Tag Archives: hillary

Hillary Clinton Secretary of Ulterior Motives

Since the news came through that Hillary Clinton might be under consideration for the Obama administration’s secretary of state appointment, the news pundits have had a field day coming up with their reasons behind the choice. Most want to find ulterior motives for it. “He wants her out of the Senate so she won’t be able to give him problems with health care.” “Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.” “He wants to keep her from running in 2012.”


But what if he just thinks that she is the best person for the post? What if Obama is simply able to put the primaries behind him and move forward with the job we gave him? I have to say that Hillary in that post didn’t seem like the most obvious to me when I first heard it. What about Sec. of Health and Human Services? What is the experience she brings to the table? But then Kissinger came out and said:

“I believe it would be an outstanding appointment. If it is true, it shows a number of things, including great courage on the part of the President-Elect. To appoint a very strong personality into a prominent cabinet position requires a great deal of courage.”

She knows a wide variety of world leaders and it is clear that the world would be happy with her in the role. I think that Obama would want a strong independent thinker in the role, not someone who would be ruled by the vice president’s office, remember Condi. That Hillary and Obama have not agreed on every policy is not a negative. He is notable for wanting a variety of opinions around him. His mind thrives on synthesizing ideas, taking the best from may voices. Strong people like Hillary would be sure to give that intellect a good work out.

This is the best Hillary could hope for in my opinion, because despite being one of her early supporters, I know that there is still so much hatred of her here in America from both the left and the right, women and men, black and white. Fox News was, as expected, bashing her from the moment she took the stage. And NY Times Columnist Maureen Dowd never missed an opportunity to bash “The Clintons” during the whole cycle. I don’t think Hillary could win the American presidency, not because of the supposed sexism that derailed her; I think that there are people of every persuasion who hated her when she was in the White House with Bill for whatever reason, who would never have voted for her for president, and who will continue to distrust her and Bill until the end of time. Fortunately, if she becomes Secretary of State, those people are all in the US and her job will be in the world at large where they like her and respect her husband. So it is in the end the best of both worlds for her — huge responsibility and respect. And good for all of us, too.

The fly in the ointment may be Bill. Will his many international business and philanthropic dealings become a conflict of interest if Hillary takes the office? If he makes a speech that voices an opinion that runs counter to the new administration’s policy, is the family association enough to say that Hillary must address it. Putting a muzzle on Bill and expecting him to pull back on his agenda might be the only thing to derail this appointment.

This is the first time in history this has come up and I find it fascinating. Talk about sexism or gender politics! This could easily become the most interesting he said/she said ever.


Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Female Chauvinism is not Feminism. It’s Antifeminism.

Once the ridiculous spin and lies of the election are put to rest and after the dust settles, the women of America have a lot of explaining to do. The first things we need do is redefine what feminism is. Falling in lock step behind a woman who is unqualified for the office she seeks is not being a feminist. It is just female chauvinism. And it is an insult to women everywhere to equate questioning a woman’s fitness for a job because of her lack of qualifications with being a sexist.

During this election, there have been so many distortions of what Sarah Palin’s nomination meant in terms of women and feminism. There was this preposterous idea floated by the Republicans that being like a frontierswoman is somehow the same as being a feminist. But the basis of feminism is not being like a man, it is being for women and the issues that make our lives better. Frontierwomen accepted that they could not own land, could not compete on a level field with the men around them, were second class citizens. Sure they were tough, but that is not feminism.

And the way that women on the right were falling in behind Palin and that it was being portrayed as anything akin to women’s rights or feminism was disconcerting and dishonest. There have been women in high places before, but as a British woman who I interviewed years ago noted, when asked about Margaret Thatcher and what she did for women,” There are two kinds of women who make it to the top of the ladder. One of them reaches down and helps the next woman up. The other looks down and pulls up the ladder.” If you are going to call yourself a champion of women’s rights (as Palin did apparently) you need to actually put women’s rights and issues on your agenda. Just saying it doesn’t make it so.

Today at the polls, there were women who were voting for McCain just because of Palin. “I just love her,” one of the women said, actually suggesting that if she could split her presidential ticket she would vote Obama/Palin. What is it about her that appeals to these women? Can it simply be that they see their fantasy in her? A tough mom who rises to the top like in a fairy tale. As if by magic. No need for any knowledge base, education, depth, curiosity, or understanding of the office necessary. Sure she’s pretty and folksy, but do they really think she would be a good president? I don’t think these women would actually ever claim that they are feminists. It was probably just something projected onto them by the McCain machine hoping to grab a few disgruntled Hillary backers. In fact, feminism is probably somewhere near liberalism in their world.

Post Hillary and Sarah, we need to get back to the job for women’s rights. I think a lot of things have been trivialized during this election. Cries of sexism when none was there, then ignoring the objectivization by the Republican party of their own candidate, an election devoid of any discussion of women’s issues. We have lots of work to do to get the feminist movement moving again and maybe it is a different direction, but we have plenty of things to talk about now.

1 Comment

Filed under Politics

Smart Women No Vote

Today I chatted with a friend to whom I have been sending various and sundry political articles for the past few months assuming that she was as much for Obama as I, and was entirely shocked to hear, “I think the man is a sexist racist ass.” She is the second Hillary supporter I know who has this antipathy toward him. My first instinct was to feel totally adrift; how could someone who I see as an astute, thoughtful woman see the same person as such a horrible man? Why?

Based on the way he treated Clinton … saw that with my own eyes during the debates … the language he allowed his supporters to leave on his website … “bros before hos” …… allowing all of his followers Clyburn and others to brand Bill and Hillary Clinton racists …. the list can go on and on and on. No one is allowed to say anything negative about Obama ….

