Esterday: "I'm not going to vote for Hillary. That is a definite. No one could pay me enough money."

[jefferson_dem]

Does this change the way you are approaching the presidential election?

I've been an independent all my life. My mom was a Democrat and my father a Republican. I just sat back and watched them argue and stayed in the middle. But I'm not going to vote for Hillary. That is a definite. No one could pay me enough money. My opinion of her has changed drastically. The more I read and find out about her it changes more and more to the negative. I don't believe she can help out the working women of this world because I don't believe she gets it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/11/13/iowa-waitress-speaks-out_n_72437.html

[depakid]

1. It's a far more common sentiment than many here acknowledge

I hear things like this all of the time IRL.

[Lerkfish]

29. I only know two people who support her at this point IRL

but I know dozens of democrats who do not. It goes without saying I know republicans who would not.

Even the two who support her cannot come up with valid arguments for why, when pressed.

That's admittedly anecdotal, but I hang around with a fairly aware group of people.

[depakid]

52. "That's admittedly anecdotal"

It is, yet it's a common theme I hear among family, friends and colleagues. Enough so that it worries me a lot.

Whatever happens (or doesn't happen) on the national level, there are state and local things we should be concerned with.

[MethuenProgressive]

54. The anti-Clinton Huffington Post runs another anti-Clinton story? I'm SHOCKED!!

Shocked, I say.

[griffi94]

2. i'll only vote for her

if she wins in the primaries.

[demosincebirth]

3. Same here.

[Nay]

17. Me three. No way I'd vote for her otherwise.

[cyclezealot]

4. I'll begrudegingly vote for her, if she gets the nomination.

We can't stand the Pukes in charge of the Justice Dept. or a chance to fill any more Supreme court appointments. But, I consider her instincts tragic. Too manipulating instead of going with her instincts. Which I would have wished to be more positive. She does not get the golden ring, it's a shame. We had wanted an Eleanor Roosevelt type as our first woman president. She is certainly not in the vain.

[enough already]

65. "Begrudging" is the problem

A lot of rank and file may hold their nose and do it. The problem is those in the middle and the undecideds who won't. The party is committing general election suicide by proceeding with this coronation.

[jefferson_dem]

5. I'll definitely vote for her...if (gulp) she wins the nomination...

:scared:

[IronLionZion]

43. I'm with you, I'll support any Dem in the presidential general election

the massive executive branch needs to be in the hands of the good guys. With military, judges, veto power, foreign policy, health care, education, and everything else at stake, it's just too important. Hillary is simply NOT going to destroy our country's infrastructure and human resources the way Giuliani and Romney are promising to (budget priorities).

Yeah, it's so easy to pontificate anonymously on an online message board about voting your conscience and being a purist. Well, I feel that voting for that "D" next to someone's name in the presidential really is voting my conscience because it puts the executive branch closer to our hands even if we don't like the person at the top. In similar fasion you could say voting "D" in legislative elections helps with our majority and puts liberal congresspeople from the progressive caucus in powerful leadership positions.

In other words, voting for a Dem is better than the other options. If we don't like the Dem then vote for another one next time. Kennedy did run against Carter in 1980.

[William769]

6. I whish she would make up her mind.

In the last interview she said she was thinking about voting for Hillary or Obama.

I think she is starting to enjoy the attention.

[TwilightGardener]

7. The publicity hound is baaaaaack. Last week she was going to

possibly vote for Hillary, now you couldn't pay her enough. She can't get enough of her 15 minutes, can she?

[angstlessk]

9. I think not only publicity..but it is now a bidding war for her vote??

will she vote for rudy?? he can pay her a whopping sum...or break her knees if she refuses!

[rinsd]

13. I'm still hesitant to call her that.

But you are right. She did just a couple of days ago say she was still considering voting for her.

I could see her saying the whole incident has soured her on Hillary but the "more I read" line was far too polished.

[TwilightGardener]

This is the third interview/commentary from a woman who was supposedly

so upset with the fallout from the publicity that came from meeting Hillary. She's really milking this for all it's worth.

[MLFerrell]

8. Amen. I won't vote for her. If she's the nominee, I'm sitting this one out.

Or I'll cast a token ballot for Kucinich. Either way, Clin-ton will NOT be getting my vote.

[guruoo]

12. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3714633&mesg_id=3714719

[Cameron27]

15. That's exactly how I feel about Johnny Edwards

except I actually will vote for him, holding my nose if necessary.

