(Edit update - you can view different sessions from the Women's conference from your home
as podcasts. I presume they are free).
My question is this. If this event is really important to Maria Shriver, and I think this event was held last year as well, why completely stab in the back a fine candidate like Hillary Clinton in 2008 when you purport to be about elevating women?
If Maria Shriver was not sure that Hillary Clinton was her type of candidate, why not just remain neutral? Why actually campaign against Hillary Clinton the way Maria Shriver did? Why? Why help defeat Hillary Clinton and then put on a women's conference that same year and then the following year and so on? I can think of a few women who instead of remaining neutral during the 2008 democratic campaign, actively campaigned for Barack Obama and against Hillary Clinton while claiming to be for women.
There is no forgive and forget in this instance. Maria Shriver purports to be for women while absolutely devaluing a completely credible presidential candidate who was female, and the candidate that Maria Shriver chose over Hillary Clinton WAS AN IMPROPERLY VETTED MALE!
Definitely check out the women's conference. The women's conference appears to be an excellent gathering of women go getters, but it also might not hurt to remind them how disingenuous Maria Shriver's position has become.
Maria Shriver actively being against Hillary Clinton but being for the empowerment of women equals Rush Limbaugh unfairly slamming a talented football player like Donovan McNabe specifically because McNabe is african american, and then afterwards trying to become part owner in a football team.
5 comments:
Do you do nothing but whine the whole time?
Maybe you should learn to read the entire articles.
If you call the comment "Definitely check out the women's conference. The women's conference appears to be an excellent gathering of women go getters"...
....whining the whole time, then you have no credibility.
Inaccurate, insulting comments made by anonymous people will probably be deleted. However, your comment will be left up for a while so people can see why you posted anonymously, your premise is flawed.
What part of women not being a monolithic entity don't you get?
Seeing as you, a man, evidently supported HRC in the presidential campaign, why were you actively campaigning against Obama, another man? Why couldn't you have just stayed neutral instead?
Also, is there a class where one can learn to read your entire articles? Would that be anywhere near the class where they teach proper spelling, grammar and proof-reading?
Also, is there a class where one can learn to read your entire articles? Would that be anywhere near the class where they teach proper spelling, grammar and proof-reading?
----------
If you need to take a class to combat your ADD so you can read entire articles and another class to learn proper spelling, grammar and proofreading, go for it, even if you have to walk a bit to get from one to the other.
So can we add Arianna Huffington to Shriver's hit list since Huffington ran against Arnold for governor.
Post a Comment