The history of the USA is littered with victims; people who have been victimized for one reason or another, from some time period to another. Amongst these groups you could find Native Indians; indentured servants, negroes and other slaves; some ethnic minorities; African Americans in the post-civil war era (especially males); members of a few nationalistic groups - which in the short term suffered discrimination, scorn and the like; and American women in general-women of all races, ethnicities, nationalities and religions.

The one group that will find it difficult to make a comprehensive case for victimization here, is Caucasian males; and despite there being a few individuals from this group, who may be successful in making such a case; for the most part: white males have overwhelmingly run the show since the pilgrims first landed at Plymouth Rock. They have always held power in their hands; power that dominated the social, economic, political, religious, military and other institutions of the country; power that has dominated the every fabric of what is called: “Americana”.

This is the objective reality that many white males love to try to deny. They shouldn’t; since most of the demands coming from alternate quarters have been for power-sharing, not for obliteration; there is a difference. They are somewhat lucky in this regard; given some of the shit they have done to others: non-white male. I don’t hear any opposing group in the USA, looking for revenge- in this world where grievances could last for a millennium or beyond. That is fascinating folks; truly.

The problem with male white-power in US society has been the painful reality left for others: that this power has been abused at times; and in so doing been abusive to many. Even white women have felt the abuse. So it was not surprising to many a student of history, that in 1966, the National Organization for Women (NOW) was formed. Its main mission was to advocate for equality. That was a good day for women all over the world- given America’s universal influence on most things.

NOW has taken on many issues salient to females in the USA (and in the larger world), with varied success. The Equal Rights Amendment to the US Constitution was a battle they fought and lost – during the seventies and eighties of the last century. They have been fighting for equal pay for equal work (as men) for some time now; but women still make less than eighty cents to every dollar a man makes in the workplace. Hopefully one day - in the not too distant future- that will even out, and we will get pay-equity in all areas of the economy. It’s an objective that’s long overdue.

NOW also fights very hard to promote and protect abortion rights for women; they have spun the argument as a matter of “freedom of choice”. In this regard: some agree and some disagree; both males and females. This is one issue that won’t go away; and for obvious reasons too lengthy to list here.

Look; NOW is a fine organization: no doubt. But like many organizations they too get stuck in their own world sometimes; stuck in their subjectivity; mired in the narcissism of single-issue politics. This position is no different to that taken by some groups of blacks and Hispanics (Latinos/Latinas); some gay organizations; some Jewish groups; some right-wing groups; some nationalistic groups, and others of the like. Whenever objectivity jumps out the window, close-minded individuals are elevated to autocracy; in this case I am suggesting that NOW has given us a peek at their real agenda. This agenda isn’t just about building an equal footing for women in this male-dominated world, it might just be about replacing white men as oppressors of near everyone else, whenever it is convenient, or whenever there is opposition to the core positions that NOW will take.

Earlier this week Senator Ted Kennedy came out and endorsed Barack Obama for POTUS (President of the United States). It was a big thing. Senator Kennedy- like every other US citizen- has the right to endorse, vote for, support, contribute to, fund raise for, advocate for, canvass for and even proselytize for, any candidate they choose; no matter what the reason; no matter how faulty the logic behind said support; regardless of the rationale for said endorsement/support. The National Organization of Women viciously attacked the senator for not supporting Hillary Clinton instead of Obama; they said that it was a double-cross. They even went further, but I won’t rehash all the things they said in that communique; all in all it was stupid, mean, petty and vicious.

This mean-spirited attack caught many by surprise, given the many years of service Teddy Kennedy (TK) has contributed to progressive causes; given that TK has been a vociferous defender of NOW’s pet issue: abortion rights. He has backed women’s issues to the hilt, time and time again in Congress. TK has been the most consistent defender of liberal positions on the political spectrum. He has been doing this for over forty years. The National Organization for Women (NOW) owes TK a formal and very public apology; right now.

