeds and restores. That then to into the waste system. Can you grow a clone from stool and or liver or kidney.

7 . Selection of dna and molecular to then choose the organ and the direction.

8. The bone If you look at a chicken they have bone and their legs have none, yet they can carry the large body. A bird no hips or legs for flight. The tissue similar to man or mammal is cartalege. The transfer and change of chemistry selection to form bone. Knowing the combination and order is part of the key to growing these. and timing. Timing in the find as in the School in Briton will be the key to life cells and regrowth. Are they using nanotechnology and does this burn or wear down the life of the teledrone or reproductive ability?

9. Science can watch and distort the growth of arms and legs as in Thalidamyde drugs impact. In otherwards by breaking down what is in this drug and watching where it goes one can see which dna is for the arms and legs right and or left.

10. The life of a spern is how long. So is the life then within and the nourishment and explosive hormones needed to ignite the growth into the cell division.

More to follow I am tired and some unscupulous persons are trying to get my thoughts first.
Just as the cell starts the first division it already has all you need from the same person you would have less rejection. The speed of cell growth.

Sharon M Walker

LOL! how come they don't say anything about Caroline Kennedy also supporting Obama?

If you don't support Hillary,
you don't support standing by a lying, two timing, double dealing, cheating husband..

Man or woman, does our vote really count anyway? Apparently, only a select few elect our president, so why do we have the priviledge to vote? I don't get it!

I would love to vote for a woman. I would never vote for Hillary. Not a snowballs chance in hell.
Obama 08 Truth & Honor

Mr. Bloomberg's support goes beyond New York. Jon Fisher, a 35-year-old technology entrepreneur in Tiburon, Calif., said Mr. Bloomberg's background appeals to him. "Business experience, and specifically this kind of entrepreneurial business experience, is exactly the skill set we need in a president," said Mr. Fisher, who sold his most recent venture, Bharosa, to technology giant Oracle Corp. last year.

Mr. Fisher, a Democrat, is inviting others who have sold companies to Oracle to a meeting in Tiburon at the end of the month. The goal, Mr. Fisher said, is to recruit people willing to dedicate time and effort to a Bloomberg campaign. (Mr. Bloomberg would presumably fund his campaign himself, making fund-raising unnecessary.)

The fact is, this just makes that chapter of NOW look like close-minded whiners. I whole-heartedly agree that you can't choose a candidate just because she's a woman or he's black. that's what obama's been saying for awhile now, but the clintons are trying to make this a black vs. white campaign. this could set back race relations by a couple decades if they keep this up.

White, 40 yr old, Registered Republican Female voting for Barak Obama!

O8ama

I am a Republican, and I am strongly leaning towards voting for Obama. I think he truly wants to reunite the country, not just the Democratic party.

I also am disgusted to think that anyone expects me to vote for Hillary Clinton just because she's a woman and I am, too. I think she would further divide the country instead of focusing on what ALL Americans have in common.

I am not a Ted Kennedy fan, but I agree with what he said. I also find it ironic and mean that someone dismissed Caroline Kennedy's support for Obama just because she has money and privilege.

If Ted Kennedy's endorsment of Obama means that he can't accept the idea of a woman as President, then by the same "logic" the NY chapter of NOW can't accept the idea of a black President.

What's truly sexist? Endorsing a more qualified candidate who happens to be a man, or endorsing a less qualified one BECAUSE she's a woman?

Kelly you hit the nail on the head

The NOW rant is laughable and there is no way anyone can actually believe that Obama will not respect the goals or rights of women. If Ted kennedy has destroyed their hopes, they need to find a new mission. I respect both Clinton and Obama, but was very disturbed by Bill Clinton's ranting in SC, especially as it became all about him, (Hillary who?) Realistically, both Clinton and Obama face huge obstacles and some people will never vote for them because of their race /gender. On thing that gets lost in this whole argument about race/ gender is that Obama has abosolutely no Black American ancestry. All his American family are white and he was raised by them, yet he is only considered black. His perspective is somewhat different and his views and experiece are much more diverse. Does this mean he should only get the mixed race, foreign parent, hippie white mother votes?

Oh and I forgot one thing,

While everyone is fighting over Clinton and Obama, please remember John Edward's slogan: "Objects in your mirror are closer than they appear!" Don't count him out.

NOW is wrong. A vote for Obama is not necessarily a vote against women! I think it is unfair to say that Kennedy betrayed women. Please, media – don't give this anymore attention. It's not news-worthy, and only shows ignorance.

Thank you, Senator Kennedy, for endorsing Obama. This will ensure that Independent voters will vote Republican in November. No one is more liberal than you, sir.

Evidently the amiable ties between the Kennedy and Clinton clans were not enough for Ted, Patrick, and Caroline Kennedy to endorse Hillary's presidential bid. With friends like the Kennedys, who needs enemies?

When the Clintons were involved in scandal after scandal over the years, liberal Democrats always blamed the 'Vast Right Wing Conspiracy'. Now these very same people are finally seeing the Clintons through Republican eyes for the first time, and they expect to be taken seriously. The hypocrisy of liberal Democrats is absolutely staggering and unforgivable on this FACT.

While I am no fan of the Clintons, it is indisputable that both Bill and Hillary have always been an ally of minority and poor people in America.

Therefore, when President Clinton recently compared Obama's presidential bid with that of Jesse Jackson in 1984 and 1988 and liberals feigned outrage and squealed 'racism', I couldn't help but ponder: Is this what political dissidents have to look forward to when they oppose President Obama?

Thanks for the advanced warning. Hypersensitivity has no place within the political arena. As an American, I have the right to disagree with a politician without being labelled a 'racist' for doing so.

enough of the womans crap.. woman voted for bush yes it was the womans vote that put that wit wit in office. and you see what the usa has today. there has not
been a man of principle sense JFK. alone gives me the right to back obama.

he was twice a much on the ball as hillary does, she is not presidential material

AND I HOPE ALL WASHED UP IN POLITICS

I am a black middle-aged woman, and I too am very disappointed in the Kennedys'. In the very beginning I was stricktly for Hillary, then within the last few days I started to sort of lean towards Obama. UNTIL…this morning… I was watching Good Morning America, when Diane Sawyers asked them if they notified the Clintons (because they were suppose to be friends) that they were going to turn their support to Obama, and they seemed a lttle uncomfortable. I started to think about what all I saw this morning… and now i am back to being a totally sturn Hillary (and Bill) Clinton supporter! Thanks for making up my mind Kennedys!!!

I think that the American people are smart enough to make their own decision to vote in November 2008. Don't let those endosements have any impact on your own decision. I voted for John Kerry and admired him and kept his campaign banner from the last election. But now he came out and endosed Obama and said that he's going to give all the e-mail addresses to Obama's camp. Now I want to let Mr. Kerry knows that I supported you at that time, but it does not mean that you own my name and address to force me to support Obama. Now I'm going to burn those banner that I have kept for years.

Play fair people – CNN and alike – Why do you guys keep beating up Hillary – a person that has given her life to making the world better. The problem is if a woman looks strong — then she is mean, if she shows emotion she looks weak. Do we ever talk about this concerning a man. It is true – woman have to be three times better then a man in all things they do to be accepted.
Woman wake up — do not vote for Hillary because she is a woman, but do not vote for Obama because he is a black man and he makes us feel good. Obama is just as much as an insider as Clinton. He almost broke is neck yesterday at the State of the Union trying to shake President Bush's hand.
The sad part of that is – Bush could have cared less.

Obama is a great speaker and makes us feels good and since we are a "feel good" country – we are voting with our heart and not our head. Until Obama answers the questions he is ask and quits preaching to us. – I go with Clinton. I do not need someone cool, I need someone effective.

PS : Who cares who Kennedy endorses. He doesn't pay my bills.

PEN, I totally agree with you. It wish everyone would see it.

Canuck,we know your the same person as Chad. Get over it, and grow up!

I can't believe everyone is bashing a women who salvaged what dignity she has because of her husband. I think if you can rise up from this, who knows what she could do to help this country. Women can do anything men can do.
vote HILLARY 08

The sad thing is that if Obama wins it will be seen by some as an anti-woman vote. If Hillary wins it will be seen by some as an anti-black vote. All of this is because CNN and other media has not given us enough information about candidates strategies and background to make a true informed decision based on ability rather than emotion. I'm for Hillary because I know her best.

Right on NOW!

Everyone want's to pipe up rhretoric about race and gender, but want to fault the Clintons every move they make.

Is this a case of pure Clinton HATE?

If so, then you've made a prejudice move as bad as liking/disliking for race or gender.

ANONYMOUS,
I KNOW MAXINE WATERS AND I CAN TELL YOU IF BILLARY CLINTON IS OKAY WITH HER, BILLARY IS TOO LEFT WING FOR ME. MAXINE WATERS IS A LEFT-WING NUT AND SHE WILL EVENTUALLY BE BOOTED OUT OF OFFICE BY ALL OF THE ILLEGAL ALIENS IN HER DISTRICT IN WATTS.

THAT WON'T BE A DAY TOO SOON FOR ME.

Iris:

you want someone in the whitehouse that will unite the parties. Forget it, it's not going to happen. In my eighty years the parties have not united, and I hope they never do. We don't need a one party system.

RIGHT ON CHAD!

and YOU 'give it up' Matt.

I've listened to both sides of the debate about race and gender and I firmly believe that both candidates have to stop the using false accusations against each and focus on what they can do to better this country. If both candidates don't stop we will eventually end up with 4 more years of Republican rule.

I am disgusted with Obama and Clinton's campaigns. One running on race, the other on gender, whether they admit it or not…Can't hide the obvious! I wish we could wipe the slate clean and find new candidates to run…..

Dumb. NOW has outlived its usefulness. Obama '08

FINALLY, a few good men have summoned up the courage to prefer a candidate that their wives do not neccessily approve of.

Wow, talk about bigotry here! Should we call them racists in return? What a travesty, but at least these people have been exposed for their bigotry disguised as a fight for equality.

Honestly, this is sick, sad, and crazy. Betrayal? Supporting another Democrat is now seen as betrayal? Reasonable people can disagree on which of these candidates has the best plans for America, but both of them are light-years better than even the best Republican and NOW should recognize that.

And, really, all the women writing that this is about men not being able to vote for a woman, shame on each and every one of you. You have no idea what you are talking about. There are many men, me included, who have worked on or for campaigns for women for office, and done so proudly.

This is the problem the Democratic party now faces in general. For years they have divided everyone up into groups. All the minorities over here (and then subdivided them further; Black, Brown, Asian, Islander, Indian, etc). Now all the women over here (oh, and subdivide them too). Now all you GLTB over in that corner. Get the poor over here. Put the rich and well off over their, under the spot lite. ETC…
Worked fine as long as you had some White Guy who could pander to all of the individual groups, feel their pain so to speak. Regardless of whether the annoited one actually ever did anything to solve the problem.
Now you have 2 major candidates from 2 of the major subsets.
Regardless of issue or reason, If you support the woman, your a racist. If you support the minority, your sexist. It's a good thing Edwards is Strait, otherwise to not support him would be Homophobic.
Finally, too late, the Democratic Party is seeing the problem with dividing people into groups and pandering to each of those groups, rather than just seeing everyone as a person and trying to do whats best overall.

Ready to MISLEAD from day one.

Feelings, that is the reason this country is falling apart is because of hurting feelings. I can' t stand being political correct about everything. Stop crying already

Looks like people reading CNN are not necessarily smart enough to comprehend the article. NOW is not complaining that Kennedy didn't endorse a woman, they're upset because he didn' endorse THEIR candidate after what they thought was a strong alliance with Kennedy. Obama doesn't have experience with strenghtening the purpose of NOW (women equalities) like other presidents have like Bill Clinton, so obviously Kennedy's endorsement of this novice feels a betrayal in the eyes of a group he works closely with and who supported each other.

WHAT A SURPRISE THE PARTY OF DIVERSITY WANTS BLACKS JUST FOR THEIR VOTES. HOW COULD THIS UPSTART BLACK MAN THINK HE HAS A CHANCE WHEN A WHITE WOMAN WANTS THAT JOB. OF ALL THE THINGS. WE ALL KNOW THE CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS MOSTLY BENEFIT WHITE WOMAN FIRST.

THE DEMOCRATS PARTY OF DIVERSITY HA HA HA HA. THAT'S A BIG LAUGH!!

VOTE FOR ANYBODY BUT BILLARY AND ANYBODY BUT LOVERBOY GIULIANI.

HOW ABOUT RON PAUL.

Hillary hasn't accomplished anything that shows me she's ready to lead. I don't think she would be where she is know if it wasn't for her husband. I don't know what leadership qualities people actually see in her. I think people have the right to back anyone. No one knows why a individual decides to back one vs. another except that individual. I believe a woman can run this country just not Hillary. Can someone please tell why her records are sealed !!!

being an african american woman, i think that oprah winfrey, toni morrison and all those other top notch women who supportd obaama over mrs clinton have betrayed us as women, as for ted kennedy, he is just sexist and a betrayal. for the way they have betrayed us women and the american people, we will answer at the polls. i am making sure as much women as possible go out in droves and vote for mrs clinton. i am ashamed being a black woman to see how my fellow black people are so ungratrful to the clintons. we will retaliate at the polls and mrs. clinton will be the nominee.

Has anyone noticed, the new voters guide issued by the catholic church says that it is "intrinsically evil" to support legal abortion or promotion of racism, but it is alright to promote sexism. I guess cnn agrees.

This gender issue WONT SOLVE anything… unless there is a law to calculate specific percentages of men, women, religion and race required in every job, organizaion etc

This gender issue WONT SOLVE anything… unless there is a law to calculate specific percentages of men, women, religion required in every job, organizaion etc

Hillary Clinton has experience? Please.

Hillary was elected to the US Senate on her name alone. All the "experience" she touts, the 35 years, came from the exposure her husband recieved as Govenor and President. Hillary was never elected during her time as first lady of Arkansas, and the United States. She was never held accountable to the tax payers for her little pet projects. And, most importantly, she has zero military experience. Yes, that's who I want leading our nation when we're mired in war in the Middle East. .

Barack Obama is in the position he's in today because of Barack Obama. Hillary Clinton is where she is today because of Bill Clinton. That's the truth, wether you like it or not.

Does anyone you know really care what N.O.W. thinks. It should hve remionded its supporters that it was a woman fat Teddy left to drown. Funny how he has been a "hero" to feminists until now.