[LoZoccolo]

20. Not voting for the Democrat is not a good idea. n/t

[MLFerrell]

22. Hillary is as much a Democrat as Bush is a Christian...

That is, in name only.

I refuse to endorse, tacitly or otherwise, a corporatist-rightist just because they have a fucking D next to their name.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. That's A Crock Of Shit

She's a Democrat and we don't have democratic centralism in the Democratic party...

If you don't know what democratic centralism is google it...

[Lerkfish]

30. well, actually, I took your advice

I looked up the term in wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_centralism

Democratic centralism is the name given to the principles of internal organization used by Leninist political parties, and the term is sometimes used as a synonym for any Leninist policy inside a political party. The democratic aspect of this organizational method describes the freedom of members of the political party to discuss and debate matters of policy and direction, but once the decision of the party is made by majority vote, all members are expected to uphold that decision. This latter aspect represents the centralism. As Lenin described it, democratic centralism consisted of "freedom of discussion, unity of action".<1>
Leninist organizations' constitutions have typically defined the following key principles of democratic centralism:
Election of all party organs from bottom to top and systematic renewal of their composition, if needed.
Responsibility of party structures to both lower and upper structures.
Strict and conscious discipline in the party—the minority must obey the majority until such time as the policy is changed.
Decisions of upper structures are mandatory for the lower structures.
Cooperation of all party organs in a collective manner at all times, and correspondingly, personal responsibility of party members for the assignments given to them and for the assignments they themselves create.

and frankly I don't understand the point YOU"RE making by saying we don't have it or what that would have to do with whether Clinton is a democrat as alleged by the other poster.
(for the record, I think she IS a democrat, obviously, she's just a very corporatist one that is promoting some of the neocon agendas, especially in regards to AIPAC and the middle east)

that seems to be an apples/bicycle type of comparison.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

33. Democratic Centralism

Democratic Centralism implies that once a party "decides" on an issue there shall be no more debate...

There are no litmus tests in the Democratic party but if there were, abortion, gay rights, and affirmative action would be those tests...HRC is pro-choice, as pro gay rights as any "national" Democrat, and pro affirmative action...

[Lerkfish]

36. those issues are nice, but meaningles if continue to allow torture,

continue to allow the unitary executive powers, continue to promote an illegal and immoral war, continue to saber rattle at Iran, continue to allow corporations to raid working people's livelihoods, continue to support outsourcing, continue to avoid making elections fair.

unless you address those issues, the other ones are not going to remain long, regardless.

If we have no civil rights at all, do you think gay rights are being served? If we retroactively make domestic spying legal, do we have affirmative action rights?
If we continue to have "no fly lists" based on peace activism, do we have a vital democracy?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

40. Lots of issues... I will try to address them

1) I don't think HRC indicated she favors an "imperial presidency" or unitary executive...

2) As far as I know there is not much light between the Iraq positions of Edwards, Obama, and Clinton... None of them have promised an instant withdrawl... I think a decent case can be made that the difference between them is semantic

3) Edwards, Clinton, and Obama have all indicated they will do everything possible to prevent Iran from going nuclear and have not ruled out the use of force...

4) I am for as much trade as possible as long as it's fair... If we don't buy other people's stuff they aren't going to buy our stuff...I guess if opposition to most trade agreements is your holy grail than Edwards is the best candidate...Not much light between Clinton and Obama though...

5) I don't see how Clinton is worse on civil liberties than Obama or Edwards... I believe she has a much higher ACLU rating than Edwards and a bit lower than Obama...

6) I think the difference between Edwards, Obama, and Clinton are largely cosmetic and a look at their resumes would bear me out...

PEACE

DSB

[Lerkfish]

53. I appreciate the post, but I think you misunderstood me.

I meant those issues will have to be addressed, because they are the most threatening to us as a country if they continue. I'm also saying if they are NOT addressed first, the other issues will be unaddressable because we will already be in a society where the citizens have no power.

I'm speaking in general about those issues and why they're more imperative, if not more imporant.


but since you brought up HRC's take on those issues, which I really appreciate, I feel I owe you a return response.

you said:

1) I don't think HRC indicated she favors an "imperial presidency" or unitary executive...

ME: she is on record as saying she MIGHT consider giving back SOME of the unitary executive powers grabbed by Bush if she is elected. That indicates to me she does not view the grabbed powers as automatically bad and feels she is the only one who would deign to return them, and she would get to pick which ones. She SHOULD say we need to return to a proper balance of power. SO I disagree with your assessment on this issue.

