<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>AW WebBiz &#38; Social Media Blog &#187; Obama</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.advancingwomen.com/wordpress/tag/obama/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.advancingwomen.com/wordpress</link>
	<description>Mentoring, Tools &#38; Strategy To Succeed</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 May 2013 21:42:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Lipstick on a Pig</title>
		<link>http://www.advancingwomen.com/wordpress/lipstick-on-a-pig/</link>
		<comments>http://www.advancingwomen.com/wordpress/lipstick-on-a-pig/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:00:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gretchen Glasscock</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Level The Playing Field In The Political Arena]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Biden]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[leveling the playing field for women in politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sarah Palin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexism in politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.advancingwomen.com/wordpress/?p=370</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lipstick on a Pig &#8211; The Corner on National Review Online. Well, to my question “does anybody really think Obama meant to call Sarah Palin a pig?” the answer appears to be “yes, about a gazillion and a half emailers do think so,” though another half a gazillion don’t. And the video without question looks [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OTM3NWY5YzQ0ZTNjYmMyZmY1MTU4MzdmNTU5Y2JmMWY=">Lipstick on a Pig &#8211; The Corner on National Review Online</a>.</p>
<p>Well, to my question “does anybody really think Obama meant to call Sarah Palin a pig?” the answer appears to be “yes, about a gazillion and a half emailers do think so,” though another half a gazillion don’t. And the video without question looks very very bad. The audience certainly seems to take him to refer to Palin. I think Obama’s choice of words was unbelievably stupid (as it so very often is when he’s not chained to a teleprompter), and I certainly think both he and Biden have completely lost their cool because of Palin and are getting hysterical—Biden’s ugly reference to Palin’s Down syndrome child and stem cell research today is one example. But did he set out to call Palin (or McCain) names? I think it’s a bad gaffe, not an attack. That’s bad enough, but the McCain folks themselves shouldn’t overreact. Let them melt down. <a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerkimball/2008/09/09/palin-rule-1-no-whining-give-the-pig-thing-a-rest/">Roger Kimball</a> has it right.</p>
<p><object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" width="425" height="344" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0">
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FPd4yk0x-eg&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FPd4yk0x-eg&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.advancingwomen.com/wordpress/lipstick-on-a-pig/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Electability: will Democrats nominate the electable presidential candidate in Denver?</title>
		<link>http://www.advancingwomen.com/wordpress/electability-will-democrats-nominate-the-electable-presidential-candidate-in-denver/</link>
		<comments>http://www.advancingwomen.com/wordpress/electability-will-democrats-nominate-the-electable-presidential-candidate-in-denver/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2008 15:04:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gretchen Glasscock</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Level The Playing Field In The Political Arena]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillary Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillary Clinton nomination at convention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[polls]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roll call vote at convention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Super Delegates]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.advancingwomen.com/wordpress/?p=143</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Ann Macnaughton Garry Mauro is Going to Denver to Vote For Hillary The only responsibility of the Super Delegates is to select the electable Democrat in Denver, and she is HRC. Democrats across the country will hold &#8216;super&#8217; delegates responsible for selecting the electable Democrat so that we get back to the White House. [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Ann Macnaughton</p>
<p><a href="http://alegrescorner.soapblox.net/showDiary.do?diaryId=490">Garry Mauro is Going to Denver to Vote For Hillary</a></p>
<p>The only responsibility of the Super Delegates is to select the electable Democrat in Denver, and she is HRC.</p>
<p>Democrats across the country will hold &#8216;super&#8217; delegates responsible for selecting the electable Democrat so that we get back to the White House.</p>
<p>Senator Obama did not &#8220;seal the deal&#8221; with voters in the primary and is not doing so now. The more voters learned about him, the more they voted for Senator Clinton. that is now happening again:</p>
<p>His core constituents use only cell phones, so the argument goes, so the polls are meaningless. Maye so. But those who do answer their phones are changing their minds in large numbers.</p>