It will all came down to race or gender. You cannot not honestly sit there and think otherwise. Open your eyes. Tim has a great point, but who cares who would be a better leader as long as we have a women or black president. We will finally reach our goal in life. iT ALL COMES DOWN TO SAY, THE FIRST. That is it, and the media is pushing it so hard.

Ummm…I hate to say it, but maybe this is why it took so long for women to get the right to vote in the first place–because men knew they would vote for a candidate just because she's a woman.

What's next? "Ooooh…I love her dress! Let's make her president!"

Thanks NOW…you've set us back another 100 years.

To be honest, most people will vote because of race or sex. No matter what their views. It will be great to finally have black president or a women president. Very sad. Most blacks will think he will cater to them more and most women will think she will help them more. When you say the truth, it usually does not get past the moderator. We will see.

Hillary is symbol of strength. If given the chance she'll show a good way to the YOUTH of this country how to respect old things and old experience. Did you hear what Obama did at the State of the Union address? He's arrogant and that's what he's going to teach the youngsters. Dont't respect or even greet someone because a big supporter is sitting beside you for whole world to see. And still people keep saying he's bringing about change. You know ,in India, people don't care for Mahatma Gandhi's grand children if they don't like them. Why Kennedy does not like dynasty rule. His brother did try to become president after brother John was killed. Unfortunately for this country this could not happen or he would be another John for this country. People please stop hating Hillary.

Tim… There have been plenty of other black candidates before, in both parties. Oprah didn't back them.

It's extremely presumptuous to say she's only backing Barack because of his race. Does that mean the first person she ever endorses has to be white, just so people like you can't accuse her of being racist? Use your head.

Equality?

What is equal about a woman's organization bashing of a person for not siding with a woman? They don't want gender equality. They want a woman to be in power. Their platform is based purely ON gender.

This is akin to Oprah backing Obama. She's doing this because he's black and no other reason. Prior to Obama, how many canditates in the history of Oprahs' life did she back? 0. The difference between Obama and the 100's of presidential hopefuls of before? Skin color.

If NOW was truly based on gender inequality, they would be supported the candidate whose platform best fit their idea of equal oppurtunity for women. Their position is nothing more then reverse sexism, much like Oprah's heralding of Obama is a form of reverse racism.

Close the NOW.

I doubt any intelligent woman is part of this ridiculous group. No wonder Hillary has their support.

Roger,
Pay attention, please – hard as it is. Obama camp spun the ethnic issue first. Go to the videotape. They spun you dizzy Roger, didn't they?

Unfortunately there are still many in the United States that will vote based on race. A recently informal poll showed that 1 in 5 will vote based on race, not qualification. How very sad. The United States and its people will never reach their full potential until race is a celebrated quality, not a descriminated quality.

Danielle,
Dumb comment… it was Bill who made race an issue. Now the Clinton folks are making gender an issue, too. Shows the Clintons will do anything for a win. At least its backfiring on them this time.

For the people who agree w/ NOW, I have one request. Next time, support a female who: 1) is a progressive; 2) has integrity; 3) doesn't pad the resume (being first lady doesn't count); 4) doesn't take money from corporate donors (Rupert Murdoch, anyone?); and 5) can win without plaing Karl Rove-style politics…

I'd happily support any CANDIDATE with those characteristics, regardless of race or gender.

Tell the National Organization for Women to get over it! There is nothing like a power hungry woman AND Billy

I'm sick and tired of people saying that Hillary just want's people to vote for her because she is a woman – especially Obama supporters. Take a look at where Obama's support comes from – blacks. You don't see anyone saying that they vote for Obama because he is the same color, do you? No, because that would be racist. We may say that we do not want race and gender to be an issue in this race, but we are not going to be able to stop it. The media plays more of a role in these situations than the candidates themselves – much like Bill Clinton. I'm sure that Obama's wife has said some pretty nasty things in his campaign rallies, but she is not a former president so she doesn't draw much attention. The media is anti-Hillary and are projecting the image that everyone else should be. She is running a great campaign and will get the nomination. No doubt.

Look at it this way, we have had Bush-Clinton-Bush and the Bush twerps have put us into war and deficit while the Clintons have put us at peace with a surplus. Obama is a dreamer overstating principles without details and overpromising things that he will not be able to accomplish.

Matrix, give it up. Obama cannot defeat the all-stars.

Go with someone who keeps their eyes on the prize. Hillary 08! Obama can wash the limousine.

Tell the National Organization for Women to get over it! There is nothing like a power hungry woman….AND Billy

Like it or not, there are people who will vote for a candidate because of their race or color. But if you are broad minded, then go for the issues.

What is wrong with you people!! Everytime someone endorses someone we have hundreds of people attempting to put some racial or gender prejudice to it!! It is time we all gorw up a little. I REALLY doubt Ted Kennedy's decision had anything to do with him not wanting to see a woman as President. I personally think it was 2 issues: 1) How President Clinton has basically over shadowed Hillary and said some pretty STUPID things. 2) There is about 10-15% of the Democratic / Independent electorate that would not vote for Hillary PERIOD. That could result in the Democrats losing the White House..this is unacceptable to Ted.

Danielle, where have you been? It is Hillary and Bill that have made race the issue, not Obama. Please be more aware of the issues in the future before you speak out.

What is wrong with people? This thing about "it's time for a woman president or
it"s time for a black president" It is no wonder this country is in the shape it's in.
Use your brains and elect the person who will do the best for this country reguardless of race or sex.

Ted Kennedy has always been a flake….he's riding on the name of JFK. Time to retire Teddy boy…..(coming from a democrat myself)

Yoko Ono was beloved by her husband John Lennon, but she was laughed at and despised by many others. Their original union was not exempt from their fair share of personal problems. They lived apart for awhile. But with their reconciliation and the birth of Sean in 1975 they were able to live in relative seclusion with John as a house husband until his death in December 1980.

I bring this up because I just am amazed at the number of people who hate Hillary because she forgave Bill and stayed with him. John wrote amazing songs about Peace, Women’s Rights, Mind Games, Revolution, and how we are all not that much different (We’re All Water). There can be no doubt if you listen to his Double Fantasy album how much he loved Yoko.

Is it too much of a leap of faith to believe that Bill and Hillary could go through some very rough times and end up with a love for one another that is even stronger?

Women of American better wake up, men have kept us down for long enough.

Don't you realize that women have only been "Voting" for only 80+ years. Men have dominated the world and been voting for hundreds and thousands.

Wake Up! Do women still want to be "the little woman" for ever.
I certainly don't and I don't want another generation of women kept on the bottom rung of the ladder anymore.
I want to see a women President in my life time, and this is the year!

To Clara:
You really hate men don't you? Maybe people just haven't warmed up to Hillary because she's well, ice cold, is devisive, is slimmy like her husband, comes off as arrogant and untruthful. Those are just a few reasons. It has little to do because she is a woman.

I'd vote for a women if one came across as being on the same side of the issues as myself. If we agreed philisophically. Women have been elected to heads of state all around the world. People will elect a women, but it has to be the right women, not just a person with two breasts. That would be ridiculous and that is how Clara sounds.

I'd vote for Margaret Thatcher if I had the chance. I'd vote for Larry Elder in a heart beat. But I will not vote for Hillary or Obama because they both believe it takes a government to raise a child.

They both believe in the sanctity of the government, that beauracracy knows best, that politicians are the gatekeepers of our paychecks.

I for one, believe in the sanctity of the individual, that free markets know best, and that money I earn should be money I keep. Government, as its best, is an evil necessity that drains the economy, and its funding should be kept to a minimum.
Neither the woman, nor the black man, in this race understand those basic of principles and thus will not get my vote.

Read the Declaration of Independence. Read the Constitution. You will see how far this country has deteriorated from its founding principles and that most condidates on either side of the aisle do a poor job in representing on our behalf, on the behalf of the rights of citizens, on the protection from the government.

Consider the source — Ted Kennedy — who has shown about as much respect for women in his life as an amoeba. And yes, folks, it IS about gender! It's about the "good old boys" wanting a "new boy" they can twist and shake around, rather than having an experienced, strong woman who has her own convictions! And did you see how Obama fawned all over Ted during the State of the Union speech? Geez!

It's about time someone stood up at the plate and talked about the negatives about Kennedy-Obama. There is stuff there but all any one in the media talks about are his dreams. I do not want a dreamer, I want a doer.

FLORIDA FOR HILLARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CNN knows Obama's tantrum at the SOTU should be on top of the ticker.

I'd like to think that people choose to back a candidate because they agree with that candidate's views and opinions, not because of that candidate's race, gender or age.

I'm not going to vote for Clinton because I don't like her politics or track record, not because she's a woman. I'd love to have a woman president, but not Hillary.

Maybe Chelsea in a decade or two. I'm pretty sure she's not 35 yet and can't run.

I would NEVER vote for Obama—or anyone who makes race their issue. THAT'S racist. GO HILLARY!!!

Are you serious? Positions like this make special interest organizations irrelevant in the VAST majority of Americans' minds. Lakisha said it best – I thought in America we all got to support who we thought the best candidate would be without feeling "betrayed." Why is this in a public statement. If anything, this hurts Hillary's chances even more.

Why is President Clinton out there as her attack dog if Hillary is so ready to be president?

A lot Men feel threatened by a powerful Women. Look how long it took for women to get the right to vote, to own property. To all the Susan B. Anthoneys out there, THANK YOU. HILLARY IS THE BEST QUALIFIED TO LEAD ON DAY ONE. If Ophama wins, he's going to need the OLD guys to help on DAY ONE.

It would appear the NY NOW chapter is so desperate for a woman president that they are willing to set the women's movement back years. A bad women president will do far more damage to the women's rights movement than actually having a female president. The first female president needs to be the right person/candidate for the job. Hillary is clearly not the right candidate with her consistent dishonesty and power-mad greed.

Demanding people vote for Hillary just because she is a woman is degrading to all women. It also dearly costs the NY NOW chapter any sense of credibility they have left.

I cannot even believe that people are pulling this… I am a woman, and offended by the suggestion that we are letting our kind down by not voting for the female candidate. Why would I place a vote that I know would let the country down? She is far too polarizing to get anything done (let alone win in the general). We need a real woman with integrity.

Also, the news media has been incredibly gracious to Senator Clinton – they're all afraid of being shunned by the Clinton machine if she should get the nomination. Politics of fear. That's not feminism.

Is this what feminism has come to? That if you support gender equality then you must support Hillary because she's a woman? What ever happened to judging people based on their abilities and the content of their character? I would have supported Hillary if not for Barack, not because she's a woman, but because she's strong and talented. Unfortunately for her, I just think that Barack's a better candidate. Does that make me sexist?

There is no way in this world that Bill can take back what he said. He showed his true colors. You cannot publicly act racist and then decide to hide it in your pocket where no one can see, when it is convenient. I personaly believe that he wants to be back in the white house really bad. So much that he'll stoop down and do anything for it. If those were not Hillary's sentiments she should have stopped him. At least separating herself from those comments. What does that say for leadership and experience??? Experience leads, it is not lead. She must not care for the minority vote. …By the way I am in the black poor minority. Her & Bill's actions have made me decide to go independent and stay independent. If she won as the democratic nominee, I would vote republican.

Just why should Senator Kennedy back Hilary Clinton just because she is a woman? I am a woman too and I don't intend to back her. Many women I've talked to will not vote just on gender. America needs the best qualified person in the whitehouse, not because of race or gender.

I suppose the fact that Senator Clinton voted to enable President Bush to rush headlong into Iraq,a needless conflict where many brave women have died, doesn't matter? This race should not be decided on gender or race. Period.

Hopefully someone at CNN will have a serious meeting with the anchors about professionalism… you guys are leaning way too close to Obama and it shows.

You perpetuate the spin when it hurts the Clinton camp and then accuse her of being divisive when she counter punches…. something that IF SHE WAS MALE …. you would attribute to "politics as usual".

I am distressed to think that even smart men like Ted Kennedy are afraid of a woman president…. gender really is the last stumbling block to true equity in this country… that's true discrimination- so deep it flows in your blood that you actually believe the spin you put out there to justify yourselves.

WHATEVER!!!!!!

Hmm…so if we don't vote for Hillary…we are "disrespecting women's rights"? I do not favor any candidate at this point but I have been waiting for this shoe to drop since the campaign started and I think we're going to hear a lot more along this line. Hillary does polarize the poplulation for a number of reasons i.e. being female and the baggage known as Bill but she should be judged on her merits instead of her chromosones. That being said, as a male, I understand a significant number of men in this country are not comfortable with the concept of a female president. I would also tell you that many of those same men could not give you a truly intelligent reason why they are not comfortable with a female president. I wonder that given the choice of a black man or a white female, if voters are going to stay within their "comfort zone" and vote for a white Republican male instead. I would hope we all vote for whom we think is the best candidate but this is the real world and we are not yet a country can put aside race and gender when pondering these decisions. I sadly look for this election to become very divided along racial and gender lines in addition to the usual political "dirty tricks". In the words of the immortal Bette Davis…"Fasten your seatbelts. It's going to be a bumpy night."

Ted Kennedy(as well as Caroline and Patrick) picked the candidate,not based on gender,who knows how to tell the truth and who wouldn't present duality in leadership by having their spouse as co-president. This sounds rather strongly like swift-boating.

First Hillary played the gender card. Obama did not play the race card, Bill simply made a racial comment that backfired! The democrats have already lost this election. Women can not back Obama after he took out their liberal leader. Obama supporters would vote against Hillary should she take him out. This election may very well be getting settled today in Florida between McCain and Flip Romney. Thanks Bill! LOL

What happened to best qualified for the job? Where is Obama's exsperience with foreign countries, He is a novice compared to Mrs. Clinton. If you want a job done right, if you want a balanced economy, if you want health care, if you want wasteful spending done away with we as a country need Hilary Clinton-Lord it's about time.Lets clean up this mess for our children and their children.

i can not believe the bias that CNN and MSNBC to continue spew hatred and dislike towards the candidates that do not fit their particular choice or wants. Blitzer and Mathews give the impression that THEY are the ones who should pick the nominees. It is disgaceful that these two networks are so biased and will say and do anything to try to slant the public to choose their particular candidate. The one sure thing that they will achieve that the next President will more than likely be a republican because the public is not ready for the inexperience that comes with Obama at this time and situation of the US in todays world and its conflicts. We are headed for BUSH #3 and continuing wars and deteriation of the past american pride and trust we once had in this world.