I reminded her that people say all kinds of things that are negative about Obama. Bill and Hillary said all kinds of negative things and now they are saying all kinds of positive things. In fact, I was totally for Hillary in the primaries, but when she lost, she and I both moved on to what we thought was the best candidate. “Do you think he won’t be a good president?” I asked her.

I have no idea if he will be a good president. What past job experience do I have to judge him by? Can’t really see anything he has ever done. I don’t think McCain would be a good president either.

She is taking her answers from the Hillary and McCain playbooks. In terms of experience, many would say that Obama is pretty much equivalent to Hillary. Time wise, no one can beat McCain, but I don’t think that years served beats soundness of judgment or ability to lead. I asked if she would be voting.

There is no one to vote for in my opinion.

At this point I was so totally depressed. Because she is someone whose opinion I value and because I know that there is nothing I can say that will make her feel otherwise.

I’m used to being the only non-Obamaphile around. I know he will be elected. Once in office I hope some of the crap will stop and things will normalize.

I just don’t understand the hatred. I’ve seen this from Republicans, but what explains it from Democrats? I know we don’t need to be in lock step together just because he is the candidate. It is sad that things turned so personal in the primaries, but Obama’s policy positions and Hillary’s are so similar, and so they had to differentiate themselves from one another and turned to the negative. But after a slug fest, can’t the competitors agree that it was a good match and move on? I think Obama and Hillary did, but many of the Hillary followers could not accept it. For many, it is not about policy, or anything Obama is saying now; this is personal. Hillary represented them, and anything that was said against her was taken as an affront to them.

I know there is a lot of sexism in the world. It exists and there is nothing that can be done about it. I always thought the members of the Democratic Party or the leaders of it at least were above it. To see how strong it is in the Party was really heartbreaking. I have struggled with this. I felt like I was getting a divorce. You know Obama gave a very eloquent speech on racism in America. What would it cost him to give one on sexism? Forget his brushing Hillary off his shoulders on a televised debate, but why not since he is just waiting on a coronation, not address his young “followers” about all of the horrible Sarah Palin blow up fuck dolls and cunt t shirts and video porn movies they are making and ask them to stop? If he is a leader, why doesn’t he lead on this topic? ….. Why is a Democrat letting this happen? I just feel as if decades of feminist advances disappeared and it was open season on women.

I guess I just don’t see all this blatant sexism from Obama followers. The places I have seen it most are McCain supporters talking online about how hot Palin is. She is definitely unqualified to be president and she’s a joke every time she opens her mouth. There is nothing sexist in stating that. The Republicans have been sexist from day one in dressing her up in designer clothes and giving her the “hockey mom” speeches. She is just a trophy VP for McCain that has totally backfired. She is herself as anti-feminist as I can imagine and joined a ticket that has voted against women at every turn. I cannot blame Obama for that.

You know every one of the candidates are in designer clothes. Obama is wearing Hugo Boss suits, etc etc. If you don’t see the difference in how Clinton and Palin have been treated then I can’t point them out to you. I only blame Obama for the tone of his campaign and for how his operators manipulated that tone. It started against Clinton and it has free reign against Palin. (This would be the same if Palin registered A+ on the East Coast Feminist Behavior Scale)

The Democratic Party did not take Obama out and spend $150,000 of donors’ money to dress him or give him a $11,000 per week stylist. And as for it being sexist to bring it up, it was huge news when John Edwards had a couple of $400 haircuts. If Palin had any substance the GOP would not feel the need to be doing this. I am not sure how you connect this to Hillary at all. Only Palin who is an idiot and an insult to anyone who calls herself a feminist.

Linking Palin and Hillary is in itself sexist to me. Frankly, I don’t think that it would be the same if Palin were a qualified candidate. So much of what is being said about her is about her lack of information or intellectual curiosity about subjects she would have to be knowledgeable about if she were to be elected. I really don’t see a lot of sexism coming from the left, just intense fear of this aggressively ignorant candidate. Much like Dan Quayle who it now seems was eminently more qualified.

Bottom line, my point is Obama is unqualified to be president. McCain would be a horrible president. Biden is a drunk. Palin, well no. So, there are no good choices. I think we are well and truly fucked.

I know it is childish, but I told my dear friend not to ever talk to me about politics again. We see things too differently. My heart was beating too fast and my stomach was churning. I was ready to cry. I just realized what my gentile friends felt like when they found out there was no Santa Claus.

Do we see politics too differently or do we see this election too differently?

I don’t know at this point how to separate the two.

That’s why I’m looking forward to this whole election being over.

November 4th is not the end. Will all her anger just magically disappear on November 5th?

I’m just tired of all the hyped up crap. It will be refreshing to not have All Obama All the Time. He is a slick politician who managed to run an end game around a substantive public servant. Let’s hope I am going to be completely surprised. His presidency will not be one of a “cult of personality” but will instead be brilliant and will restore respect to an office sorely abused by a petty nasty horrible tyrant who inflicted horror and pain on this world. It will be a relief to have the media stop the Obama blitz.

I know I was right to suggest we never speak about this again. The slick politician vs the substantive public servant? I have so much to say, but no way to say it that won’t come out sounding like “you’re an idiot.” How can we see the same two people and see it so differently? As I said, I supported Hillary. I still hope she has a place either as the long-time Senior Senator from NY and maybe as a presidential candidate later or, should Obama find a place for her in the cabinet, she’d be great there, too. I see them both as exceptional people. But to see this as so black and white, good and evil, sexist and feminist, baffles and saddens me.

1 Comment

Filed under Politics