There are other women out there, women who didn’t stay married to the jackass, women whose experience with crisis is other than Travelgate, Cattle Futures Gate, Monicagate, BimboSgate, Trooper gate, Rose law firm billing records gate, White House furniture gate, Healthcare reform gate, Vince Foster gate…and so on, into the night, ad nauseam, ad infinitum…

Hillary, claiming to be ready (unlike her opponent) to take the reins of government at Day One, hasn’t even managed staff and finance issues within her own campaign particularly well.

If you want to know where Hillary “stands” on an issue, look to where those to whom she feels indebted stand (perhaps those who support her, financially) and you will be able to figure out her position before she utters it.

It might very well change with the wind the next week, depending on what she feels is most expedient and self-serving at the time.

The notion that a President of the United States should have the power to redistribute income through taxation would be abhorrent to every single individual who conceived this Representative Republic in the 18th century.

The notion that a President of the United States should have the power to attach your salary if you don’t purchase her mandated version of “health care” would make Thomas Jefferson turn over in his grave.

While the gender differences aren’t as stark in political science as in the sciences, they are still pretty bad. Take my profession – academic political science, presumably a bastion of political correctness. Our big annual convention is dominated by men. The leading journals prefer quantitative research over qualitative research. And no surprise, men do the quantitative work.

Huh. I wonder why they prefer quantitative research. Could it have anything to do with the fact that if you want to call your profession a science, that it must focus on quantitative research because that is the research to most likely produce reproducible results?

This attitude is precisely why women are often not taken seriously in the sciences. Qualitative research rarely has much lasting value to it. If you want to play with the boys, you have to play the same sport, and that’s not what you’re talking about here.

Ummm… maybe because it’s quantitative?

I’m a person who’s worked in the sciences and engineering (mostly academic, but also in the real world). Given my background, I’m amazed why anyone thinks the qualitative is more valuable than, or even equal to, the quantitative. That’s like saying we should prefer circumstantial evidence over facts in a court of law.

(Oh, and in case you were thinking otherwise, I’m also a woman.)

Why is that a failure of the country. When we had children my wife stopped full-time work and we lived on my at-the-time-not-so-great salary. Of course we didn’t have a trophy house, a pair of Beamers, a vacation cottage and other essentials for young upwardly-mobile suburbanite trash. We sucked it up and really didn’t suffer. Maybe more people should try it. There was absolutely no way we were going to subject our children to day-care.

I’ve worked in IT for quite a while and the women I’ve worked with have usually done very well. We’re really all in the same boat, both good and bad.

“beause you’ve got twice the “normal” nuber of X chromosomes.”

Men have 45 X chromosomes. Women have 46. 46/45 does not equal 2.

This is why being qualitative isn’t good enough.

I’m looking for a woman running because she knows foreign policy, economics and how to run a bureaucracy, not because she wants to be the first woman president or because she has a grudge toward society and wants to re-engineer it to suit herself and other feminists.
The idea that the unfairness of the past can be erased by reverse unfairness will only make for more unhappiness and more grudges.

Women are in a difficult position trying to compete in most professional careers, but wanting to have families, as well. It’s really a failure of our country that so many families have to have two incomes to survive. I know that I wouldn’t go very far in a law firm, or company that based my advancement on the time I could commit to the firm, because I consider that an excessive demand.

I don’t know much about the over all differences in earnings, but I have noticed that many of the women lawyers I’ve known were single, usually divorced several times, hard to work with and not particularly happy. They tried to out-man the men, and it hasn’t seemed to be very fulfilling for them.

For better or worse, the business world was built primarily by men who compete in the same way they compete in war and sports. Women could change that paradigm by competing the way women do rather than with the testosterone-laced attitudes and behavior that seems to apply everywhere, but I don’t know how effective that would be.

The best way for women to work out their grudges, I think, would be through starting their own businesses, and putting truly feminine principles to work. For all the criticism of Martha Stewart, she has done very well for herself, and I feel that she really enjoys what she does.

I am concerned about both women AND men being “liberated” from expectations & stereotypes.

Both sides are pressured in countless ways & short-changed in life, due to the messages we receive growing up and later at work.

As someone who has been a stay home mom AND a working mother, I know that neither role is easy or ideal. Neither is being a father & a worker.

I long ago tired of feminism beating up on men. The attitudes of the shoulder pad feminists, my generation, seem so out of date, such old news.

Hillary is the worst-case, old style woman who made it based on her husband’s connections. Phuleeze!

I lost all interest in her when she tolerated Bill’s indiscretions & defended him.

In similar circumstances, I went out & made my own way in life. Out of self-respect!

Voting for Hillary out of some sense of “voting for the female” is about the dumbest thing yet.

Her campaign is not impressive at all.

Give me a really GOOD woman leader, and I will be thrilled to support her, but no way am I voting for someone just because it is a “she.”

I do have many friends who are doing just that, and I am shocked by their shallowness.