Tell the National Organization for Women to get over it! The word is out that Obama will be selecting the Governer of Kansas as his VP. Guess what she is a woman!!

"This latest move by Kennedy is so telling about the status of and respect for women’s rights, women’s voices, women’s equality, women’s authority and our ability – indeed, our obligation — to promote and earn and deserve and elect, unabashedly, a president that is the first woman after centuries of men who ‘know what’s best for us.’”

-Who says that Sen. Hilary Clinton knows what's best for us as women just because she is a woman? Our job as voters is to support the candidate who, in our perspective, can best run the country – not who is most similar to us. As all the Democratic nominees have expressed in previous CNN debates, they hope that voters can look past their gender or the color of their skin and vote for who can bring about the change needed or who is best fit to run the country. Therefore we, as women, should not feel an "obligation" to support Sen. Clinton simply because she is a woman since she herself has renounced the support from those who are so narrow-minded as to place her natural predisposition as a woman over the value of her experience. Instead, what we do have the obligation to do is to embrace gender and racial equality and support the nominee that would ultimately be best for our country.

I'm for Hillary…..period. She has been in politics longer and knows the ins and outs and that's what counts. She has the expierence and she can make change at the same time.
Obama has not been in politics long enough, this just isn't his time for president, VP would be a good learning expierence for him. Obama has not answered any of my questions with clarity, he dodges the questions with inspiring speeches. You can't run a country and world issues on speeches alone.
John Edwards wife has cancer, incurable but treatable. Regardless what his wife says I think he is very selfish to put his career before his wife's health.

This the reason why NOW is net negative to women. The leaders of NOW are bunch of man haters, or otherwise known as lesbians.

The NOW people are freaking useless, the foundation of their organization is equality, threat everyone equally, not based on gender or race, yet these idiots are saying if you don't support Hillary because she has a cuchi then you are wrong.

What a joke, please NOW go away.

The voters, to include women, are sending a clear message this election, that the good ole' boys network in DC is no longer wanted, and that closed minded groups with narrow politcal agendas, such as NOW, have no place in the future of this nation. Too long have these individual advocay groups tried to sway muscle over a process that belongs to EVERY American, of all genders, faiths, and ethinicity. While I do not always support Sen. Kenedy, nor any one Presidential candidate, it was refreshing to hear that his endorsment was based on a belief of ideals, and not to court the now impotent endorsement of NOW.

NOW has endorsed Sen. Clinton, without addressing the strengths of her oppenents, in either party, and have only highlighted how a Clinton Presidency will serve their own needs. To move forward as a nation, regardless of the cause, we must cast away such selfish, childish, and blinded rhetoric as NOW has put forth.

This is a very bias election more towards gender than towards race. Race in my opinion was never an issue just a trump card played to win votes. The media keeps this one sided stuff going like that rabitt battery commercial on and on and on. I believe that the candidate should be picked based upon their qualifications but all of this Clinton attack has to end, its not fair, so if NOW has expressed their opinion, its because of the bias that is being demonstrated.

LOL Barbara. Caroline Kennedy is not an independent thinker because she agrees with her uncle? Are women only independent if they agree with you? The way you speak, it sounds like women are all pawns to be used by other women for political advantage.

And Clara – Grow a pair and stop playing the victim.

It feels like I'm babysitting.

Go with Hillary, WOMEN!
Do't be republican, do't be democrat, be a WOMAN!
Show to the world we can make the change.
Clara is so right :"the men have the fear of having someone who can actually change things" and only a WOMAN can be this person!

If people need the Kennedys or the media to tell them how to vote than God help this country. Wake up and think for yourself. The media is biased and their polls have been wrong. They are trying to lead you toward their choice, an inadequate one at that.

It seems a lot of people are making ad hominem arguments for why we should vote for Hillary ("Because she's a woman" "We need a woman president" "A woman would do much better" etc.). The presidency should not involve gender or race, it should involve character and ideals. Stop telling us to vote for Hillary "because she's a woman" and start telling us to vote for Hillary because you think she's the best candidate without playing the sex card. Mentioning sex as a primary reason for voting for someone only gives the appearance of sexism and unconcern for actual platform.

If the past 2000+ years is any indication, the male gender is once again attempting to restrict the female gender's options. The methods used do not matter; however, from a visual point of view, Kennedy's support of Obama said it all. It appeared from Kennedy's extreme shouting and facial expressions that he had consumed excessive amounts of alcohol. Also, Obama's body positions and facial expressions at the end of Kennedy's announcement and just prior to his exit stage left, indicated concern. I rest my case.

Oh please! I am a 56 year old woman and would be THRILLED to have a woman in the highest office – HOWEVER I'm NOT thrilled that Hillary is the one seeking it. I am not going to vote for her just because she's a woman – I don't think she's any different than most old school politicians and I'm not interested in a co-presidency which is obviously what we'd get. I am however interested in a real change in the way things are done and in our standing on the world stage – I truely believe Obama possesses the qualities that can inspire us and involve us – it is after all OUR government and with inspiration and involvement we can all help to bring about change. Why not vote for and/or endorse whomever you feel is the best candidate – shouldn't something besides gender make your decision??

May the best man win (I mean person)! Seriously, Hillery Clinton rides the coat tails of her husband Bill. I wish we truely had a woman running that was worth voting for. Many fine and intelligent women are held back by gender bias. I just truely want the next president to be able to turn this country around and lead us back into a peaceful and more prosporous time, man or woman, regardless of ethnic background.

No one is telling any of you that you HAVE to vote for a woman! That is not the issue. The issue is in the way the male dominated media is reporting. When Obama won Iowa, all of the male media went on and on about how historical it was as the first African American to win Iowa…and it was. Well what about when Hillary won NH? It was the first time in US history that a woman has ever one a state in a presidential primary. How did the male media report her win? They went on and on about the moment she got choked up. Hello media…Obama is not the only one making history!

I can't imagine that Kennedy would have chosen Obama for anything else than he's a man.

C'mon.

No where in their argument is the issues that NOW has with Obama. Why was he a bad choice to support except for that he is a man? If they came out and said "We are disappointed because the candidate Kennedy chose to support does believe in blank and blank" than sure it would make sense. But they didn't.

Instead it sounds like they just don't like the choice because of gender. What other things could have possibly motivated Kennedy. If gender is the only thing NOW is banking on than I don't know how this is news. Hope no women support Obama over Clinton!

Because I am a republican, I never did think much of Ted Kennedy. However, now I think even less of Bush's party. It is not the republican party I belong to.
Why does the NOW think Ted is against them? He has proven over and over again
that he is a strong supporter of women's rights!
It took a lot of guts for him to endorse Borak Obama. Does this mean he is against
white male candidates?
For the first time, I actually admire Ted Kennedy!!
Obama is a young and inspirational man. I truly think he is the only candidate of either party that can straighten the mess we have in Washington, and let the whole world know our nation is not still mired in racial bigotry.

I don't know what surprises me more: the ridiculous hyperbole of this press release, or the fact that Barbara and clara are defending the premise behind it. If anyone saw Kathleen Sebelius give the Democratic response to the SOTU address last night, that's an example of the kind of woman who would make a good president. Not Hillary Clinton.

This really sucks. Can't Obama have any good endorsements without having people whine and complain that it's not fair? No one whined and complained when Hillary cried on stage in New Hampshire to win votes from undecided white women or the fact that her husband played the race card so much, that it took away half of Obama's white support.

The women's movement must be like all social tides- a changing thing. It must reflect the realities of the present. Women cannot shoot themselves in the foot now by clustering up and stamping their feet and demanding this sort of thing. Mr. Kennedy has always been a supporter of women but he has a long tradition of just supporting equality among all groups. Hillary Clinton is not liked by a lot of women for a variety of reasons- and women are not simpering idiots who will vote for her because a local chapter of NOW says so or solely because she is a woman. The whole point of the movement is for women to take charge of their lives and act with thought and independence. For them to take this position puts women back- it does not advance them.

Clara is correct – when was the last time anyone put out an even remotely positive story on Hillary? Days, weeks, months? How about her ideas, her vision, and her independency from the Democratic establishment? Obama now carries the baggage of three failed Presidential candidates (Kennedy, Hart and Kerry). For a young, "different kind of candidate", he is now eternally connected with the have-runs. The spin on this is that Hillary is very strong, independent, doesn’t curry favor with insiders, and to win, she doesn't need the belt-way white grandfathers of the party to save her candidacy. Whatever the outcome of the primary – these premature endorsements of the white-hairs for the agent of “change” have painted Obama as a true-blue liberal – which does not bode well for his chances in a general election.

The sentiments expressed by NOW NY are completely ridiculous. Do Obama and Edwards disrespect women by running against Hillary? Should the entire GOP field withdraw from the campaign now rather than disrespect women by running against Hillary in the general election?

NOW NY act as if Hillary should be anointed President, rather than having to be elected, just because she's a woman. They seem to think she's "earned" it just by declaring her candidacy.

If she wins the nomination, I'll support her to the hilt – that's what will prove she's earned something. But until that time, I reserve the right to back a black man for President, after centuries of white "men who know what's best for us."

why are u all so surprised at TED KENNEDY not supporting a woman ?
THIS SO CALLED MAN ABANDONED a families beautiful daughter to drown .
he was so busy saving himself .
TED KENNEDY THE WEAKEST LINK AMONG AN EXTRAORDINARY FAMILY
OF MEN&WOMEN.

you go "Hillary" for denying an interview to CNN last night….they bad mouth you all day long and then expect you to talk to them…..they are going to be so disappointed on the eve of super tuesday….I can't wait to see them kiss up to you and sing your praises when you become the president….I hope that you are the bigger person for forgiving CNN…..that will show your greatness and their low life disposition at the end….shame on you CNN for not letting the voters know all the truth about Barak Obama…..

Are you kidding me, This does not mean a thing that NOW of NY is upset at The Kennedy's. You women can vote for whoever you want. Does NOW have the right to tell who and who not you can vote for? Please wake up America and take back what is yours, this great country. Get Out and Vote

Oh! please put down your pen, how come you think just being a woman its a criteria of being president? This race is not about gender, its about who can lead our country and restore our reputation around the world.

together YES WE CAN

Clara: Hillary has been doing the attacking for the most part. That is why people are focusing on what she has been saying. Anything that Obama says are a response to what Hillary said or did. He does not bring up negatives on Hillary's image 1st. She started the negative campaign to get people more polarized since the Clintons believe that the only way they can win is by polarizing the voting public. When you look at Obama, he is trying to de-polarize the voting public and get EVERYONE to vote.

I'm all for having a woman president. However, Hillary isn't the person who should be running for president. Just because you think you know things doesn't make you a good president. A true president has the skills to inspire, raise hope, and make americans believe that there are better days ahead than what we have left behind. Hillary is too much of a polarizing figure for us to believe that she can get things through the Republican congress. Obama has reached across party lines several times to get things accomplished. Hillary isn't the right choice for woman at this time. I KNOW there will be a woman president in the future, but I do not want to see Hillary or another Clinton get the presidency. We need a change in our government and not go back to what it was.

To vote for a woman simply because she is a woman is as stupid as voting for someone who is white simply because they are white, or voting for someone simply because they are baptist, or even as stupid as voting for someone because they are a man. Both Hillary and Obama have shown that neither will do any better that the current president, because they are both using dirty politics in order to become front runners.
Ted Kennedy may have supported Obama because HE can't stand a woman president. Or he may be supporting him because it's his PERSONAL choice. Actors do it all the time, so do former presidents and presidential candidates. But, at no time are we forced to vote for the same person who is endorsed by Celebrity X or Politician Y.
Vote for who you think will lead the country BEST. Vote for who has demonstrated the ability to be a good leader.
Neither Hillary, nor Obama (and I have doubts about most of the Republican Candidates, even though I'm Republican) will make choices that will be best for America on the World Stage. They will do what the last two presidents have done, and that is sell out America in order to appease the rest of the world. There are plenty of women, and men, of all races, who would not do that if they were president. Why aren't they running, and if they are, why aren't they getting our votes?

Has everyone forgotten that until recently Hillary was considered the shoe-in to win by the media? She has been running a good campaign but this is what happens in a national election where the populace tries to figure out who they want to vote for. Lay off the gender card; it's not as if Clinton is some poor woman trying to make it in this world against the"man". She is a highly repected U.S. state senator! The fact is that Clinton, Obama and Edwards would probably all do a good job and Democrats actually have a pool to chose from this election. For heavens sakes she's running against a black man who has plenty of bias against him for being black as she does for being a woman.
Lately I think Hillary has hurt herself by having Bill too much in forefront with the negative campaigning. It's too much old politics and people don't want to hear it. Plus, I say it's her campaign so let her stand out front and leave Bill in a purely supporting role.
Why does Kennedy owe Clinton anything? She's a Democrat. Obama's a Democrat.
This is how it happens. And by the way blooger Barbara, how do you know what Caroline Kennedy Schossberg is thinking?

This is ridiculous. How is Kennedy's support of a female candidate simply because she is a female candidate furthering women's rights? Of course a women could be president, but not just any woman. Sen. Clinton isn't my choice because I don't trust her perspective and her past. As a woman, I would love to see a female candidate that I could support. Clinton isn't it. And how can the media lambast African American voters for 'voting black' and yet expect every woman to be all about Hillary. What a stupid double standard.

Staying neutral at this point would have become Sen Kennedy better. It seems he fhas taken Barack Obama under his wing a long time ago; nothing wrong with that. But now he tries to blame Bill Clinton, because he got a little carried away in the campaign?
Remembering the late Sixties and early Seventies, Ted Kennedy's behaviour with and around woman was not above board, so I guess not much has changed. Not that I think Hillary should be elected because she is a woman, but I feel strongly "not to be elected because she is a woman" is a much worse possibility.

NOW's position onthe Kennedy/Hillary issue is disturbing on so many levels but l will just keep this short and simple. apparently it is more important for NOW to support a female for President on the fact that she is female alone than it is to incouirage women to vote for the best candidate. NOW seems to forget we are not just women in a vaccum. We have families that consist of other genders who have other issues that need addressing. If the best candidate happens to be female then great! we should vote our conscience and issues.

To Barbara above, do you really think that Kennedy supports a black male purely because he can't stomach the idea of a female President??? He could have supported Edwards as the overwhelming number of white males are doing. That's where Edwards is getting his support and no one is whining about that. Race trumps gender??? Only each individual can honestly answer that. The bottom line is that the majority of the white public still can not come to terms with the idea of a black President, regardless of what the "polls" say.

