This bullshit is going on because Hillary Clinton is the perceived Democratic front runner.

When Barack Obama started getting attention from the media, it was “Is he black enough?”

Seems like that question has run its course.

What’s more acceptable, not being black enough or not being woman enough?

No, wait. He’d be a politician. He’d be saying, “Look, everyone is piling up on me. They know that I’m the one to beat, and they can’t do that.”

But if you happen to mention the truth, and the truth involves people piling on against a female candidate, then she must be playing the gender card…. because she’s female.

This is what’s so aggravating! If Edwards or Obama had been ganged up on like that, they’d be complaining about it too. Anybody would. But oh no, Hillary isn’t allowed to complain about the same things anyone else would be, because she’s a woman and if she complains, a) she’s showing that she’s too weak and whiny to lead, and b) playing the gender card. Kate Michaelman isn’t the only woman who’s out there throwing these “victim card” cliches around, the blogosphere is full of them saying things like “which is it, is she strong enough to lead” and if they think that’s an effective tactic to stop the backlash among even women who don’t particularly like Hillary but really don’t like this sexist narrative, yeah good luck with that.

Hillary’s debate performance was awful and her people are changing the subject.

I don’t know if Hillary’s performance was awful, but I do know that Russert is a horrible moderator, and as far as I’m concerned all of this continuing nonsense by Edwards is just giving legitimacy to his stupid right-wing frames. Russert set stupid traps, do we really need more attention on whether or not any of the candidates fell into them? Let’s let him pick our issues for us and frame the entire general election around that, it’s definitely in our long term interests.

When Barack Obama started getting attention from the media, it was “Is he black enough?”

Seems like that question has run its course.

The MSM: “Damn, we’re lazy!”

But she handled that incident much in the same way she handled the recent debate pileon, by making a wry comment on it before an audience of women:

Most pointedly, however, Mrs. Clinton exploited an opportunity before a friendly audience of women to make a concerted attack on Mr. Lazio’s debate tactics. Many supporters of Mrs. Clinton said they found Mr. Lazio to be pushy and disrespectful during the debate in Buffalo — bullying her in a way that he would not have bullied a male opponent.

Mrs. Clinton’s senior advisers have seized on that notion to blunt favorable portrayals of Mr. Lazio as strong-willed and determined, and Mrs. Clinton joined the effort yesterday. Expanding on a comment she made the morning after the debate, Mrs. Clinton received knowing chuckles and applause when she said having two younger brothers was the best preparation for her sometimes bruising encounter with Mr. Lazio.

Then she complained of having to share her lectern with an overly aggressive Mr. Lazio. (He approached her at the end of the debate and urged her to sign a document he said was a promise not to raise or spend any more soft money.) She recalled an old law school maxim that lawyers without the law or facts behind them usually ”pound on the table” as a distraction.

”There is a big difference between raising your voice and raising up the quality of education in our schools,” Mrs. Clinton said. ”There is a big difference between pointing your finger and reaching out your hand to improve the quality of life for the people who need health and good jobs.”

Lazio tried to portray himself as strong, which the ladies appreciate:

Mr. Lazio said women were being sold short by suggestions that they would not vote for him because he gave Mrs. Clinton a tough debate.

”It’s probably not respecting the judgment of women in New York,” he said. ”Women in New York know that they need to have somebody who’s going to be a strong advocate for them in the Senate, somebody that will be there for them. You got to be able to not just talk about things, but actually get the job done.”

People are going to come to the conclusion that she’s playing the gender card no matter what she does, and no matter that the Dems have for quite some time been trying to outplay the Republicans at the swaggeringly macho anxious male game.

AFSCME president Gerald McEntee said, “Six guys against Hillary. I’d call that a fair fight. This is one strong woman.”

The Hillary campaign put out the Politics of Pile On video.

Hillary never said that the other candidates were picking on her because she is a woman. Her campaign and supporters are making that implication.

So if 6 Republicans all piled on Giulliani during a debate, and he put out a video about it, he’d be playing the gender-card, right? He’s be saying, “Look, I’m a tough MAN!”

No, wait. He’d be a politician. He’d be saying, “Look, everyone is piling up on me. They know that I’m the one to beat, and they can’t do that.”

But if you happen to mention the truth, and the truth involves people piling on against a female candidate, then she must be playing the gender card…. because she’s female.

Michelman is working for Edwards, FYI.

It’s all about fighting for your candidate now and it’s getting ugly.

Many big media players back Obama and they are passionate for him. They won’t go down without a fight.

Edwards has always been a media darling.

The media is pushing the “gender card” spin both to generate drama and excitement in what would otherwise be a clearcut race- generating “news” and controversy, or they are trying push their individual favorites.

If that’s all they’ve got on her, good luck to them.

I agree the “gender card” expression is a conservative talking point and any Democrat who cares about women’s rights should drop the term. It is offensive.

Michelman is working for Edwards, FYI.

That explains it.

Ya can’t trust those people.

Clinton pollster Mark Penn:

The criticisms followed Penn’s assertion that Clinton was “unflappable.” He also said criticisms from Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) would backfire and that he was already “detecting some backlash,” particularly among female voters.

Those female voters are saying, “Sen. Clinton needs our support now more than ever if we’re going to see this six-on-one to try to bring her down,” Penn told those on the campaign call.

AFSCME president Gerald McEntee said, “Six guys against Hillary. I’d call that a fair fight. This is one strong woman.”

The Hillary campaign put out the Politics of Pile On video.

Hillary never said that the other candidates were picking on her because she is a woman. Her campaign and supporters are making that implication. Either Hillary is clueless about what her campaign is doing or she is staying above the fray. This is smart political strategy. Hillary’s debate performance was awful and her people are changing the subject.

Jill, I have the utmost respect for you and consider you a pal. You’re going to be a progressive/feminist star for years to come. Take a look at this from a strategical standpoint. Her people are in the business of winning. They won two presidential elections by being aggressive. The last thing they want is for voters to focus on is her lack of policy substance.

Personally, I don’t see anything wrong with the Clinton campaign using the fact that she is a woman for political gain. The campaign is out to win. Not make the other candidates happy. Obama is running a shitty campaign and Edwards (whom I like) is fading. Iwish more people were talking about Christopher Dodd.