I just read a sexist quote from columnist Clarence Page:
It was not that long ago, after all, that he [Obama] was losing to Sen. Hillary Clinton two-to-one among black voters before he won the Iowa caucuses.
...
Obama turned his popularity around through persistent campaigning and excellent organizing to increase the public's comfort level with him. In the end, he turned a vote for Obama into something in which many voters took pride, just for being on the right side of history (http://tinyurl.com/5kor47).
On one side was women's rights represented by Hillary (and later Sarah Palin). On the other side was black men's rights represented by Obama. Both rights are good, but Page must think women's equality is wrong, since he says those on the "right side of history" were those voting against historic women candidates. Perhaps he should write a column about why he thinks it's right for men to oppress women. Women are the most oppressed group in the world (http://tinyurl.com/6bk5rz). My preliminary studies of the U.S. show that women are more oppressed than blacks (http://tinyurl.com/5jvrzj).
Also, I disagree with Page's opinion about why Obama "won" the primary. The main reason Obama was given the nomination was because the media were extremely sexist against Hillary and the DNC ganged up against a historic woman candidate in favor of a man (http://tinyurl.com/6ms9f7).
Blatant sexism against women politician's is endorsed by the male-dominated journalism. This must end. It should be unacceptable to promote hatred of women in mainstream media journalism.