As a black American and Independent, I currently support Edwards as I did last election but can easily support Obama. As a no white male i have no problem with a woman President. Just not Billary.

President Bush mentioned hope and change many times last night. He allows us to hope for change. Republicans are talking about change, too. Why should we vote for Democrats?

Kerry, Kennedy's — I voted for them, but never again. To watch Ted and Caroline evoke JFK is disgusting. Really, how would Caroline be able to know if Obama was like her father, as a president? So many seem to call Hillary divisive but I find Obama much worse. He just does it while playing the victim. If I see him do the "who me?" look one more time, I will be sick. I think the Obama-fever out there is a case of the Emperor's New Clothes. He stands there ready to cloaked for the Presidency — but we do we know of him? We know Hillary, and we may not like her, but she can get the job done. I would rather see her sit at a table against Putin, Chavez and the rest of them. She will stick up for America and do what it is best. But what would Obama do? He is an unknown and this is not the time in our history to be voting for the unknown. As for that change song, I don't need change. I need strength, vision, courage, and wisdom. I see all of that in Hillary.

The NY NOW group needs to get their heads on straight: it's hardly a lesson in equality to accuse someone of being sexist (or whatever) because they won't support the candidate who also happens to be a woman. People have all sorts of reasons for supporting candidates – not just gender/race. It is exactly these sorts of emotional, irrational accusatory statements from some women's groups that undermines the purpose of what they are supposed to stand for: equal treatment under the law, equal pay, equal opportunity. I would love to see a woman president, I just don't like the way the Clinton's have behaved over the last 15 years. I've been for Obama as he best embodies what I think would be good for the country.

I don't think it has to do with Hillary being a woman, but the kind of person she is. If it were any other woman it might be a different story. Watch her when she talks, she is always contradicting herself, Obama is definitely the better choice. Oh and by the way, I'm a Republican.

I say HOORAY! Ted Kennedy has finally made a decent decision. I'd vote for Obama over any Clinton any time.

That was a stupid article to write. Do these authors really mean to accumplish anything for Hillary — among intelligent people — with this article?

So, in other words, NOW is saying that basically they covered up all of Kennedy's dirt and hipocracy and dirty deeds to get his backing? Yup, Democratic politics at its best! It's pretty sad that in your party, it's pretty much what you think will help your special interests, not the country – you people are running on gender and race. How stupid. Also, is it any surprise that Ted Kennedy the dirtball would back a socialist? That oinker has never worked a day in his life. He's a sleezeball.

This is exactly why younger women tend to shy away from feminist groups such as NOW. It boggles my mind that feminist fought so long for women to have the right to express their opinions and now that we do, we MUST blindly choose another woman to lead our country just because she is a woman!

As a woman, I do not feel that Senator Kennedy has betrayed us. I would far prefer that he endorse the candidate he feels best equipped to run this country than to endorse a candidate on the sole issue of gender, or any other sole issue for that matter. While I would like to see a woman president, this country is far too complex to be relegated to single issue votes. I would like to offer my support to Senator Kennedy in making the 'unpopular' decision because he knows it to be the right one… for us all.

When did it become common practice to give your support to a candidate based on their race or their gender? Instead of embracing the fact that we have a woman running, these supporters are only interested in 'why' people are not rallying behind this woman. As a woman, who has backed the candidate that she feels can best perform the task at hand, I am ashamed of other woman who are merely concerned with women getting ahead. This is not about an equality race, this is about the state of our nation and it should be placed in the hands of the best suited for the position; even though it is a 'man'.

I agree, I have always supported Kennedy, this is a huge disappointment and it seems he will do anything to defeat Clinton. This is not the JFK legacy.

Oh my… this democratic party is tearing itself apart in a lose-lose battle that is appauling to me because this should be viewed as a win-win for civil rights, politics and America!!! But no… it can't be that way… if Obama wins then its a clear sign of the suppression african americans in politics. If Hillary wins then its a clear sign of the lack of rights among women. AHHHH! You're both wrong! The fact that they are both front runner nominees of the highest political position in the whole country speaks volumes of how our country is maturing… until you open your mouth about it. Change is happening, its getting there, please be patient with it. For all we know, we'll see the first african american/woman president/vice president ticket… but of course if Hillary is the presidential nominee, then its symbolic of african americans always serving under whites and if she's the vice president then its symbolic of women oppression by men.

Grow up! I'm only 20 and this is my first election to vote in. I've been watching this race like its more important than football (it won't be this weekend…but you get the point… Go Pats!) and I'm beginning to understand why there's so much apathy in my generation towards politics. This disgusts me.

I agree that it should be the best candidate and in my opinion it is Hillary Clinton, even the Kennedy's family is split on this decision although yes Obama has gotten three of the Kennedy's, Hillary has gotten two. Yes it is betrayal I feel that men do not feel comfortable placing a woman as president. Hillary has significantly more experience in politics than Obama.

As much as I would like to see a woman President, Hillary Clinton is NOT the woman. I WILL NOT VOTE FOR HER!! I do NOT trust her……and I will vote republican, before I vote for her.

Barack Obama, I believe, has the ability to unite the people and I hope congress.

N.O.W. ….what a PETTY position to take. So I guess anyone who supports Obama is a male chauvinist pig?…is against women's rights? …..is no longer pro-choice?

NOW is blantantly saying GENDER is what this campaign is about. SHAME ON YOU! The exact opposite of what NOW *should* stand for. Ironically, NOW is supporting a woman who is heavily dependent on her husband to win the nomination for her! Gee…that's something to be proud of !!?? Pathetic.

You wish to support Hillary… fine… but do NOT demean and abuse those of us who do not feel she is *right woman* to be the first woman President.

NOW…congratulations….you have revealed a prejudice that is just as disgusting as those who say they will not vote for a black man. NOW stands for bigotry. NOW has simply become "the other side of the same coin"….instead of truly distinguishing itself and women by "raising the bar" beyond divisive mentality.

Stand up and take your bow. I'm sure you're proud.

Hillary? I thought Bill was running???????

It's not about friendship that we should support a candidate. It's about the issues and leadership. If experience is all that matters then George Bush is a perfect example of a screwed up experience leader that has wreck this country. We are in the worst shape, I can't believe that we will look at race & gender to determine who leads our country. We need a leader that will offer us hope, that will inspire us to rise again as a nation, who will bring All Americans togther as ONE NATION. Hillary represents old politics, we are sick of things as usual, the old regime. Obama brings us the elements we need to bring our country back together on all levels of the economy, social & political. Go Obama, NOW get a life!

NOW needs to grow up YESTERDAY. For some unknown reason, women groups with these strong agendas come off so aggressive, it makes you question the real motive of their existence. Obama is clearly the better more mentally balanced candidate of the two. Ted Kennedy has been in office long enough to have experienced change and when there was a need for change such as NOW. The whole world is feeling inspired by Obama, and if you have ever accomplished anything in life, it started with inspiration. He has the intelligence and gut to the job done for the American people. He was designed for the job, being born of a white mother and an African father…..if you ask me, he is the concoction of the foundation of America…in real life, not just a poem. He is the epitomy of what can be if we only dream and work hard. He is the conclusion of a great story where the underdog gets the girl….He is America….in all its beauty and genious…..He is the next president of the United States of America.
Hilary on the other hand should have been smart enough to know that all the lies of the last 18 years would have caught up by NOW. She is spiteful and vendictive and indecisive. She is a bold faced liar. If she wins the nomination, I will not vote for her, to save my own conscious not the democratic party.

I, too, was sorely disappointed with Kennedy's support of Obama, but his track record with women has never been very good and certainly not respectful. I'm not against Obama, but I am for Hillary, a very talented, qualified woman with whose policies and track record I agree.

So what is being said here is simple: Hillary Clinton is a woman and therefore should get the endorsement from any Women's groups. Regardless of her ability to do the job, regardless of her experience, regardless of anything but what gender she is. This is pathetic.

I am a self-employed 75-year old female caucasion and I heartily commend Ted Kennedy for endorsing the only candidate with true vision. He has not betrayed women, only those with personal agendas.

NOW may be blind but the voters aren't! Do not ask voters to elect Hillary just because she is a woman. If Hillary was even close to being good for this country then we would vote for her, but she's not (do you not remember the 8 years of the recent Clinton dynasty?). This country IS capable of voting for a woman who is qualified and who people want as a leader. We are NOT ready to vote for any woman just to have a woman president!

How about his betrayal to us, and members of his own family, in the movement against global warming!! Are windmills that "unattractive"??? I don't think so … when you consider the alternative!

This election is proving that there are a lot of people in America who go to no ends to make every situation a "no-win" situation.

To say that discrimination does not exist is stupid. If anyone has ever made a decision, they are guilty of discrimination. They used their judgement based on morals and beliefs or just plain preferences.

Kennedy made a decision, and it does not seem to be based on sexism but rather on political knowledge. The fact that the Clintons and organizations like NOW call it a betrayal just goes to show that the Republicans are the only ones who try to play the friend card to get what they want.

As a woman I resent coverage of this sort of nonsense. Must we play a card of one type or another? NOW does not represent me, nor the vast majority of women. Hillary Clinton does not have my support, nor will she ever. If she were the last candidate on earth, I would not support her. Obama is the future and I am pleased that the Kennedy's have thrown their force behind him. That may be all it takes to tip the scales in his favor and carry him to the White House. Thank you Sen. Kennedy, Rep. Kennedy and Caroline Schlossberg.

When are we going to grow up and realize that neither skin color nor internal plumbing count when it comes to responsible governance? We need to elect a President who can lead this country forward, as a responsible citizen of the world, not a representative of narrow, moneyed interests. Voting for someone based on their color or gender is a luxury we can't afford. We need to look beyond the end of our noses and act for the greater good.

We were having a dinner-table conversation and decided between us that if Obama and Hillary got together and 1 was presidential candidate and the other vice-presidential candidate, they would be a shoe-in. That way, both minorities would be represented. And….we decided it would work too. We initially though Obama as presidential candidate and Hillary as vice-president. It's still a boys club out there, but women are getting more attention every day. What better way to get your foot in the door.

I strongly agree with Clara, Joe Morning, and Hardball on MSNBC, have gone crazy blasting the Clintons. Those two shows should be taken off the air, due to they play the "Race Card" every day. It's a shame the way Ted Kennedy, blasted the Clinton's during Obama, endorsement. The Clinton's have not said one word about him. The Clinton's have all right to blast wrong during Ted.

When you look at most of the post here, it is pretty apparent that the women of this organization do not represent the whole, but rather a small portion of society that would pick a woman over a man, just because she is a woman. Really, their whole arguement holds less water than a thimble. Kennedy's lack of support has nothing to do with the fact that Hillary is a woman, but rather the fact she is Hillary. And it is pretty scary that I as a man can see this so clearly, especially since according to "Barbara", men lack the "insight into how to shape the future, and the consequent strength to act on it than men do – generally speaking".

This is an example of what should have been apparent to us all these years. The Kennedy men do not respect women

Clara must hate grammar and spelling. I've got news for you: no politician is going to guarantee a better future for your kids; that's your job.

Barbara – How can you even come close to claiming that Caroline can't think for herself without knowing her? That is the problem with these blogs that people can make these ridiculous, unfounded statements.

A woman can be President. We have strong female leaders who show more poise, experience, composure and intelligence than Hillary. (Codi Rice for one) Recently I've forgotten who was actually running for President Hillary or Bill. If she becomes President do you really think she will be in charge? If Bill can't be controlled now, do you think it will get better later? He'll have his hands into all policy decisions and will overshadow his Presidential wife.

NOW NY needs to realize they aren't supporting a woman for President, they are supporting the idea of a woman President in the form of Billary. I'll wait for a better female candidate in the future.

Well I guess this means I have to contact NOW and cease my membership. This goes against every principle that I have and I believe NOW should have. So we should all just be blindly supporting Hillary because she has the same parts as we do. What a shame to be narrow minded and to use womens rights in such a notorious fashion. NOW should be ashamed of themselves. I'm an Independent. I don't vote Republican or Democrat. I vote my conscience and it has no gender. The only way to ever advance in this society is to be inclusive and this act certianly isn't.

Last night at the state of the union. Hillary shook Ted Kennedy's hand while Obama turned his back on her. I think it is very telling, that same afternoon the Kennedy's had touted Obama as the man that is going to unite this nation. obama couldn't manage to put the presidential race, debates and election into perspective long enough to behave properly. We are all suppose to think this childish behavior is that of the man that is going to unify this country. we have laready had a child in office for seven years I think it is time that we elect an adult. ON A PERSONAL NOTE, TO THE MEDIA OF THIS COUNTRY ; IT WOULD BE GREAT IF ALL OF YOU START BEHAVING LIKE JOURNALIST AND ACUTALLY TREAT OBAMA LIKE A CANDIDATE AND STOP TREATING HIM LIKE THE BLACK CANDIDATE.

As a 50's something working woman who has been engaged in women's rights for 35 years, I do not feel betrayed. I feel uplifted by the intigrity demonstrated by the Kennedy's….putting what they believe is right for the country above political loyalty.

Some want to divide us by making the issue of who to support about loyalty to race and gender…or some other group. I want to focus on what's possible when we come together. I am a Democrate who's changed my party afflication in order to vote in the primary and climb on board the train of New Politics. The train is leaving the station…its time to get on board.

Seriously? I'm a woman and I have the right to NOT vote for someone, even if one of the candidates is a woman. Have I betrayed 'us' too?

No. I have the right to think for myself, vote on my own, and not buy into the cheap tactics being employed in this race. Those same rights apply to someone publicly endorsing/supporting a candidate, too. Just because that person doesn't pick 'your' candidate doesn't mean you have to freak out and publicly attack them.

Stop whining, stop playing the gender card, and realize that – while we do have rights – we lose our dignity when we throw a childish tantrum and demand a woman be president.

You make us all look like women who are still stuck in the "I am woman, hear me roar' era. We are so much better than that. We fought hard to become equals on the battlefield, so to speak, and that means there will be some battles we will not win. There will be times when we fight hard and are treated equally, but lose. That does not automatically mean that each loss is due to insensitivities and malicious intent from men.

It's time to shake hands and play fair.