<p>In the past few days, a raft of new polls have documented the depth and severity of voters&#8217; reactions to Obama as they get to know the &#8220;presumptive nominee&#8221; better.<br />
<em> Tracking Polls are released at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time each day.</em></p>
<p><em></em><br />
<a href="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll"> Daily Presidential Tracking Poll</a>: The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows Barack Obama attracting 45% of the vote while and John McCain earns 43%. When &#8220;leaners&#8221; are included, it&#8217;s Obama 47% and McCain 46%.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/numbers_in_mccain_obama_race_steady_but_getting_tighter">Numbers in McCain-Obama Race Steady &#8212; But Getting Tighter</a>: Sometimes in the day-to-day tracking of a Presidential race, it&#8217;s hard to separate statistical noise from larger trends.<br />
<a href="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/voters_trust_for_mccain_on_key_issues_growing"> Voters&#8217; Trust for McCain on Key Issues Growing</a>: John McCain is now trusted more than Barack Obama on nine out of 14 electoral issues tracked by Rasmussen Reports. The latest national telephone surveys find that McCain has the biggest advantage on the war in Iraq, by a 51% to 39% margin.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/46457.html"> Zogby</a> shows McCain ahead by 42-41%, a stunning reversal of a Zogby poll earlier in the month that had Obama ahead by 46-36%. Zogby noted that Obama&#8217;s collapse was swiftest and sharpest amongst voters he has always taken for granted, and<strong> especially voters aged 18-29 and women.</strong><strong></strong></p>
<p><strong></strong><br />
-Among voters aged 18-29, Obama lost 16 percent and McCain gained 20. Obama still leads, 49-38;</p>
<p>-Among women, McCain gained 10 percentage points. Obama now leads 43-38;</p>
<p>-Among independents, Obama lost an 11 point lead. They&#8217;re now tied;</p>
<p>-Among Democrats, Obama&#8217;s support dropped from 83 percent to 74 percent;</p>
<p>-Among Catholics, Obama lost the 11 point lead he had in July and now trails McCain by 15.<br />
The Rasmussen and Zogby polls come hot on the heels of the Gallup tracking poll that showed Obama&#8217;s support evaporating over the course of of last week, and the Gallup/USA Today poll last Monday that showed McCain ahead 46-43%.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/05/opinion/05brooks.html?_r=2&amp;partner=rssnyt&amp;emc=rss&amp;oref=login&amp;oref=slogin">Pundits</a> (click for NYT David Brooks &#8220;Where&#8217;s the Landslide&#8221;?) seem taken aback at how <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/08/mr_obama_welcome_to_the_nfl.html">quickly</a> the thinly experienced Senator Obama is <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alex-castellanos/the-molten-core-of-barack_b_116904.html">cratering</a>. They shouldn&#8217;t be. He gives the impression of being &#8220;willing to do anything to win,&#8221; and is turning off voters as he continues to betray constituents on almost every single signature issue of his campaign:<br />
<a href="http://londonamerican01.blogspot.com/2008/06/shameless.html"> campaign finance reform,</a><br />
<a href="http://londonamerican01.blogspot.com/2008/07/barack-obama-does-not-exist.html"> FISA, NAFTA, Iraq</a> ,<br />
<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/05/oil.barackobama"> offshore-drilling,</a> and<br />
<a href="http://alegrescorner.soapblox.net/showDiary.do?diaryId=490"> Garry Mauro is Going to Denver to Vote For Hillary</a><br />
&#8220;&#8230;I&#8217;m voting for Hillary Clinton. I went through a long process with a lot of the other Hillary Clinton Democrats. The Democratic National Convention is called the nominating convention. <strong>Since 1884, we have had a roll call vote for every presidential election since then.</strong> I expect to vote for Hillary Clinton for president, and then, I expect at the right time, when Barack Obama has the votes to be the nominee, I expect to vote for a motion to nominate him by acclimation&#8230;.<br />
&#8220;&#8230;I am suggesting that we have a process, and as much as television pundits and political experts want to decide who the nominee is, <strong>the national convention decides who the nominee is, and they decide it when they vote.</strong></p>
<p>The reporter tried to get Garry agree with him that Hillary&#8217;s supporters thinking she could win were &#8220;delusional&#8221; &#8211; Garry declined to do so, and continued&#8230;</p>
<p>&#8220;I think we ought to go through the process&#8230; if anybody thinks we ought not to put Hillary Clinton&#8217;s name in nomination and have a roll call vote, <strong>they&#8217;re going to have a problem</strong>. That&#8217;s what we&#8217;ve been doing since 1884. We have a roll call vote. We think Barack Obama has the votes to win; we are ready to support him, <strong>but let&#8217;s have a roll call vote</strong>.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8211;<br />
Ann L. MacNaughton</p>
<p>&#8220;Always aim high, work hard, and care deeply about what you believe in. When you stumble, keep faith. When you&#8217;re knocked down, get right back up. And never listen to anyone who says you can&#8217;t or shouldn&#8217;t go on.&#8221; Hillary Clinton</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.advancingwomen.com/wordpress/electability-will-democrats-nominate-the-electable-presidential-candidate-in-denver/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>