This may come as a surprise to you, but there are women out there — smart, accomplished women (just ask ’em; they’ve got a Web site and everything) — who believe that the issue of "Sexism Went Unchallenged During Hillary Campaign."
Who knew? It seemed to me that it kept coming up whether it was relevant or not. But that’s just me, and obviously I’m not qualified to judge (just ask these women, they’ll tell you). I don’t know whether anyone voted against Hillary Clinton because she was a woman. However, I’ve become convinced by pieces such as this one that there are people out there (generally of the female persuasion) who voted for her because she’s a woman, so maybe that means the opposite is also true…
I sort of thought — as, apparently, does Kathleen Parker, who as near as I can tell is a woman, and therefore entitled to speak on the subject — that Hillary Clinton isn’t getting the nomination because she’s Hillary Clinton, not because she is a woman in the generic sense. Ironically, and let’s just call this a mystery, she also got as far as she did because she is Hillary Clinton. There seems to be a sort of dynamic equilibrium in being Hillary Clinton — you’re guaranteed to go far, but not beyond a certain point.
But never mind me. Read this exchange in which Lesley Stahl welcomes Cynthia McFadden to "our lineup of wise women." Lesley and Cynthia chat about the previously unchallenged issue of sexism as it applies to Hillary, and then go on to empathize with each other about the ways in which they have been victimized by misogyny, and all sorts of stuff I couldn’t possibly understand, being only a guy.
And now, while these ladies discuss such things as whether the media has called sufficient attention to how male candidates look in trousers, I’m just going to tiptoe out of the room, hoping my exit isn’t noticed, and see if there’s any more beer in the fridge…
Related Posts
Hillary can’t win because she has a track record, and it is slimy.
The Democrat leaders want an empty suit, a front man with no history, no accomplishments, who says nothing of substance.
They pulled this off with Wilson, Truman, Carter and Bill Clinton.
Ok, this is just ridiculous. Yet another article about the person who has lost the nomination. Why? It’s time to move on. With the incredible hutzpah of John McCain’s hiring of Phil Gramm to shore up his economic creditials don’t you think at least one catastrophic McCain decision merits some attention? Just pick one, there are plenty. The disgraceful Gramm incident is probably the gold standard of horrible decisions by McCain. Yet not a peep from Brad and very little from the MSM. Liberal media. Pleez, spare me the insult to my intelligence.
Anyone who claims to be an independent and yet ignores the Graham whopper is certainly full of hutzpah. Just like John McCain.
So the things that I criticized McCain for in the past — the gas tax pander, his support of the Bush tax cuts, his lousy health care plan, to name three that leap to mind — don’t count on your “just pick one” scoreboard? I have to be worked up about exactly the same thing that you’re worked up about at a given moment, is that it? Just tell me what the rules are…
… come to think of it, I sort of feel that way about “sexism” and “misogyny,” the definitions of which seem to shift in ways that are hard for me to follow. It makes me want to say sometimes — but only in my most sexist moments, of course, which I deeply regret — “just tell me what I’m not supposed to do ladies, and I won’t do it…”
… Oh, and bud: Last time I checked, she was still a candidate. Just ask her; she’ll tell you…
I voted against her not because she was a woman, but because of the kind of woman she was. We are already living in the ” Nanny ” state without electing another ” person ” who thinks it the taxpayers responsibility to raise their children.
Hillary is a scheming monster, but she won all the big states and was robbed by the DNC hierarchy.
Obama has been chosen as the puppet candidate precisely BECAUSE he is a vapid know-nothing who can be trained to speak passionately and say nothing concrete, which willing listeners will hear as agreeing with their FEELINGS. There is no intellectual connection, because there is no intellectual content.
Hillary used to be a Republican! We could tap that conservatism again. Somehow. Someday. Somewhere. Nancy Pelosi is going to be the downfall of what was The Great Eagle.
P.S. There is no way Obama’s getting to that Oval Office. Good Grief — they are already burning churches in a pseudo outrage in Denver — insurance that the fear mongerers will drive the huddled masses to McCain by November. Hide and Watch!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Viva La Hillary~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The coup has begun in earnest.
Ululations are subdued, but spirited.
We’re SOARING under the radar…….
God Bless America…God Bless Us Every One.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It’s not sexism. It’s sex — sex her husband had but she didn’t.
It’s also Obama’s oratory. He says nothing better than any of the other candidates have manged to express it.
If Obama spoke honestly in concrete terms about his agenda, people would run for the exits.
Obama is the feel good man. It is not important that the words mean anything but just the fact that he says them have filled the masses with Hope and Change.
What this man intends is to adopt the social programs of FDR and Eleanor and put everyone to work (for the government) and put the cost on the credit card called taxpayers.