I find it hard to believe that "NOW" could feel so betrayed by Sen. Kennedy's decision to back Barack Obama. How could any self-respecting woman vote for Hillary after the way she's accepted and allowed Bill's "indulgences" over the years. How degrading for us women! This whole scenario stinks and has put us women back a hundred years! Shame on you Hillary and especially NOW!

clara:

I am actually glad that you are not involved in politics, since your entire objective is to put "mom" in the white house.

get a clue…

Hillary's campaign need of her rock-star husband to drag her over the finish line is a greater betrayal of feminism than anything Ted can accomplish.

I don't like Ted K…
Maybe it's not a woman in a White House that scares him, but this peticular woman….

Why can't his decision be based on who he truly believes will do a better job for the United States of America as President?

If Sen. Kennedy believes that Sen. Obama will be that person, why shouldn't he back him?

I am a woman and would love to see a woman in the office of President, however, I would like it to be a woman I believe would do the office justice. Hillary is not that woman for me. Why can't that be the case for others as well?

Just because we have a woman running for office does not mean that she should be voted for just because she is a woman.

Sadly, most, if not all men feel superior to women! Enough said.

This woman's organization should get over themselves. Hilary Clinton is not doing anything for the woman's cause. Everything that comes from her mouth is based on hatred, and divisivness. All hail the Kennedy's for endorsement the man that will lead this country to the heights of success, and that includes women.

Absolutely ridiculous. Let's get back to the policy issues that actually matter instead of debating the value of another man's opinion. I really don't Ted Kennedy's opinion can or will change the course of this election. All the NY NOW women are doing is making Hillary and her supporters look even more obnoxious than they did after South Carolina. All of this is just another large distraction from the real issues that would help us decide who would be the next best President of the United States.

When I heard Kennedy say "It is time again for a new generation of leadership" I thought thank God he is finally retiring.
Of course I would love to see Byrd, Cheney and Reid retire too.
The first time someone told me I should vote for a woman was where you could vote for two candidates and a man was a sure thing for one spot. That was 30 years ago and I voted for the better candidates and both were male. I have voted for, and supported, many women over the years but opposed the ERA.
This time I haven't made a choice yet. I would certainly prefer Hillary to Huckabee but would probably choose McCain over Obama (and I didn't like the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill.)

Yet another reason why I am glad I am not a member of NOW or a raging feminist.

Telling someone one to vote for (or against) a candidate based on their gender is as foolish as basing your vote on their ethnic background.

My vote goes to the candidate's whose stance on the issues are realistic, workable and make sense. I do not vote for a candidate based on their gender or their ethnic background.

Get a life! Kennedy clearly says his choice of Obama has everything to do with qualification, and someone he feels has been above the fray, and does not play old school politics (i.e. – dirty campaigning). Hillary and Bill will do ANYTHING, and I mean ANYTHING, to win. Kennedy only got involved when it became obvious the Clintons were trying to bring race into the mix, and this is clearly documented in multiple articles. Of course, feminists like you won't accept logical explanation; it has to be about dissing a woman for president! GROW-UP! Oh, and while you are at it, please iron my shirt (that's a JOKE! HA-HA!).

yes, kennedy MUST have left clinton's campaign ONLY because of her gender. yep, that must be it. nothing else could possibly make sense.

grow up, my fellow ladies. you're giving us all a bad name. think with your mind, not your estrogen.

Oh, Ed…The Clintons wanted Ted Kennedy's endorsement as much as Obama did…and when they founf out that he was going to announce it, Bill Clinton pleaded with him to wait until after Feb. 5th to do it.

Kennedy's decision came as a result of the Clintons' tactics especially in SC!

At least be honest and informed!!

The tone of that piece makes Marcia Pappas sound like and adolescent. Just goes to show you how much NOW has slouched away from what most reasonably minded people would regard as reasonable, whether feminist or otherwise.

Pappas lost me when she and NOW-NY fought so hard against sensible family court reform in the NY legislature last year.

Is feminism still relevant and valuable? Arguably so.

Is NOW and Marcia Pappas? Likely not.

I live in NY and have never met anyone who supports Hillary Clinton. Where she gets her support is beyond me. All of the women I have ever spoken to here in NY and in other states do not support her. When a woman governor or woman senator or a woman celebrity backs Hillary I don’t hear anyone cry “foul, they only support her because she is a woman” Wake up America and listen to the fried froth that comes out of her, its like eating empty calories. You can eat all day and be full, but starve to death for the lack of nourishment. If it came down to her and Obama (but it cant) I would pick Obama. If came down to her and Mitt Romney I would pick Romney. If it came down to her and John McCain I would move to Canada.

The Hillary folk playing the women card yet again. Seriously, for those Hillary supporters who claim Obama, not the Clinton camp, played the race card, was anything near this blatant? Doesn't she have anything else to run on other than her gender, and is that really what feminism is about?

Wow. Gee. Which would I rather be? Sexist? Or racist? If both democratic candidates survive until my state (North Carolina) gets to choose (unlikely!)… I'll have to decide. Unbelievable. Maybe I'll just vote republican, because some of the "you're a racist" "you're sexist!" crap coming from the left these days is just to nauseating to stand…

Yes, I agree that the best candidate should win and that is clearly Hillary. She may not have always voted the popular way but at least she took a stand and actually showed up to vote. She has 2 terms as senator, has worked for years on behalf of children's health insurance, and even when it was not popular tried to get this country to see the importance of univeral healthcare. Now that she is a candidate for the presidency she has to walk a very fine line that the men do not. If she is too aggressive that is not feminine and she is blasted for that, as she was in the SC debate. Remember she was not debating herself-where is the "disgust" for Obama's performance on that stage? He wasn't exactly above the fray now was he? If she gets emotional that is evidence of weakness. So for those of you who say gender does not matter and that we should vote for the best candidate, I agree but let's first get the facts and start holding all of them to the same standard. For example where was the headline and constant, intense discussion about the arrest of Rezko the big Obama supporter? If that had been a close tie to Hillary she would have been dissected-again!

Sometimes things happen to show just how petty we can be. We say one thing, but as soon as something happens, we don't get the endorsements, or the person we want, true colors shine through.

Was it a mandatory law that Ted Kennedy support Hilliary. Just like us all, we all have a mind to choose who to support, elect, vote, etc.

Now that the tables are turn, who is voting for whom because she is a woman. Some spoke out about blacks voting for Obama because he is black.

Quiet frankly, if the truth be told, it's the mere fact that he is black is getting under people skin. We say we've come along way and should not let this divide us, but apparently we haven't come along way…we are still stuck.

What's wrong with America? I'll tell you… Stupid people voting for blacks, whites, men, women, gays, straights, religious, secular…

What's right with America? Thoughtful, intelligent people voting for those who recognize that our strength is in unity – not diversity! Our priorities need to be focused on what's best for our country and not for any specific group or ideology. Our only hope is that intelligence still holds true for the American Spirit.

Kennedy..like most of the rational adults in the Democratic party…believes that the Democratic Party should look after the needs of all Americans–and not curry favor with the multitude of social special interests who are angrily (even now) fighting for a tiny sector of populous.

If everyone had a "real" voice…like Obama is striving to re-invent…then of course there wouldn't be a need for the large social organizations like NOW.

Perhaps–this threat to their "necessary existence" in a new Washington–where women do not need N.O.W. to represent their interests is the bigger reason why they are angrily upset! You would think they would scream "Victory"…but reality is, they are a business entity who thrives on the misery of it's members. No misery–no members.

Obama 08

This is a big insult to yourselves women! America is looking for someone who can help the country wake up from more than seven years of deep sleep, not for a woman. If she is the one, the Americans will choose her. Bringing a gender here is a big disservice to yourselves. You don't own other people choice. We live in a democratic society, in case you lost that sight.

I think after Obama's big win in SC, prominent Democrats are really now starting to see Obama as viable and probably has a better shot at beating the Republican nominee over Clinton. The national polls still show Clinton with a double digit lead over Obama which I find hard to beleive when you look at another poll that shows McCain beating Clinton in a general election, but Obama and McCain statistically tied.

Clinton CANNOT win a general election and hopefully more Democrats start realizing that and throw their support to Obama.

I'm a man and perfectly fine with a woman president…just NOT HILLARY. Obama is clearly the better choice and the better of the 2 to be more of a uniter than a divider. Organizations like NOW are all about division and entitlement rather than unification, so it doesn't surprise me that they would complain about any male politician than doesn't back Hillary.

I'm a lifelong Democrat, but if Hillary wins the nominee I will most certainlly vote Republican.

I must confess to feeling completely stupid. Kennedy is supposed to back Hillary because she is a woman? Sorry–I am a woman and I back Obama. I have heard all about Hillary's experience (explain how being a first lady and a two-term senator qualifies her for the presidency?) I would very much like to see a woman president, but not one that comes with all the baggage Hillary does. Bring change, will she? No, she will bring the same old politics and she will bring Slick Bill back with her–sorry!!! And why should the African-American community not feel slighted if Kennedy had backed Hillary. Let us not make this race about man-woman, black-white. Let us make it a race for the best person to bring REAL change in Washington.

I am not impressed by endorsements of any kind. I voted for Obama because I like his message and believe that he will at least bring some change. Hillary would have to be a miracle worker to deliver on 1/8 of all the promises she is making.
If Obama does not win the nomination, I will either still vote for him in the general election or I will vote Republican. Politics as usual will not get my vote.

He is a Kennedy. Betraying women is what they do.

So much for not injecting gender or race into the nomination "process."

Like a friend of mine from Canada said the other day- " It's funny with you Americans. Ever since JFK, about 50% of your country has despised whomever you elected to President." Sad is more like it.

Let's see if this endorsement has ties to political favors down the road. Perhaps Obama will be "influenced" by the Kennedy network if he is nominated. His body language and comments are arrogant and disrespectful of Senator Clinton and I wonder how he has contributed to the empowerment of women in this country. Oh, that's right, he did add to Ophrah's reputation as the saleswoman of the year…..

As a woman who was on the barricades of feminism in the 60's, I feel that to insist that women must vote for Hillary because she's a woman, or that anyone who is against Hillary is against her is so because she's a woman, is a GIANT step backwards and does women everywhere, and feminism, a grave disservice. Feminism is not simply the flip side of paternalism, contrary to what the NY chapter of NOW is exhibiting (which is, indeed, simply the flip side of paternalism, and they don't speak for all feminists). Feminism is about choice, not about simply exchanging the "shoulds" of paternalism for those of feminism, but about true choice, and that includes choice in who to vote for and who to support.

Hillary is not, in my opinion, a good candidate for President for reasons that have everything to do with her as a person and potential leader and critical decision maker, and nothing to do with her gender. Frankly, she scares me, and she would scare me no matter what her plumbing, just as the current occupant of the post scares me and for very similar reasons.

Yes, it would be nice to see what a woman would do in that position – just not THAT woman. In this particular race, Obama is the much better choice for reasons that have nothing to do with either race OR gender.

Voting for Hillary because she is a woman is just as bad as not voting for Hillary because she is a woman. I have worked for many women and many men and have seen very little difference as far as productivity and leadership goes. Some are good and some are bad no matter what sex they are. I think everyone in this country needs to grow up and stop picking sides based on who you most closely resemble in a physical sense. As a white male I can't win. If I vote for Obama I'm a sexist, if I vote for for Hillary I'm a racist. I'm not buying it. We need to stop bringing up these devicisive non-issues, the fact that we have 2 minorities fighting over the nomination demonstrates that Americans are willing to vote for the best candidate not matter what their gender and race. Ted Kennedy has a the same right to choose who he believes is the best candidate.

How can we trust Hillary to be an effective President when she seems incapable of leading her own campaign. I didn't think she was a strong woman to stand by a man who has cheated on her throughout her marriage – but that is a personal choice. I would not permitted my husband to disrespect me like that.

However, he seems to be running for President again – and she is allowing her to run all over it. I never saw any other woman candidate (Geraldine Ferraro, Elizabeth Dole) who had this kind of problem with their husbands. When have you heard Mr. Margaret Thatcher getting into her business?

All Bill does over and over again is showing that Hillary is NOT capable of being strong. We do not want a co-President. Hillary does not have the strength to make Bill go away and do whatever it is that he does nowadays.

As a "progressive white male" who's been struggling to decide which candidate to support, I resent being labeled "sexist" by the NY chapter of NOW. I think any of the remaining Democratic candidates would be a huge improvement over George W. Bush. My dilemma is between a more experienced, but intensely political and very divisive, candidate and a less experienced candidate that just might be able to at least somewhat improve the poisonous atmosphere in Washington that's been hurting the country for years. Gender and race has nothing to do with which one I choose to support. The NY chapter of NOW seems to be saying "we're supporting Hillary Clinton because she's a woman" and anyone that doesn't support her is a sexist. That sure sounds to me like choosing a candidate based on gender. Now just who is it that's sexist?

This is rich coming from a womens group. Hillary is the biggest betrayer of women everywhere. She stood with and behind a lying, cheating ,spouse for years and years who publically humiliated himself and her. She doesn't know how to stand on her own two feet. She set women back into the next century by not standing up for herslf and I will never forgive her or him. They disgraced the office of the Commander in Chief once and I don't want them there again. I will vote Republican before I ever vote for her.

I was as charmed by the Kennedy era as anyone, but in restrospect we realize that CAMELOT was as much a myth in the White House as it was on the Broadway stage, particularly when it came to women's issues. In a recent retrospective about Kennedy's White House years, an old video clip showed a group of Girl Scouts visiting with him in the gardens. He slipped and told them that someday one of them might be President, but then he caught himself and said that well, not president, but first lady. That was the expectation then. Sure, we could aim for the moon, just not gender equality. And we accepted that limitation as naively as we overlooked his sexual indiscretions, his dalliances with women, which were more blatant and numerous than anything that happened in the Clinton White House. We just didn't talk about things that were unpleasant. Then, of course, there was the Bay of Pigs. In other words, we believed what we wanted to believe and paid the consequences for it later. It seems to me that's what we're doing now. Are we really embracing the politics of change, when we're looking to Edward Kennedy, an icon from the past and an embellished past at that, to be our spokesman?

Since when does gender automatically make someone a desirebale candidate. I am female, and I am NOT voting for Hilary. I am voting for the candidate I feel will do the best job for this country. Anyone who votes for Hilary simply because she is a "woman" and wants to make history, is doing a grave injustice to this country and to themselves.

I support the Kennedy's endorsement.

