Super Tuesday: Hillary, it is!

Today, I voted for Hillary Clinton, and while I had reservations beforehand (and even during!) my vote, I have come across some commentary that makes me feel a lot better about my decision.

First, consider this stunning article by Robin Morgan. She brings up some points that I wish I had in hand months ago. I was particularly taken by her noting the fact that while the older Kennedys embrace Obama, the younger members of the clan are siding with Hillary--so much for him being the beacon for the youth vote. She also offers an intense review of the mysogyny at root of so much of the anti-Hillary sentiment (and no, men aren't the only folks spreading it around). And she offers a pretty good summation of why a vote for Hillary makes the most sense. An excerpt:

"I’d rather say a joyful Hello to all the glorious young women who do identify with Hillary, and all the brave, smart men—of all ethnicities and any age—who get that it’s in their self-interest, too. She’s better qualified. (D’uh.) She’s a high-profile candidate with an enormous grasp of foreign- and domestic-policy nuance, dedication to detail, ability to absorb staggering insult and personal pain while retaining dignity, resolve, even humor, and keep on keeping on. (Also, yes, dammit, let’s hear it for her connections and funding and party-building background, too. Obama was awfully glad about those when she raised dough and campaigned for him to get to the Senate in the first place.)"

Plus:

"Me? I support Hillary Rodham because she’s the best qualified of all candidates running in both parties. I support her because she’s refreshingly thoughtful, and I’m bloodied from eight years of a jolly 'uniter' with ejaculatory politics. I needn’t agree with her on every point. I agree with the 97 percent of her positions that are identical with Obama’s—and the few where hers are both more practical and to the left of his (like health care). I support her because she’s already smashed the first-lady stereotype and made history as a fine senator, because I believe she will continue to make history not only as the first U.S. woman president, but as a great U.S. president.

"As for the 'woman thing'?

"Me, I’m voting for Hillary not because she’s a woman—but because I am."

Secondly, somehow I missed the bit about Barack Obama campaigning with an "ex-Gay" gospel singer in South Carolina, a man who said, in short, that lesbians do not exist.

(Allow me to reply: Actually, it's ex-Gays who don't exist. Ex-straights, on the other hand? We are legion.)

If you want to learn more about this little under-reported debacle, I suggest you read the Salon.com article, "Obama: Don't pander to homophobes," by James Hannaham. (If they let you.) An excerpt:

"Obama's gay advocates obviously support him regardless of this fumble. But his gay critics are right to ask why he thinks getting homosexuals to sit at the same table with antigay and allegedly 'ex-gay' Christians represents some kind of balance. Had McClurkin been a Holocaust denier, my money says Obama would be 'embracing a change' in his tour's entertainment lineup, lickety-split.

"It shouldn't surprise anyone that Obama is playing to both sides -- that seems to be what he's best at. He means well, but you know what they say about the highways in hell. However, adding Sidden to the mix without giving McClurkin the shaft was enough of an afterthought to incense the gay community without fixing the problem. Did Obama overestimate the depth of the black community's homophobia and unintentionally solidify the stereotype about him -- that he's the white man's black candidate? Well, if Sharpton refuses to pander to the homophobic faction of the black church, why should anybody else?"

Now, pardon me, I must go make a donation to Hillary's campaign.....