What About Sexism and Racism in the Mainstream Blog Sphere?

Taylor Marsh has a good show, and occasionally, she is right about the impressions a campaign can make. She's from the entertainment business, so she has a sharp eye about what the populace's lenses may be.

I disagree with Taylor's commentaries when she shouts sexism and racism where it is not warranted. She is correct sometimes, but I think she stretches it a bit far at other times. She's had her share of discrimination, but one cannot call "wolf" each time someone of an opposite gender and race is critical of Clinton, of her, or her guests that favor Clinton in their comments.

I am very progressive but do not look for every ceiling to be necessarily glass either. One looks for ways to break the barriers. My observation is that Taylor thinks it is OK for Hillary to have Bill break the upper floor windows for all to see (Hillary already broke glass ceilings). And he has done it well, since he continues to have questionable "Dream Merchants" and "Carpetbaggers"in both negative and positive ways to solicit his advice and channel money into his wife's campaign coffers. Just read Harold Robbins, who had been gone 10 years this month, but a novelist who understood these transactions and why.

To me it is not OK.

As a woman, I've never had a man to promote me based on connections to my spouse, nor would I welcome those. Yes, basically, I can say in job interviews (which I've not needed for 6 years, but do an evaluation for peer reviews) I learned from mistakes and worked on my own to be a better manager and stepping into leadership, not just control the message which is all I see Hillary has learned. To her, that is all it is because of what happened to Bill and the 1998 scandal got out of hand.

I've not had name recognition based on my spouse either.

Either Clinton takes the aggressive route and claim credit for all what she did with Bill (which if NAFTA, horrible welfare reform, telecommunications act or not getting Bin Laden count) are accomplishments... or she runs strictly on her records outside First Lady roles in Ark and WH, and instead on her senate/her own activist (since 2001) records to run on.

So my vote for someone else not Hillary is laid out here. Name recognition is great, but status-quo is not.