How is it that race and sex became so important here? The Dems have all the momentum in the world here and are on the cusp of great things, no matter who represents us. Shame on anyone who votes for Obama for being black or Hillary for being a woman. Double that shame for anyone who plays the race or gender card on others because of an endorsement. The Kennedys should be free to endorse anyone they like without fear of "betraying" anyone. Such a concept is entirely bogus. Why weren't Bill Clinton, George McGovern, and Robert Johnson blasted for being "racists" and not picking the black man? If that seems ridiculous, it's because it is.

There is a bias against Hillary because the Clintons have a bias against the media and to tell you the truth life isnt in a vacuum. No one could ignore the tactics used by the Clintons so anyone that jumps on the band wagon after the masks were removed will have serious issues. I have loved the Clintons since 1992, but voted for losers in every election but 1996 and 2000. Now if Barack inst the nominee I will either vote for McCain or for a no name. I will never vote for Hillary…believe me it was very sad letting go, but we arent Republicans…its better to be "weak" and right then strong and wrong. Im not going to follow the Clintons into another Presidential loss…

Besides, this isnt a beauty pagent, we need to start picking with our heads like Republicans and vote for the one who will win (Barack) not with our outdated loyalties (Hillary)!!! The world cannot afford for us to loose again!

Obama / Farrakhan ticket most likely!

Ron Paul would pick someone all of America could proud of who would bring us together not divide and cause riots in the streets

I find it wrong that in 2008 the NOW group would base their support for the next President of the USA on the fact the Clinton is female. If you want to talk equallity should you even be looking at gender or race? The best person to run our Country should be based off the past voting record and where they stand on moral beliefs. Not the fact that they are male or female, black, white, hispanic, asian, just the right person.
I am so sick of hearing about the gender and race issue just please look at their voting record and pick the person who had supported your values and beliefs in the past.

This is just another example how the Kennedy's have used and abused women their whole lives, and several have paid the ultimate price because of them. Who would expect Teddy to support Hillary?

SHAME ON TED KENNEDY AND HIS TWO OTHER RELATIVES!

VOTE FOR HILLARY!!!!!!!!!!!

DO NOT LET AMERICA DOWN!!!!!!!!!

Some people need to get a grip. Betrayal my butt. Ted made the right call. Good for him. And if a few soap-box standing, tunnel vision having, over-the-top feminist zealots get upset, who really cares.

"""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. """

Barbara, (see above post). Take out the word women and replace with men. Does it sound sexist? Your comment is hopefully the most sexist remark I will hear today. As a man, and someone who supports feminist ideals (which means equality and freedom of choice, not women's rights), I find your remark simply insulting.

So why is this story on the ticker twice?

Clara, do you have any male relatives? Any male loved ones who you care about?

How will you feel when they're sent to Iran to die when Hillary starts a war against them, like Bush did against Iraq?

This just shows how simplistic, partisan, and out-of touch NOW is. What a crock! This organization has done more to demean, disempower, and marginalize women than any predjudice historically served up by actual male bigots. NOW has unfortunately shown yet again with this ridiculous statement how narrow, limited, and yes…bigoted they are.

NOW: Please do women everywhere a favor and zip it! You are only hurting those whose interests you claim to be looking out for.

Pathetic!

I don't understand the women who think all women should fall in line and vote for Hillary because "it's time" for a woman. Inequality of the sexes may still exist, but if you think Hillary didn't get the Kennedy endorsement because of the good-old-boy system, you haven't been paying attention or are in denial.

Not only Ted Kennedy but Ted Turner has been backstabbing Clinton…. comparing John f. Kennedy to Obama was one of the most disgusting pieces of news reporting I have wittnessed in some time. Kennedy was a war hero.A member of one of Americas most respected familys and many other things. Obama has shown me very little. He makes excerpts from other people and calls them his own. C.N.N. has been trying to start a race war and has taken sides with the person Obama in spite of the fact he has done very little to set himself apart from the others.

This endorsement by Senator Kennedy is his personal opinion which he is entitled to. However, I believe women have not come far enough in todays society since our congress is still controlled by men and I believe in my heart that even Senator Kennedy wants to keep women in the background. This proves to me that women need to be more supportive of each other and that we all need to campaign for Senator Clinton if we want our voices heard

Listen, I don't care who anyone votes for. I'd never have the audacity to tell someone how they have to think or vote. People died for that right and it's outrageous that anyone would insinuate that Carolyn Kennedy is disingenuous or not a free thinker because she chose someone over Clinton. I'd love to see a woman in the white house, just not Hillary Clinton. Also, at this point, I think there is a reasonable thought within the democratic party that Obama is more electable in a general election. He brings people together and she is seen as polarizing and a divider. Ultimately I also think a lot of people are just tired of the Bush-Clinton dynasties.

Hillary is now coming across as the vote-nazi.

If you don't agree with her as your candidate you can expect to be attacked for daring to have a voice that's different than hers, or have heavy handed politics used to supress your voice, or the very worst – have outright dishonest distortions of your record floated by the "do anything to get elected" mentality behind her campaign. Meanwhile, her name alone appears in Michigan and Florida – and that's supposed to be "democratic"?

Why is the media so biased against Obama?
CNN, MSNBC … where is your sense of ethics in journalism?
Between the censoring going on at the NY times blog spot, and how the news is being spun and reported, maybe it's time for a change in journalism as well.

Report the truth; stick to the issues.
Integrity and honesty matters.
Persuit of the truth matters.

America is sick of the politics of distortion, the politics of divisiveness, the politics of self-serving interests and bias.

It is time for transformative change. Obama for president 2008!

I am sick and tired of the hate/hate attitudes that in the end serves nothing. We need someone in the White House that will unify the parties and the divide this has brought across the country. I'm sorry to say, Hillary is not that person. Right or wrong, the name Clinton envokes as much animosity and hatred as the name Bush does. Hillary will do nothing heal the divide. She proved that with her vehement rhetoric against Obama just because he had a nice thing to say about a Republican. If women want equality, they must gain it on their merit, not their gender. You can't have it both ways.

The allegations that those who support Obama over Hillary are mysogenists are unfounded slander. You cannot judge what is in the heart of another person with such little information. These demeaning allegations by her supporters will be counterproductive for Hillary because people will take offense to these bullying tactics. Can we stick to the issues and not resort to personal attacks to influence people?

Quote:

"""Though the National Organization for Women Political Action Committee has proudly endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton for president, we respect Sen. Kennedy's endorsement," NOW President Kim Gandy said. "We continue to encourage women everywhere to express their opinions and exercise their right to vote."""

Really??

Way to give yourself a black eye NOW NY. You fight for equality and a person's (a person's….not a woman's…) right to choose, and then put out a statement that sounds like it was made by an angry 13 year old.

In sum, NOW NY, I would say thank you for actually helping Obama with your infantile remarks.

-Kevin

Kennedy is supposed to endorse Hillary just because she's a woman? Isn't that sexist? Someone give that woman a box of tissues.

Clara I wish someone had "aducated" you. Also, Barbara. Having a woman in a powerful political office is not the a precedent for the world and has yielded mixed results. For as much heralding the media gave to Bhutto it could be argued, and proven, that she was corrupt; Margaret Thatcher was known for constantly shifting back in forth on issues, as well as making many economic decisions that proved to be detrimental to her country.

And I'm not discounting them either. They did the best with what resources they had, and felt they were making fair decisions. What I am saying is that people need to realize to things: 1) Your gender has no effect on your ability to make policy, and 2) The president is important, but not all important. Hillary Clinton Nor Barack Obama will be able to mitigate changes without the support of the legislative branches. No one cares about voting on their legislative branches, so we will get the same things -as people have been saying about both canidates- for as long as we do not change the entire personnel of our political structure.

Stop it. Stop talking about how being a man or being a woman makes you better. Both statements are sexist. I don't care who wins at this point, as long as it isn't Mitt Romney.

Any woman who cries in public because things are not going her way wouldn't get my vote.

She's running to be POTUS…crying for sympathy is not an option.

I am a 49 yr. women, and I do not feel betrayed nor abandoned by Senator Kennedy's decison. I have competed against men and women of all ages in the corporate world for postions and I was chosen overall. It's about qualfications, moral quality and having the capabilty to work as a team player.

I find that the media, in particular, will pick a candidate at the beginning of a campaign and then continuously promote that candidate whether or not he/she is qualified. They have done it again in trying to back Sen. Clinton. I feel that Obama, at this time is the better candidate. Hillary is so completely 2-faced. Any woman can pull off that type of campaigning. We smile, we cry, we stamp our feet, and then become tough again. We do the "oh whoa is me" and everyone feels sorry for us. Puleeezeee. Let's get off our duffs and vote for the candidate who is the most qualified. Let's get the OLD MEN and WOMEN out of office and stop playing the GOOD OLD BOYS game. Nothing will change unless we, the voting public make it change. I wouldn't vote for Hillary for all the money in the world. I don't trust her. Gut instinct. Maybe. But in all my years, and they do add up, I have only been wrong about a person once. That is why I do what I do. Won't tell you what it is….but I am normally right. Even guys take my word. And like Lakisha above says " I vote for who I want. Not because they are a man or a woman and not because of race." This is America where I have the right to vote for whom I want, when I want, and how I want. SUPPORT OUR TROOPS AND BRING THEM HOME.

The thing everybody has to remember is that NOW (National Organization of Women) is an extremist, fringe, left-wing gender feminist group. Their input when it comes to this election is about as relevant as the Nation of Islam's. They're not a main stream organization, and they certainly don't speak for all women.

You were deceived many years ago,by the Clintons. To believe that Bush was the Master Mind of what is going on today is rediculous. The voice of the people stopped being heard with the Clinton administration. Large corporations took over and are the only ones that mattered then or now. Wake-Up. Mrs. Clinton represents more of the same. Is that what you really want?? Obama may not be a great choice, but, Clinton is definately not.

I'm a feminist, and believe women are the equal of men in practically every endeavor. But this kind of hysterical reaction by NOW just makes them look silly and demeans the complexity and intelligence of women. Is Obama or Edwards less supportive of women's rights than Hillary? Absolutely not. And the fact that they each married strong accomplished opinionated women shows me that they respect our gender.

NOW better wake up before they marginalize themselves into oblivion.

NOW's response was juvenile and sexist. At least it wasn't the national chapter of NOW spouting this garbage.

I think it is obvious that Kennedy's break for Obama is firmly rooted in his rejection of the tactics used by the Clinton campaign-particularly Bill's tactics. He went point be point to repudiate these tactics- clearly had they played a different game, they may have had his support. It is called integrity- something that even clinton lovers admit that Bill (and hillary) come up short on. Why can't they just fight a clean fight?

OMG, Tell them to get over it- there is no way he is 'betraying' women by endorsing Obama. This election is not about putting a woman versus a man in the White House, it is about putting in the right person to get the job done- Kennedy happens to believe that person is Obama.

how is it that women are so easily fooled into thinking hillary is in it for the 'women's power' thing. why is she relying on her husband?

As a male, I also am outraged by the behavior of the three Kennedy family members yesterday in their nasty piling on Hillary Clinton. I note that Sen. Kennedy called Bill Clinton and not Hillary about the endorsement. This says it all about disrespect for a woman candidate for president. Personally, I don't need inspiration, I need a president with skills and experience such as Hillary Clinton.

I'm still trying to figure out who Obama is uniting. Is it the Obama supporters? Is it the extreme left of the left wing? I haven't seen any right wing Republicans being united to stand behind Obama. I don't even see the moderate Republicans uniting to stand behind Obama. In fact, not even the moderate Democrats are uniting to stand behind Obama. So who is he uniting? The college kids? Black American's? The establishment behind the extreme left (like Kennedy and Kerry)? I hear all this talk about him being a uniter. Who is he uniting? The country will not "unite" just because Barak Obama is elected President. Congress will not "unite" just because Barak Obama is elected President. Let's please drop the "uniter" rhetoric. The guy is not a "uniter."

After the presidential debate, Hillary went to shake hands to Senator Kennedy and talked to him. They were laughing and a civilized manner. Obama was next to Kennedy. You know what he did, he turned his back on Hillary, because he did not want to shake hands with her. He pretended not to see her. You should have it on tape, because on saw it on MSNBC with Christ Mattew. Chris who is not a fan of Hillary promptly got raid of it. I know what I saw. The footage is still there.

I think It is unamerican and unpresidential for a candidate to do a such thing. Why the media does not want the voters to see it. Obama has to clear this up. If he wants my vote. I rely on CNN to look for this scene and show it to american people. It is the right thing to do as journalists, The world is watching. A friend of mine called me and told me how disappointed he was of MSNBC, specially of Christ Mattew. I still think CNN is the most powerful name in news.

Just be fair.

CNN, you have this "filed under" BARAK (Obama) and HILLAY (Clinton). Who didn't have their caffeine this morning?

Why should Kennedy endorse a candidate purely based on gender? That's completely absurd. Now I see how Hilary gets all her support…gender voters that have no clue what she really stands for. Kennedy hasn't betrayed anyone; he's simply endorsed the better candidate; I can't see how this would anger anyone with half a brain.

Just a couple of comments off topic first.

Bias exists in the news. As a Republican, I know that. FoxNews is Bias towards Republicans. Cnn, MSNBC is bias towards Democrats. Woopidy doo. You know what you are getting into when you change the channel. And within each of those biases, there are more biases towards individuals. Again, get used to it.

For a Woman's rights camp insisting that anyone who doesn't vote for Senator Clinton has "betrayed" women is like the pot calling the kettle black. In order for racism and sexism to exist, people need to be insisting that there are differences that need to be pointed out. There needs to be a comradery among a group, such as "I'm a woman so I will vote for a woman" or "I'm a woman, therefore the woman is always right" for these ideals to continue.

The fact that a woman's rights group is the one that is spreading this feeling is disheartening. By continuing to state that a woman can only become President, CEO, or any powerful position if all woman back that person is ridiculous.

Martin Luther King stated it best when he said that we "will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." This thought can be applied to gender as well.

Judge the candidates by that stances on issues, policies, commitment, strength, and character. By putting the best candidate in office based upon these qualities, rather than their outward appearance or particular organs, will best suit the country.

Mark

This is just another example how the Kennedy's have used and abused women their whole lives and a couple are dead because of them. So who would expect Teddy to support Hillary. Is any one really surprised?

I'm in my 40's and I will not vote for HIllary Clinton, that's my choice! Sen. Kennedy picked Sen. Obama and that's his choice! Get over it!!!
After watching the Clinton's and their horrible tactics, I find it amusing that anyone would vote for her or Bill. Enough of the Clinton's I'm sick of them, but once again that's my opinion.