You said:
2) As far as I know there is not much light between the Iraq positions of Edwards, Obama, and Clinton... None of them have promised an instant withdrawl... I think a decent case can be made that the difference between them is semantic

ME: I'll agree with you on that up until recently. I think Edwards is talking as if he would take a stronger stand on bringing the boys home, but I agree that none of those three make me happy on that issue.

You said:
3) Edwards, Clinton, and Obama have all indicated they will do everything possible to prevent Iran from going nuclear and have not ruled out the use of force...

ME: and I think they're all nucking futs on that. By not ruling out use of force, they are defacto ruling out diplomacy before it has a chance. I also don't know why Iran cannot use nuclear power when we "allow" Pakistan to have nuclear weapons...in case you haven't noticed, tis not a real stable place at the moment.


You said:
4) I am for as much trade as possible as long as it's fair... If we don't buy other people's stuff they aren't going to buy our stuff...I guess if opposition to most trade agreements is your holy grail than Edwards is the best candidate...Not much light between Clinton and Obama though...

ME: there's a vast difference between "trade" and putting our country in debt to China beyond our ability to pay, as an example. We've allowed mulitnational companies to raid the cookie jar and there are no more cookies. Unless you like your cookies tainted with China's poison, anti-freeze and lead. If Trade puts us at a disadvantage, and dries up our jobs, its not really that helpful, is it? Again, I agree that the top three are not helpful on this issue as much as I'd like.


You said:
5) I don't see how Clinton is worse on civil liberties than Obama or Edwards... I believe she has a much higher ACLU rating than Edwards and a bit lower than Obama...

ME: that is one where I"m talking about the importance of the issue generally. How did Clinton vote on the recent immunity for telcoms? Is she actively stopping torture or trying to bring back habeas corpus, for example? None of the candidates are fighting hard enough on this issue to make me happy, I don't mean to single her out on it, but I also don't agree that she is a beacon of protection of civil liberties -- just being "not worse" is not good enough for the american people.


You said:
6) I think the difference between Edwards, Obama, and Clinton are largely cosmetic and a look at their resumes would bear me out...

ME: well, I have to disagree a bit on that, but I will agree that none of them excite me on the issues I noted. Kucinich is the only one who does on those issues.

[sundancekid]

70. how do I thank thee for such a valuable post???? FINALLY - some

substance over screed

[eridani]

59. And pro exporting more of our jobs, and pro health insurance company

and pro letting Bushco slide for their crimes, and pro further centralization of executive power, and pro staying in Iraq forever.

[cali]

50. what delusional nonsense.

and completely belied by the facts. I don't like her, and I won't vote for her in the primary, but it's just a flat out lie to claim she's a repuke. I'm not going to bother with people who live in a world completely unrelated to facts, and I could give a shit who you vote for in the general, but you deserve to be called on pushing a big lie. How Goebbels of you.

[MLFerrell]

69. Cali, where did I use the word Republican, or any derivation thereof in my post?

Umm, I didn't say that Hillary is a Republican, I said that she's a corporatist-rightist who happens to tack a (D) next to her name.

Kucinich is a true Democrat. Hillary is not.

[guruoo]

10. And just think of the gas and time you'll save gas not having to

campaign for anybody.

[Bitwit1234]

11. So if the dofus accepted money I'd b e the first to report him.

Besides I don't think Hillary has to pay people to vote for her. Who in the hell is esterday, never heard of him....some slimeball floating in the toilet

[JTFrog]

61. (s)"He" is just a waitress that didn't ask for the publicity.

Hillary is the one that brought up her lunch in the speech. So she could relay to her supporters (as she told the waitress herself) what she thinks of Esterday who works three jobs and has two working teenagers and no health insurance. "I'm proud of you".

Maybe your candidate should have just skipped over her meeting this "slimeball floating in the toilet". It's not like she offered her any hope.

[Skip Intro]

14. man, she's workin' that fifteen minutes, isn't she?

[LoZoccolo]

16. I know. She deserves a root beer.

[frazzled]

18. The waitress can do what she wants ... but just remember

A failure to vote for the Democratic nominee (whoever it is) in the general election is a vote for Rudy or Mitt or whatever other nutjob the other side nominates. And them's the facts.

If that's what someone wants--another 4 to 8 years of Repubican decimation--then go ahead.