Ted Kennedy exercised what is known as: freedom of choice; election style. NOW fights for what is known as freedom of choice: abortion style. They advocate for a woman’s right to be free to choose abortions over taking pregnancies to full term; thus their attack on Senator Kennedy for his Obama endorsement: smacks of a double standard. It also reeks of genderism. What would they have said if TK was a black man; that the endorsement was solely race-driven? The implications behind their attack are pregnant with possible interpretations; mostly negative ones. Was their endorsement of Hillary Clinton totally gender-driven? It sure appears so to many (male and female).

Hillary blatantly plays the “woman” card at every opportunity, but NOW has refused to denounce this. Hillary and her supporters have been mailing to women at a clip umpteen times higher than her mailing to men; running a campaign with deliberate “female” overtones; and it isn’t even discussed in mainstream media. If Barack Obama attempted to play up his mixed race- beyond what is perceptibly allowable by the gatekeepers of media- you would see an uproar way beyond what your imagination could conceptualize. And that’s the gorilla that I have written about a few times already; very few took me seriously when I first probed this; just as they didn’t take me seriously when I said Barack Obama could win it all; over a year ago.

In state after state, Billary and their supporters have obfuscated Obama’s position on abortion. They have done this deliberately, in order to deviously paint him as anti-abortion, and thus anti-choice. They know that this is blatantly false, and yet they do it over and again. NOW has conveniently stayed quiet on this issue.

In state after state Billary’s machines have distorted Obama’s true religion; lied about his allegiance to the American flag; sent out vicious e-mails with lies, innuendo and racial undertones; smeared him at every opportunity (even using big time political heavyweights in this regard); and NOW has stayed awfully quiet whilst all this was going on. Then Caroline Kennedy endorses Barack with a beautiful op-ed piece in the New York Times newspaper, and suddenly a stirring occurs. Later, when Senator Ted Kennedy and his son congressman Patrick Kennedy come out to join Caroline, each with his own personal endorsement: NOW suddenly finds a voice. Gimme a break!

Look; NOW has a bigger problem on their hands; one they won’t face up to: justifying their closed endorsement of Hillary Clinton. For a feminist organization to endorse Hillary-a woman who must have accepted her betraying husband’s repeated violation of their marriage vows, and who has allowed him to trample over her like she was a doormat- doesn’t equate with the message this organization has been trying to send to women for the past 42 years. It’s contradictory. You truly couldn’t want women to be high achievers, strong individuals, equal, fair, just and independent, when you make an endorsement as this one. I say this because the only thing you have endorsed, is the position that women should always vote for a woman whenever possible; that’s all.

NOW has displayed their hypocrisy with this Hillary Clinton endorsement; they are saying one thing in terms of their philosophy, but saying another in terms of this endorsement. Bill Clinton has hurt too many women with his doggy- like behavior; and Hillary has been an enabler. He has treated women like sex-objects. His satyristic outbursts have caused lots of pain to many women. This shouldn’t be rewarded by an organization like this.

NOW has endorsed a woman-who despite being exceptionally bright- got to where she is today, not on her own volition, but because of an unhealthy relationship with her husband: the former president of this country. She earned all this because of her loyalty, forgiveness, devotion, ruthless ambition and insensitivity. That insensitivity has been directed to fellow females with whom she should have shown more solidarity. That is ruthless; there is no excuse for this Lady Macbeth-like ambition; “ambition should be made of less sterner stuff”. This is scary stuff folks; very scary.

Hillary has never shown any compassion towards a young girl (Monica Lewinsky), whose first and last names are now synonymous with a sex act; and all because of her husband’s bad behavior. It is also because of Hillary’s own hubris, since it is said that the Paula Jones debacle could have been settled out of court, but that Hillary was instrumental in the non-settlement. If that case was settled out of court, then Monica Lewinsky could have been spared the embarrassment of having to see her youthful indiscretions publicly on display in such an international setting.