If Hillary Rodham Clinton is a true tough candidate why does she need her husband to come to her rescue ? Why cant she play clean as a true strong candidate like others ? its sorry that neither edwards or obama or even the republicans have played dirty against each other except The Clintons downing their potential threat and their own party nominee obama .

If she cant handle the heat , she needs to get out of the kitchen and leave those who can handle the heat to stay in !.Calling Bill clinton to her rescue when she lost in iowa, cried the crocodile tears shouldnt work no more. Why do people fall her these silly traps ?

It will be time for a female to become president when the proper candidate appears. Accusing someone of betrayal on account of who they're voting for is not only one of the most childish things I've heard in a long time but it also is hurting their movement (that's why the national chapter of NOW wants nothing to do with the comments made).

I am pretty dissapointed that NOW would simply support the female candidate just because she is female. I also don't understand why people are supporting Hillary as much as they are. I remember growing up during the Clinton presidency, and when you put him between a bunch of horrible Republicans I think he is only better by comparison. When you take the fact that for the twenty years prior to his coming into office, computer and internet technology had been in development and research phases, it was only a matter of time before it became accessible to the consumer, Bill was in the right place at the right time, and was smart enough to know what to do with it (unlike Bush missing out on endorsing renewable/green energy companies).
This is America, and we don't need ruling families. I don't support Hillary because she is a woman (the 25th to run for president FYI), I don't support her because she is an immediate family member of a former president.
1988: Bush
1992: Clinton
1996: Clinton
2000: Bush
2004: Bush
2008: ?Clinton?
Seriously folks. That's totals up to be 80% of my life span.

The Womens' Groups are wrong on this one in my opinion.

If in earlier days they decided to support, aid Ted Kennedy that was their right and decision. And the decision then to support Ted should not have been based on what he might do for them or (how he could repay them) in the future! As that is not support, it is grovelling, pandering for one's future benefits.

In my opinion, the Womens' Group going publicly with this statement, slamming Kennedy for the same Freedom of Rights they champion on behalf of women, have discredited their Movement, it's mandate and members for their desired political gain. Shame on all.

As a woman, who considers herself a feminist, I find it offensive to be told by NOW that I should vote for candidate based on gender. True equality will only be attained when we don't consider gender in such decisions. I want the best person in the White House. If it's a woman, great. But right now I think the best person is Barack Obama.

Hillary didn't directly do anything towards Obama, her husband did all of that damage. This is a bad move by NOW NY to expect women to vote for her just because she is a woman. She is not entitled to anything, she has to fight like the rest of the candidates……..

Obama08!

Obama seems to be getting slack whereever he turns. So the Kennedys have decided to back him in the elections. I am a Black Woman, and I am still waiting for reparation, equal jobs, good health care, and someone honest to represent me……….
Know anyone? Your woman's right organizations are mad at the Kennedys? Put it where it makes a difference…………………….Fair housing, national health care, free good education, and everyday living prices that we can all live with.

So it's now "Billary" vs "Kennobama". Will the gender issue take centrestage now that the racial issue has been hushed aside (at least temporarily) ?

Whatever it is, I hope Americans will make the RIGHT choice in November 2008 regardless of race and gender as your decision really affects the rest of the world, like what your current sub-prime mortgage crisis is now doing to the whole world's economy.

My advice – it's still better to go for the tried and tested (i.e. experienced) one even if he/she may not be the most charismatic person or the person who makes the best speeches or draws the largest crowds. It takes more than charisma and charm to run the world's only superpower. As a Singaporean, I can only hope that Americans will do the right thing and listen more to your heads and not your hearts on Super Tuesday but most importantly in your General Elections in November 08.

These reports of endorsements and other drama by the media ad nauseum are really distracting the voters away from the real issues and which candidate each individual citizen feels best suits their needs. Why don't we demand the media report on these candidates in a fair and equal manner regarding their stances on the issues, which is really all that matters. George Bush ran on bringing the country together, which was what the country wanted to hear at that time, but no one asked him how he planned on doing this. As it turned out, he apparently had no intention on bringing the country together at all. Why do we just listen to these commentators with their self-serving opinions, all these endorsements from politicians and others with their own agendas and especially the bipartisan pundits who seem to be campaigning for the candidate of their choice? We need to get back to the issues. I am ashamed that this goes on in our country. The "News" media is becoming nothing more than paparazzi and is down right despicable how they cram this crap down our throats. I do not see any change in the media even though there are many people out there disgusted with their practices especially with regards to this election. It is time the American People take back our government and put an end to the commentating and demand we get the NEWS by means of investigative reporting not by personal opinions.

that women group need to shut up

Your comment is awaiting moderation.
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.

(I sent the above comment early-just after 7am. It wasn't accepted. I compare it to the other comments that were accepted and wonder if CNN prefers those that are less concise.)

Good for you Clara!,
it is very disappointing to see the unjustify attack by the candidate on Hillary, but it is disgusting to see the way the press is handling this, Whatever happens to
good reporting and fair and free election.
Hillary is smart and tough and she do'nt need Bill or anyone else to fight her battle,
just put her in a debate with Obama and you will see.
Obama is the Bush incarnate- he will say the right things to get elected.
The popular line is not what america needs right now, but a LEADER.
Good Luck American and HILLARY 08!

Get over it, NOW. (You're going the way of the dinosaur anyway)

How about we have the best candidiate for a change, regardess of gender or race?

Yesterday was supposed to be about "change", but it looked like back to the future to me. Talk about bias in this contest! Hillary can't get a fair shake from the media- her baggage is well known to us all, but Obama continues to get a free ride about his judgment (Rezko and Wright) and experience (or lack thereof). When did hard work and experience become dirty words in this country?

CNN is not giving equal exposure to the other Kennedy support to Hillary Clinton. What happened?

Its not bias nor discrimination being anti-Hillary. She simply has to many skeletons in the closet to be trusted. Besides, do we really want Bill Clinton as first man of the country?? The White House would be a brothel. Course that may be pretty cool. We can get Hugh Hefner to do the Playmate of the Year shoot in the Kennedy Room.

This is probably the dumbest remark I have read in a while. Support HIllary because she is a woman. Breathtakingly stupid.

NOW needs to get over it…Senator Kennedy chose HOPE over Status Quo…It had nothing to do with gender – which is what NOW is ALL about.

As a woman of Hillary's age, I find it appalling to think that women should vote for a woman, just because she is a woman. Women that have worked their entire life fighting discrimination in the workplace, fighting for equal rights, are now telling us that our sex is the only reason why we should vote for HIllary? If we truly believe in equal rights, why would we do that?

It made me sick to see Obama drowning with glee over his new found friend's comments. I see the endorsement as a plus for Hillary. Super Tuesday will tell us who was right about this one.

"…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."

Perhaps it is just the prospect of Hillary Clinton being president regardless of the fact that she is a woman.

This is another "dirty politics" played by the invisible Clinton's ". They have failed to dig dirt about obama now all they do is dig dirt about those who support him ? Isnt this pathetic ?. Why scream about it when everyone has the right to support whom they want to ? Anyway even if voted into power miss Clinton no matter how much i loved her and i still do but she wont do nothing except it will be bill's third time no wonder recently he has been crying, cursing , downing obama to have his 3rd term in politics.

its pathetic how he calls out nonsense about obama thinking we have forgotten how he disrespected his office.. public adultery ? isn't that one sad thing ? What has Miss Clinton down except voting for the war in iraq, voting for war spending ? , Cosigning bills? What has she done ?
She is bitter, she is angry , she ONLY GIVES YOU WANT YOU WANT TO HEAR.
This isnt about race or gender its about who has the potential i personally endorse Illinois senator barrack obama .

Because people don't agree with you it becomes an issue of sexism? Would you call men who don't vote for Edwards or Obama in the primary sexists for not siding with their gender? I didn't think so.

"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."

This in itself doesn't say Teddy's against women and therefore deserving of NOW's wrath – it simply says that he doesn't want to support Hillary. The quote makes it sound like a pattern and maybe there is.

It's not sex or gender, it's personality.

"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."

Isn't this a glaring contradiction?

Clara – it's not a matter of bias against Clinton, it's just she's not much of a story. Clinton wins a primary or caucus? Not really surprising or newsworthy, given she herself has positioned herself as the "inevitable" candidate… Cut the news a little slack, it's not like her message is obscured or unreported like Ron Paul or pretty much anyone who wasn't Clinton, Obama, or Edwards on the Democratic side… they've got to keep it interesting, and frankly there's nothing that interesting lately about Hillary other than Bill's rage against Obama and that horrible yellow suit Mrs. Clinton keeps wearing…

What is wrong with the American public? They seem to be hypnotized by Obama. He is not the first black man to run for president; just one with 2 years in the Senate; all blow and no show!

I think this is insulting – he endorsed who he feels will be the best president, and explained his reasons clearly. Why should there be anything sexist or racist about that?

Remember, this country elected Bush based on charisma. Let's not make that same mistake again. Hillary Clinton is an intelligent and capable woman who is not afraid to stand strong. Men should not feel threatened by that, but obviously they do.

Hillary is as out of touch with reality as NOW – get a grip – it's not the 60's, we're not all lesbians and the best thing that could happen to this country is that the Clinton's would LEAVE!

Radicalism, whether in religion or politics is bad, and this is just an example of that. Don't worry all you Hillary lovers, she'll lie, cheat and steal the nomination if she has to. That's the kind of president I want!

Why do women feel they must support Hilary because she is a woman??? I thought voting in an election is about choosing the right person. I am a white woman, and let me say, at first I was torn between Hilary and Obama. Initially, Edwards had the best education plan, but the other two beat him on everything else. Now, after following politics closely and watching the debates, I can't imagine Hilary being the president of our nation. Not only is she overly emotional (the country needs to be led by someone who can make rational decisions NOT on emotion), but her plans are awful. She wants to give healthcare to 12 million illegal immigrants! That is ridiculous! Who is going to pay for it? Maybe would should climb into more debt. Hey China just invested a trillion dollars in the US, maybe we will use that? (I hate to see the interest on that one!) Obama calls for a subsided plan and the care for Americans who need it, so that they can eventually support themselves. Obama is the most rational candidate. Hilary keeps twisting the facts, showing her lack of honesty. Do you all really want a President that you can't trust? I fear what will happen to the US if Clinton were to win. Oh, and lets not forget how hard Bill tried to push the same healthcare plan she is pushing. Remember how it didn't work?? I guess all you women who think you should vote for Hilary because she is a woman are forgetting about her past record. I am voting for Obama all the way! Sure, I would love to have a woman president, but it has to be the RIGHT woman, and Hilary is NOT. If Hilary is on the ballet without Obama… I may have to vote for a republican just to keep her out of office!

If I were a woman, involved in NOW, I would be incensed that Hillary has to have Bill drag her across the line… She claims to be an independent woman, but it seems like Bill is doing all the work for her… It's sad to see that she still depends so heavily on a man just to stay competitive. It's no longer Hillary 2008… it's "The Clintons" 2008.

Talk about a step backwards…

As a white male, I am voting for the candidate I think is strongest, and most likely to be the republicans. Whoever that turns out to be, I'll vote Democratic in the election in November. i find it interesting, though, that many women support Hillary NOT because of what she stands for on issues, but because she is a woman. i've never heard a guy say that he's voting for obama or edwards because they're guys…

It seems, conspicuously so to me, that the NOW statement indicates that their endorsement of Clinton hinges virtually soley upon the fact that she is a woman. I am a left of center leaning white male and have weighed the virtues of both candidates and feel more comfortable with Obama representing me. To read their statement, its almost as if their stance is that any forward thinking man who doesn't endorse Clinton is a sexist.

This type of rhetoric really weakens NOW's position.

this isn't about race or gender, even though Hillary and camp sure like to play the campaign that way.
Kennedy endorsed Obama because he believes Obama is the best candidate irregardless of race or gender.
i'm a woman. i would love for a woman to be president. sure. but not BECAUSE she's a woman. i support Obama.

Here's a thought people… why don't you vote for the best candidate! Ya! How about that?? Does anybody have any idea who that might be?? I just can't help but notice that the african american dude and the white woman seem to be the only two candidates on the list (or getting any form of media attention)… because one is black and one is a woman. And American's say they have no race or gender issues. People are so blinded by those issues that they don't even really know if Hillary or Obama are right for the job.

Hey why don't you Americans vote in a Chinese dude? They practically own the US anyway.

It's more than a little ridiculous when women like "Barbara" accuse, not just some generic "man," but a long-time women's rights supporter like Ted Kennedy of "betraying" their trust. Her own bias is obvious from her first sentence: "that women have more insight into how to shape the future, and the consequent strength to act on it than men do." The vitriol of that statement makes it clear where organizations like the NOW draws its political rhetoric from. I think that she and other partisans of identity-politics will find that most Americans, male and female, will be turned away by the innate injustice of that kind of thinking. A vote for Barack Obama is not "betrayal" of women, any more than it's an endorsement of African-Americans–rather, it's an endorsement for a candidate with a positive vision, a progressive social agenda, and an intelligent foreign policy, who happens to be black and male.

The New York state chapter of NOW needs to get a clue and recognize reality.

Voters don't have particular gender issues with electing a woman president.

Voters have issues with electing Hillary Clinton president.

PLEASE WHOM DID NOW SUPPORT WHOM CAROL MOSLEY BRAUN, A FORMER ILLINOIS SENATOR, RAN FOR PRESIDENT IN 2004 ?

Your nominee (CNN's) states that he's for change, but all the same old guards are supporting him, please tell me what change is he talking about

Where was the state chapter of NOW when everyone else endorsed Obama? Are they going to call Toni Morrison anti-feminist?

Seems we know where CNN stands now after last night's news attacking anyone who sends out emails against the Dems or should I say certain Dems!

If Hilary was the right woman I would have voted for her. It is time for a woman president but she isn't the one.

Clara,

I'm not sure what, specifically, is the issue. This article is not critical of Hillary at all. Rather, it states the reaction of NOW (NY Chapter) to Kennedy's endorsement of Obama.

You saying that people don't want a woman to be President is like me saying that you do not want an African American to be President. I surely hope that's not true, and I do doubt it is the case.

Personally, I am a big fan of Obama, and I have been ever since I first became familiar with his work in Chicago. Hillary has some great qualities, but she is going up against someone who I feel is the best Democratic candidate in my lifetime.

