From the head of NOW in New York, Maria Pappas:

This latest move by Kennedy, is so telling about the status of and respect for women’s rights, women’s voices, women’s equality, women’s authority and our ability – indeed, our obligation - to promote and earn and deserve and elect, unabashedly, a President that is the first woman after centuries of men who ‘know what’s best for us'

This latest move she refers to was simply Ted Kennedy endorsing Barack Obama.  So, if you don't endorse the woman, then your oppressing her?  Does that mean endorsing Hillary Clinton is somehow racist because it's not endorsing Obama?  The whole point of feminism, as I understood it, was to insure that society treats women as equals to men (and rightfully so).  Supporting a woman for office purely because she's a woman seem rather the opposite of that. 

I think that, realistically, a white woman faces more difficulty than a black man in becoming President because the sexism in our culture is pretty well embedded and rarely discussed.  You can describe a woman as being shrill or bitchy and not get called a sexist, but it'd be hard to make similar types of attacks on a black man without getting your ass handed to you by the media.  So I definitely understand that she's at a disadvantage in that regard.  But I don't think that we should feel compelled to hand her the presidency as some kind of affirmative action against centuries of white male dominance. 

Equality means being judged equally.  I judge them on their records, on their statements, and on their actions.  From that I decided Obama is the best candidate.  Not because he's a man, or black, but because he seems to be somebody who can genuinely make some progress in Washington.  I don't like Hillary.  Not because she's a chick, but because she does dirty back handed crap that reminds me of Karl Rove.  I just don't see her getting beyond the zero sum game of partisan politics that has so plagued us since the early 90's.