If you're going to vote against Hillary, do it in the primaries: it's only fair. But if the will of the people is that she is the nominee, then we all better get down and tally up all the good things about her. Because I will slit my wrists if another Republican is elected/selected or otherwise slithers into office again. Really, goodbye cruel world.

And we will have only ourselves to blame. Remember Florida 2000. And never forget.

[enough already]

66. I'm done with that argument

It means nothing to me anymore.

[ginchinchili]

19. My concern is that she'll lose and nothing will have been learned.

Many of Hillary's supporters will simply blame everyone who didn't vote for her rather than reevaluate the criteria they used to choose her in the first place. I personally think she makes a fine senator, but I think she's a very poor choice for the Democratic nominee for president in 2008.

[Josiah1982]

21. Puhhhhleeeze! Like she was really going to vote for hillary?

She is a liar and is probably working for the repugs, I don't believe this whole idiotic non-tip thing. Besides, I thought they are called gratuities for a reason. They are not mandatory, yet Hillary's people left a $!00 dollar tip? Esterday is YEsterday's news.

[MLFerrell]

24. "Besides, I thought they are called gratuities for a reason."

You've obviously never worked a job that depends on tips. It may be a "gratuity", but it's an essential portion of a waiter / bartender / delivery driver / etc.'s income. This waitress probably spent an hour or more tending to the needs of the Clin-ton camp, and got NOTHING for it. Had she been serving other customers, who likely would have left her tips, she would have earned more.

The biggest slap in the face has to be the knowledge that the persons who stiffed her are wealthier than she could ever hope to be.

Oh, and if you really think that a tip is "optional", try ordering pizza four weeks in a row and stiffing the driver every time. Then compare how long it took to get the first pizza compared to the last one.

[TwilightGardener]

32. Tips are reward for good service. They are not "owed". But of course, a campaign

would absolutely tip, and tip well, if it was smart. Hillary's camp DID tip, so this is still a non-story.

[MLFerrell]

45. "Tips are reward for good service. They are not "owed""

That mentality will get your food spit in every time. And rightly so.

[TwilightGardener]

46. Well, that's why the tip comes AFTER the service, and AFTER the meal. So I'm

not too worried about spit in my food. I'm very polite to servers. But tips are earned by good service, and if I get sucky service, the tip-o-meter goes down.

[MLFerrell]

48. As long as you DO tip service personnel.

People who don't tip are inconsiderate assholes.

[youthere]

71. Yes..fast food waitresses are known for their alliegance to the GOP.

:eyes:

[DURHAM D]

23. Ok - now she is nothing but a "performance artist".

and a bad one at that.

Give her the hook - done with her.

I guarantee you that everyone who works with her now hates her.

[LoZoccolo]

25. Maid-Rite is a fast food restaurant; you don't normally tip there.

There's a reason that the credit card machine doesn't print out receipts for tipping, and that's because they don't normally accept tips.

[Apollo11]

60. Thanks for this desperate attempt at defending Hillary!

First they gave us: "We left $100 to be split between everyone who was working that day"

Then it was: "Different people were sitting at different tables and left a whole bunch of tips""

After that, the Hillary Camapaign sent someone over to the restaurant with a $20 bill.

And now here is an Illinois Democrat telling us that it's not normal to tip at Maid-Rite !!

Sorry - but any restaurant where there are people waiting tables, you should leave a tip.

If you take up a waitress' time asking her about her life story - then you must leave a tip.

Especially if you want to use her story in your stump speech! B-)

[yardwork]

26. I really don't care what this waitress has to say about any of the candidates.

[TwilightGardener]

31. But you're supposed to, because she's one of the celebrated noble, common-sense

working-class sages who are wiser than the media pundit elites. At least that's the DU narrative.

[Lerkfish]

37. um, you're thinking media pundits are wise and sage, elite?

that would be the converse of what you're saying.

a pundit is just someone with an agenda who is given access to media that the normal citizen does not have.
That's not wisdom, that's propaganda

[TwilightGardener]

39. No, I'm just saying there's always a weird knee-jerk reaction to laud

the "wisdom of the common man"--when this lady bitched about the media attention (which she clearly loves) and said, "Don't you people have more important issues to talk about than tips?", everyone on DU fawned over her--"oh, she's so much wiser than our media and politicians!" Problem is, I'll bet she's just like all the other uninformed jerks I'm surrounded by--people I wouldn't take advice off of in a million years. But we're (mostly) populists here, so...gotta build up that myth of the wisecracking-but-sage waitress.