Also, Ed, what are you talking about regarding Obama's support coming from McCain supporters? If you are saying that independents like each of them, you would be correct. However, Obama's base is a younger, racially diverse crowd, while McCain's is an older, white crowd. They both won South Carolina, so clearly the support is not from the same people.

We have had men in the White House forever, maybe it is time to give a woman a chance. Not just because she is a woman but as they say "Women are the stronger sex" and maybe, just maybe, she could get something done. We will never know untel we give it a chance and let's face it, no one could do worse then bush so we would have to be better off then we have been for the past 7 + years. I think there should be equality FOR ALL and that does include women as well as blacks, Mexicans, etc. So come on boys, join the 21st century and get it out of your head that a woman can't be a leader.

This is why I left the democratic party after college: There are no principles or ideals. When a group like NOW only cares about getting a woman elected, not the best qualified individual, you have mental problems and you certainly are a disgrace to the American ideal.

Even worse, NOW shows how utterly pointless it is an organization and the useless "feminist" movement of today when it admits that it looks the other way when men they "need" on their side commit gross transgressions, such as what Bill did, and certainly Ted Kennedy has done.

My wife is conservative through and through, and I will tell you that she defends "feminist" rights more vigorously than all the women at the NOW headquarters.

I no longer respect existing Kennedy's family because of there endorsement.

For what I see this is so typical of some women groups. If you do not support a female candidate you are a pig and it has to be because you do not respect women. What about just the you prefer a candidate obver another independenly of sex? That is not possible with the limited one-track-mind/black-white-vision of extreme feminists. It speaks worst of them than of anybody else.

"He’s picked the new guy over us. 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." What a sour grapes reaction by the New York chapter of NOW !

Why didn't they also mention that Caroline Kennedy supported Obama? Thats and easy one, it would not have fit in with their absurd conclusion that if you don't support Hillary you are somehow anti woman. If that were true, it wouldn't it raise the opposite question ? If you support Hillary and don't support Obama, you are "part of a group of progressive women that won't support Obama because he is a black man"?

I know many women that love the idea of a woman in the White House but don't like Hillary. One thing is certain, if Hillary is elected, the now fractured Republican party will come togather to defeat Hillary and many others on the democratic ticket. Many of the Republican pundits have admitted that a Hillary win in the primary makes their job easier in the general election. At least the national NOW organization seems to be handling this correctly.

how much is billary paying for that statement.

Impossible to please everyone…If someone did they would probably go insane.

Womens groups are just now upset with a Kennedy's behavior about women? Where have they been the last 45 years? I'm sorry, but if womens groups are are only upset about a political endorsement from a Kennedy then it only shows that women's groups are more concerned with POLITICS than real women. Shame on you.

It's interesting that different groups of voters have been highlighted by the press – balck and women voters in particular. The groups who appear to have been ignored by the media (not by the candidates) though are the very groups that could decide the elction – white male voters and the Latino vote – also the two groups that Obama has struggled to find support from.

If he cannot make headway with those two groups of voters and genuinely appeal across the board I find it very difficult to see how he can get elected as the unity candidate.

Hey NOW-

Could it be possible that he thinks Obama would be better for our country right now? Or is it automatically a statement on societies attitude towards women?

You and your organization are a joke. These statements are similiar to the many that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have made, that ultimately diminished their authority when it came to race relations.

Ted who? Does anyone…anyone really care who Ted Kennedy endorses? Seriously, based upon his record and past exploits it would seem that his endorsement would better equate to the "kiss of death."
Ted, retire and spend your time on the boat rather than meddling in serious things like politics.

Sounds to me like NOW is being discriminatory towards men. Sometimes you just can't make happy campers out of city slickers.

I will vote for the person I think is the best and reflects my beliefs.
The fact that Ed Kennedy and Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg are endorsing Barack Obama does not effect me at all.
I am capable of watching candidates and reading about their platforms myself.
So, bottom line, vote for who you feel most represents you. Don't worry re: endorsements.

Ok so first off i don't think this is a popularity contest, this is a presidential election. If everyone sided with their friends over the issues we would not be america. By saying that he has betrayed you, you are implying that you speak for him, and as you can plainly see, he didn't back hillary (THANK GOD) and backed Obama. its america dont play up the politics.

Hard to Believe we have groups of people this stupid that are allowed to vote in this country. This chapter of "NOW" needs Dr.Phil.

I f Hilary stood for something positive for women I could seeit, but she stands for nothing except her own gain, If I was a women I would not vote for her or her policies, she actually hasn't done anything except ride her husbands coattails, he who continuously acknowledged having affairs and she continued to forgive him, why??? She needed him to achieve her goals, no she isn't the best choice for women to be supporting

What is "NOW" again? "WHO" cares is what it should be called. Another insignificant womens group that only supports Hillary because she is a woman. this is the only time that I agree with Ted Kennedy.

wow some americans are just wierd

Just another narrow minded special interest group "NOW" who can't realize that the year is 2008. Get your head out of the sand. You haven't done anything for women in 40 years. Sad. Very sad.

This should not be on CNN. This is a simple push for publicity by a group that doesn't know what they are talking about. Because he isn't backing a woman does not mean he has betrayed anyone. Women are not supporting Hillary around the country. This is not big news. Put something worth while on the ticker.

The position taken by the NOW-NY chapter is ridiculous and extremely hypocritical. They state that Kennedy's endorsement is an ultimate betrayal and that he simply doesn't want to see a woman as president. Their clear aim and goal in this election is to elect a woman president, regardless of qualifications or platform. Now, while Hillary Clinton is qualified and more than capable enough of holding the highest office in the land, that isn't the argument that NOW-NY uses. They're not mad because they think Obama is less qualified. They're not mad because they feel Kennedy's endorsement is politically motivated. They're not even irritated at the fact that Teddy chose to support a candidate with less tenure as senator. They only point out Hillary's gender and claim gender bias. They don't even try to attack Obama's legitmacy as a candidate. NOW-NY wants fair and equitable treatment, and they got it. In this country, we're still free to support whomever we choose, regardless of race, color, creed, religion, or gender. If Senator Clinton wins the nomination, it should be because the majority of voters believes she's the best Democratic candidate…not because she's a woman.

Isn't it strange how Hillary decides at the last minute not to speak on political shows as previously arranged when she has had a "difficult" day. She did it to Meet the Press when the polls showed her behind in NH before the vote. She backed out of a full hour interview.

Last night she backed out in the last minutes from CNN to talk about the President's speech.

She was putting on her clown exaggerated smile, to cover up her real emotions. But the real truth came out when she couldn't even muster the courage to speak with the media. Probably was afraid she was going to be asked about the Kennedy endorsement of Obama.

Watching the hoopla with the Kennedys and Obama I felt literally sick. I also felt betrayed and wondered why should I even vote ….they have taken it away from me.

While I think Obama is a great person with tremendous potential – HE IS NOT READY TO BE PRESIDENT – what arrogance to think he can.
Oh yes! there is this "learning on the job" thing I heard from his adorous crowd -
did we not have enough of it with George Insane Bush?

GO HILLARY GO I for one am solidly behind you, and Bill help Hillary you two are the people we need in the White House.

Considering how they work and manipulate events, I don't believe the Kennedys REALLY support Obama. Their endorsement has more to do with not putting the Clintons back in the White House via Bill's wife.

When you work on a daily basis with someone for years, you get to see their true
colors(NO SLUR OR PUN INTENDED!) Sen. Kennedy 's reputation is that he truely
cares for this country, perhaps(for once)a politician is supporting someone because they have the most to offer, NOT because of a bunch of back-door, partyline, smokey room dealings that have poluted Washington and deminished the faith in our elected leaders. I do not agree with Sen. Kennedy most of the time, but I do admire him for standing for what he believes in. QUIT WHINING AND GET OF HIS BACK!

I think NOW NY has a point. As a man who grew up in India under a strong
female prime minister Indira Gandhi, I am shocked at the venom thrown at
HRC. Give her a fair shake..

HRC is not getting a fair treatment. The media is basically fawning over BO.
Every comment made by HRC and BC is taken out of context and made into
something that it is not meant to be. The media is the one who invented this
race card business. I observed since 92 how BC courted African Americans and
other minorities… It is rather unfair to cast BC's comments to be playing
race card. He is doing what every husband has to do for his wife. He is
basically returning favor. After all she campaigned for him and his success
all these years. She managed the family – See what a successful daughter
they have raised.

May be the conservatives have a point when they bemoan that the media
plays favorites. BO is big beneficiary of media coverage. See all the positive
spin he gets. I want BO to give a fight to HRC. But, I am getting sick of all the
dumping on HRC. Give the woman a fair shake.

Clara,
The media just gravitates towards what's hot. And, what's hot right now is Obama. People like his message. Get over it.

Well said, Ashley. True empowerment of women means that they can vote for whomever they wish. It means exactly the opposite of supporting Hillary Clinton simply because she is a woman.

Just because she's a woman she should have his backing! Perhaps she isn't the right woman to back! Just a thought.

Thank you NOW NY for taking this stand. I'm not voting for Hillary because she's a woman. Rather, she is the better of the two Democratic candidates most likely to get the nomination. On-the-job training hasn't worked for the last 8 years and I'm not interested in a repeat of the same thing.

As for Ted and Caroline Kennedy, they've dishonored John and Robert Kennedy's honor by comparing Barack Obama to them. It's very disappointing. However, they're free agents—they can support any candidate they wish. Just don't expect the same level of support and respect from those who've been offended by their foolish decision.

We still have the right as well as freedom to vote for and support who we like. Don't get mad at the Kennedy's for their support of Obama. This is their right. I believe The Clinton's felt they had this victory in the bag because of Bill and that's just not so. Hillary maybe running but Bill will be behind the scene making the decisions and calls for Hillary. This is not what we need in Washington. They both had their turn and now it should be for someone else. Hillary wasn't president but she was the wife of the president and maybe for the future a law should be in place that once you serve either as president or wife, etc. of the president you are not eligible to run for this seat. It seem so ridiculus to me that she would even want to be president after the mess and scandals left behind from their time there. I'm sure a lot of women will vote for Hillary but I will vote for the best candidate and right now with all of the mud slinging going on Hillary is not the best and I am a female over 50.

I am a young black male and I find it insulting that anyone would think that I support Obama simply because he is black. I don't understand why women would want to support Hilary simply because she is a woman.

We all want to see something "new" in the White House. But, just because Hilary is the first woman to make a serious run for the office doesn't mean she is the best for the job. Same for Obama being black. You have to remember that Hilary and Obama, if they win, will set a bar for other women and blacks to come after them. That means that if Hilary is a terrible president, it will be another 200 years before we see another woman run for office.

Don't vote based on gender or race, please don't throw your vote away like that. Educate yourself…

Oh come on N.O.W, give me a break. Now we are not only playing the race card but the gender card as well. Ted Kennedy is simply backing the candidate whom he feels is the best equipped to lead our country. I wonder what the members of N.O.W. would be saying today had Kennedy backed Hillary and the NAACP were screaming Betrayal! Betrayal? I have seen some big crocks this campaign but this is the biggest. Get over it.

Ted Kennedy states that it is time for change in Washington. When is he leaving?

KENEDY OUGHT TO BE ASHAMED OF HIMSELF-CAROLINE KENNEDY LEFT HER BRAINS BEHIND THE DOOR SO WHAT CAN YOU EXPECT-TO BAD FOR THE DEMOCRATS BUT WE CAN RISE ABOVE THE KENNEDYS AND WIN
LETS ALL WOMEN UNIT BEHIND HILLARY AND SHE THEM ALL WE CAN WIN

I am ashamed of NOW for attacking a wonderful advocate for women's rights for endorsing whom he believes is the best candidate for President. I do not believe Hillary is a person who can get the job done for women or men or children simply because she demonizes people on the other side.

We need a President who will not be pandering to special groups, but would be representing of people.

Where was NOW when Elizabeth Dole was running? Why weren't women demanding that women vote for her? Oh yeah, she wasn't running as a Woman – she was running as a candidate.

It is not just Cnn, it is all of them. They do not give all candidates equal coverage. They have made their picks and are forcing them on the public. This is very unfair. There are more than 2 democrats and 2 republicans still on the tickets so why do we never hear anything other than petty little discussions reporters have had with the others. This will probably not be accepted, as it is a negative against the news reports. As usual we will not be heard, only what the media sees fit. Sad, sad, sad.

wow if we vote for anyone but Hillary we are bigots? Seriously, if you Clintonites close your eyes and imagine that both candidates are the same gender you would realize that Obama is the better candidate.

I agree with Ashley and Lakisha (smart people). You shouldn't vote for a person because they are a particular gender or race. You vote for their ideas and ideals. I think NOW, NY has insulted women by suggesting that if you are a woman you should vote for a woman, regardles of their political beliefs. Poppycock! I vote for the best candidate regardless of gender, race, religion, and sometimes even political party .

Well it should not matter to Hillary since in order to change things for the better we don't need such support as the Kennedy's who lets face it could never become president himself even running against a one term democrat (Carter).

I agree that men would vote for inexperience verses putting a woman in te White House! I look forward to an exiting 8 years as Hillary does what Bill did and get this country back in order.

Stay positive and use these men of yesterday as a way to foscus on why we need new support to make a change in Washington.

No HUGE loss.. I think positioned well it could be a gain and looks bad for Obama who preaches new direction but is being endorsed by the old school.

Ted Kennedy had a binary choice it has nothing to do with women but everything to do with Hillary!

If Barack Obama does not win the Dems Primary Condi Rice will be the VP on the GOP ticket!

A ticket of Mitt/Condi will beat Hillary hands down and I am a Barack Obama supporter!

Go Barack '08 / '12

Barak Hussien Obama is acting like a spoil child, if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. teddy has always treated woman badly.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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

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.

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

Barbara from NJ

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.

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

Thank you Clara for summing up my words for me.

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".

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.

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!

I agree with Ashley above.

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.

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!!!

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!

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

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…….

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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?

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".

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Waahhh….

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."

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.

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.

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?

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.

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..

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.

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

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.

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!

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'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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

"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.

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!

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!

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?

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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."

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.

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.

This whole thing makes me sick to my stomach.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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 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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

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!

Attention Females: Stop whining and find a better candidate.

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

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

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 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…..

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

Wow, that was shrill of them.

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.

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?

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.

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

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

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

HILLARY 08

SEATTLE

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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!!!!

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.

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.

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!

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?

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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!

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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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

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…

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.

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