NOW has never shown the compassion towards this young impressionable intern (Lewinsky), that she deserved from an organization like this. When Monica needed comfort and kinship, NOW was missing in action. There are many fathers out there, who will tell you straight, that if Bill Clinton had destroyed their daughter’s honor like this: they would still be hunting him down “Tony Soprano” style. Too many people in this country refuse to explore what really happened to this young woman; too many people insist to this day, that this should be casually dismissed as some private adulterous affair- best left up to the privacy of forgiving parties. It is not that simple; but I don’t want to explore the intricacies in this column.

The media frenzy and overbearing publicity that swirled around what happened between Bill and Monica has led to a rise in the number of kids being caught performing oral sex in elementary and high schools; and in places such as hallways, classrooms and bathrooms. It has also led to a rise in STDs amongst youngsters over the past dozen years; if you don’t believe me, than ask Doctor Phil. If taken further to a logical conclusion, all this has possibly affected the rise in HIV-infections amongst teenagers in certain parts of this country.

There is a double standard in existence when organizations like NOW, plus “big- name” individual feminists, consistently articulate and write, that women should not be viewed as, or treated as, or valued as, or looked at as sex objects, but then allow Billary’s behavior to go unpunished. At least Rosie O’Donnell -an unabashed feminist if there ever was one- had the guts to publicly call out the Clintons on this one. For whatever it is worth, Ms. O’Donnell won my respect with that call. Hillary Clinton is no role-model for feminism.

And let’s look at another aspect of her campaign: Bill Clinton’s behavior. Is this the example you want to set for aspiring feminists? Will it be that every time you are confronted with a ticklish situation, you will trot out your hubby as some knight in shining armor? Pleaseeeeeeeee! Are you going to have your husband become your hit man every time a male (like Barack) throws a shot up sides your head? Will a man always come to your aid and comfort while you run around as feminism-incarnate?

And what will your husband be doing while you are busy as president? If the past is the best indicator of potential behavior, this question will be disturbing to many a parent. If you can’t keep your hubby in check during the campaign, then how will you keep him corralled while in office? Where are the answers to all this?

Look, I don’t want to rehash all the many troubling allegations from the Bill Clinton presidential era; we all know them. The list is long and wide. The claims are in some cases hideous, odious, troubling, outlandish and even horrific. Do we really want to possibly go back down these streets? I know many many people who tell me: no. I concur. We need to go forward not backwards; Billary is the past; Barack Obama is the future. It is that simple. Ted, Patrick and Caroline Kennedy know this; that’s why they endorsed Obama and not Hillary Clinton. This isn’t rocket-science folks. It isn’t.

The National Organization for Women had an opportunity to endorse a brilliant and impressive married man named Barack Obama; a man who is a role model for what real men should be: (1) loving and protective fathers, (2) loyal husbands, (3) devoted family men, (4) concerned and caring citizens, and (5) intellectually developed men with social consciences. They didn’t endorse him, but preferred instead to signal women all over the world, that a couple (Billary) with a publicly dysfunctional marriage should be rewarded with another stint in the White house; this is sad; real sad; especially when women have taken so much crap from men, because too many of them lacked strength, morality, integrity, discipline and character. Too many of our social ills can be traced right back to the “missing father syndrome”, and to the heavy toll that divorce extracts from our society. The executive officers of NOW should be ashamed of themselves for endorsing Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama, since it directly conflicts with their ideals, hopes, values and aspirations.

NOW missed the point, and in so doing they also missed the boat; and with that boat came a tremendous opportunity to make an endorsement that transcended race, ethnicity, religion, nationality or gender. They embarrassed themselves with this endorsement and also with their subsequent attack on Ted Kennedy. When the primary is over and Barack Obama becomes the Dems nominee; NOW will get another opportunity to do this thing right: I hope they do the right thing next time around. After super-Tuesday it will be clear that they made the wrong choice, and also that they are out of step with a significant portion of their membership.

Stay tuned-in folks: the best is yet to come.