Articulations of my Hillary Problems

These are two comments from New Republic readers who articulate their problems witgh Hillary, from a feminist and from a Democratic/Liberal persepective. It's validating to see someone else say what I've been saying. The two writers are both Democrats (as far as I can tell) and Wandreycer is a woman in her 70s:

Wandreycer1 said: Whether or not there is an element of chauvenism and/or mysoginy (you'd think an old feminist like me would have any idea how to spell those words) to the criticisms and mistrust of Hillary (and there is) does not excuse her from personal responsibility for her behavior. Life's a bitch, no one ever said it was fair. Ask the successful female graduates of the military academys - not to many of them whining about sexism, although no doubt they had it twice as tough as anyone. Those women are almost the most beloved come graduation too.

That "excusing" tendency of her blind supporters - because of her gender - is patronizing as hell, that's why I loathe those simpering ads. I don't need to be pitied or babysat, thank you. They ar so insincere and infantilizing, I want to hurl things around the room, to paraphrase virginiacentrist.

I'd like to the under the surface mistrust of powerful women to be gone too, but that is not the whole story with Hillary. Like I said, part of her character problem is that she is incapable of taking real, not half-assed self-serving (oh, I was just too thorough and careful in the health care debaucle, I just cared too much and that right wing conspiracy dontcha know), responsibility for herself.

This is a character problem of many people, regardless of gender. Please don't excuse my crappy behavior because I've been a victim of sexism my whole life, and in some ways I have. Kick my ass, please.

I know she is self-protective and I understand that, I also understand why - but it's not up to us as voters to be hectored in to "getting" that, it's up to her to explain herself and then to change it.

As far as Bill CLinton's behavior - I just want to hide every time I see him, he's been so dishonest, manipulative and undignified as a former President. Just compare him for one second with GHWB whose SON was running. I say this as someone who six months ago adored him: how DARE he?

Number 2:

Rhubarbs said: pccostello writes, "My own guess is that we are hearing the vilification (as distinct from analysis) coming mainly from youngish males who have a lot of anxiety about powerful women. They should try the following: breathe slowly and repeat often: She is not my mother."

Well, I'm complimented that someone would still call me youngish. Thanks for that. But the rest is just BS. I would vote for my mother for president in a heartbeat. Enthusiastically. I would vote for any of the several currently serving women Democratic governors and most Democratic members of Congress for president all week long and twice on Tuesday if I could, purely for the sake of voting for a woman. Hell, if the Republicans ever nominate a woman whose support doesn't depend on admiring her husband, I'd give strong consideration to voting for her _because_ she's a woman, and because it's about damn time for a woman president.

Maybe Hillary can turn things around after she wins the nomination, and convince me that she's had a complete and total transformation of her personality, politics, and judgment. But until then, I'm just not willing to vote for someone who has done as much actual harm to my party and my party's policy goals as Hillary Clinton did in the mid-1990s. I'm not willing to vote for a candidate who is as gleefully cynical and dishonest as Hillary has been this last year. She has a record of real, personal financial corruption that would embarrass even a Republican. On almost all of the votes that have really mattered while she's been in the Senate, she's voted against liberal values, or she hasn't shown up to vote. (And now she frequently lies -- outright lies -- about the nature of her votes.)

Finally, if Hillary had been president and her husband were now running for the nomination based so transparently on appeals to aristocratic nepotism, I would oppose the man. How can any Democrat look back on the last seven years and conclude that putting the close relative of a president in the White House is a good idea? Why they hell not make Laura Bush president? Or Hillary's brother? Maybe there's a Bush or a Clinton named "Jong Il" or "Bashar" and we can just dispense with the facade of being a republic entirely. If I knew that the only way to implement the policies I support and ensure good Supreme Court nominations was to make my favorite Democrat king of America, I'd be against it, even at the cost of the defeat of my personal policy preferences. Some things are just more important than policy.

I am _desperate_ to vote for a woman for president -- and in local elections I've sometimes crossed party lines to vote for Republican women against Democratic men. But Hillary Clinton is not a generic woman candidate. She's not an archetypal emasculating strong woman figure. She's an actual politician with a terrible record and bad judgment who stands for all the wrong things, things I used to pride myself that Democrats had no truck with even as Republicans wallowed in them.

Pic from here. Backpost finished 2009-12-18.