[yardwork]

79. To clarify, I'm not interested in publicity-seeking waitresses or talking heads.

If I had to place their value to me on a scale, I'd value the waitress's opinion above that of the talking heads, but that is a very low bar.

[Zuiderelle]

38. Nor do I.

[Basileus Basileon]

28. Malcontents have always existed, and always will.

[bread_and_roses]

34. I just love how some people here are trashing a waitress (not)

Ever think that maybe the encounter prompted her to read more than perhaps she would have otherwise done at this stage in the election cycle? After all, we're a year away from the election, and as anyone who has ever been a waitress knows, it's exhausting work that might not leave a person - especially one working at the low-wage end of the scale who probably has other stresses in her life - a lot of time to ponder the candidates a year away. And if she did read about Hillary, are there really those here who think that no one of integrity would come to the conclusion that s/he can't vote for Hillary? We see the same here everyday, and many of us hear it off-board every day from people we regard and respect.

As for publicity mongering, did she take herself down to some news station and pound on the door demanding to publicize her opinion, or did some news hound ask her? And if some reporter asks her, why should she not state her opinion - whatever it is?

And no, I didn't read the link, which I would normally do before posting. I am too appalled that a significant number here are so ready to blast away at a waitress who by happenstance encountered Hillary in her work and then had the audacity to form and express an opinion. I guess only highly-paid pundits have that right!

[Zodiak]

41. That's just the charming personality that certain Clinton supporters...

...display every single day on this board.

I honestly do not see how such behavior is supposed to gain Clinton supporters amongst DUers, but I am no strategist.

[tammywammy]

42. That's what I was thinking

It seems that she's been hounded, not exactly looking for all this attention.

This was also in the article:
"Sen. Clinton talked about you - following this incident - in some of her speeches about women earning minimum wage and you seemed upset about it.
To all the politicians, if you talk to somebody and maybe their life interests you, don't just go down the road then and use them as part of your speech to get votes. I was never even asked that day if I'm a Democrat or a Republican or whatever. I was never asked whom I was behind. And then to go down and be called up that night , was I angry about it? Yes I was. Don't get me wrong they called me a few days later to ask if they could use me in the speech. And they sent me a release form, but they were already using me. So what the hell, I signed it."


An incident like that, would make me think differently about a candidate, even if I didn't read more about them. It seems like she feels a little "used" by the Clinton camp.

[bread_and_roses]

35. I just love how some people here are trashing a waitress (not)

Ever think that maybe the encounter prompted her to read more than perhaps she would have otherwise done at this stage in the election cycle? After all, we're a year away from the election, and as anyone who has ever been a waitress knows, it's exhausting work that might not leave a person - especially one working at the low-wage end of the scale who probably has other stresses in her life - a lot of time to ponder the candidates a year away. And if she did read about Hillary, are there really those here who think that no one of integrity would come to the conclusion that s/he can't vote for Hillary? We see the same here everyday, and many of us hear it off-board every day from people we regard and respect.

As for publicity mongering, did she take herself down to some news station and pound on the door demanding to publicize her opinion, or did some news hound ask her? And if some reporter asks her, why should she not state her opinion - whatever it is?

And no, I didn't read the link, which I would normally do before posting. I am too appalled that a significant number here are so ready to blast away at a waitress who by happenstance encountered Hillary in her work and then had the audacity to form and express an opinion. I guess only highly-paid pundits have that right!

[BootinUp]

44. Is that the FAUX News commentator?

Screw her. lol.

[sofa king]

47. Then warm up the lube, 'cause the last 8 years was just the start.

I heard this same horse shit from Ralph Nader supporters in 2000. "I can't vote for Al Gore. There's no difference between Democrats and Republicans." And they didn't--far more than enough to swing the election for Gore in Florida alone.

Think I'm bullshitting you? Go take a visit you your nearest, newest wetland. Actually, though, take along your green fees or get a membership, because all the "new" wetlands are golf course water hazards.

You think Al Gore would have done that to you? Then there's a difference between the Democrats and the Republicans that just got shoved straight up your ass, along with ten thousand other crimes of the mind, heart, and letter and spirit of the law. You should know it all by heart now.

Here's a broadcast to all of you treehuggers and middle-of-the-roaders: the quality of your life, your future and your civil liberties is so much worse now than it was in 2000 that you will never have it as good as you did on January 19, 2001, if you bust your ass for the rest of your life trying to undo what has been done.

And for those doofuses in particular--the ones who handed our nation over in 2000 to the most criminal political party our country has ever seen--I will remind you that you have an obligation to bust your ass for the rest of your life trying--and failing--to undo what has been done to the rest of us.

For those of you now entertaining the possibility of keeping this government in the hands of those criminals because "you can't vote for Hillary," you've got your chance coming to you in the primaries, and you can bet your ass I'll be right with you on that.

But after that, your choice is simple: to condemn our nation to dictatorship, or to try to take that dictatorship away before it's consolidated. And if you choose the latter, you have to vote Democratic--even if it's Hillary.

You don't have to like it, but your children won't know well enough to forgive you if you don't do it.

[JeanGrey]

49. I don't have a single dem friend who will vote for her. Everyone

cannot stand her. I won't vote for her, I'm sorry. I'll write in if I have to.

[BigDDem]

68. Let me guess....

not a dime's worth of difference between Bush and Gore, right?

[JeanGrey]

80. No, it doesn't have anything to do with Gore! I'd give anything

if Gore would run, but I knew he wouldn't, and I think it has to do with the Clinton's. I simply am sick to death of Bush/Gore, Bush/Gore. Hillary is Bush lite in my book! Why the others won't is their own personal preference but let us say she isn't well loved among them. I am pretty sure only one of them will vote for her if she is the nom, but she told me last week she'd probably just not vote if that were the case. She loves Gore as I do and wishes he would've jumped in.

[ecstatic]

51. Esterday seems unstable... Her changing accounts, etc.

Like she's on some sort of drug.

[dionysus]

74. pathetic post

[Beacool]

55. Boy, am I sick to death of Iowa!!!!

With all due respect to those who live there, but why should I give a flying fig about who a rural state with no diversity whatsoever (92% white) thinks should win the presidency??? I'm from the Northeast and have as much in common with a waitress from Iowa as I do with an eskimo in Alaska. The woman has a right to her opinions, but in no way will it influence who I will vote for in this election. She should be more concerned to find out who stiffed her from her tip at the diner since the campaign insists that they left $100 tip and she claims not to have received a penny of it.

[mzmolly]

56. I don't support Hillary but saying we'll allow another PNAC-er control of the world

is outrageous IMHO.

[Lilith Velkor]

57. Good thing she's rich enough to scoff at a million dollars

For that amount, I'd definitely vote for Hillary.

[BenDavid]

58. Hey, you got a wife or sister or female relative that is

pregnant? Guess who helped stop the drive thru delivery of pregnant women in the 90s that became law? uh huh It was HRC.
Health insurance companies were herding women giving birth in and out of the hospital like it was a dive thru, and word came to the white house and the office of the First Lady and HRC looked into it and then worked with others and got a law passed that stopped this.

Anyone that says HRC will not be an advocate for women do not know of her background when it comes to women and children. Take a few minutes and get away from all the negative chit you read in this forum especially and do you a little research and maybe you still will not vote for HRC, but I bet you see her differently as an advocate for women and children.

Ben David

[Perry Logan]

62. I'll be there to thank you when Rudy nukes Iran.

[JTFrog]

63. Four words summed this up for me.

"I'm proud of you".

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

[LWolf]

64. She's not alone. n/t

[BigDDem]

67. Isn't her 15 minutes about up already?

Please decide! America is on pins and needles waiting for you to
make up your mind.

Geez Louise, who gives a shit who she votes for????

[saracat]

72. Because she represents working women and their vote will count.That is the sector Hill thought

was "locked up". And I find the smearing of the young working Mom digusting.She didn't ask to be dragged into this campaign.And mocking her is nasty.

[BigDDem]

73. Woops, I didnt get the memo that she was

representing working women. In that case, please, please, please vote for Hillary, she's really going to have a tough time with working women. Is she still complaining about the $100 tip she got?
That's like 1/4 of a haircut for John Edwards.

[saracat]

76. She is just a snapshot of what some working moms may think and I think HRC should pay attention but

that would require really caring what working moms think. And Hill's hairdo cost is $3500 so that makes John's haircut peanuts! All relative.And she says she didn't get a tip.

[TwilightGardener]

75. She represents no one but herself. And I for one want herself to go away.

[saracat]

77. Well, I am glad she spoke out.Silence clearly wasn't working ,neither was knuckling under..Good

for her.She doesn't officially represent anyonme but she is a snapshot of what some "working class' Moms may think, and we should be interested in what they say.

[BigDDem]

78. Clearly Hillary hates working women and waitresses

the Edwards campaign should take this "issue" and run with it!