| |
|
Without sexism, where would Hillary Clinton be?
Re Not allowed to have a different opinion,
and How can I be sexist when I ask for equality?
Hillary Clinton has indeed been treated very, very unfairly because of her sex, and because of her last name. It is absolutely unfair every time she is mentioned as if she's a credible candidate for President.
Without sexism, where would Hillary Clinton be? In this universe being First Lady is a ceremonial post, and it's no more a qualification for being President than a spokesmodel posing for smiling photos in front of a new car is somehow qualified for a career in mechanical design. Beyond her bedtime whispers in a President's ears her accomplishments as First Lady don't amount to squat. Hundreds of times, she held over-sized scissors and cut through bright ribbon. Big frickin' deal.
Early in her husband's administration, she did briefly step out of the traditional ribbon-cutting ceremonial role
|
|
Hillary Clinton deserves the respect due any person with six years' experience in politics, with no apparent ideals, with no original ideas of consequence, with a track record supporting an idiotic war, and with a political agenda that can only be described as Hillary Clintonist.
There is nothing, absolutely nothing in her life to suggest that she is of anything remotely approaching Presidential stature.
|
|
|
|
|
of First Lady, and immersed herself in political battle. She deserves credit for this, because it was her only pre-Senate political experience. And how did that turn out? She destroyed the possibility for meaningful health care reform in America.
M.M. and Mrs Collier and others complain that Hillary Clinton has been treated without the respect due her, but I just wonder what warp in the time-space continuum they're writing from, where up is down and matter is anti-matter and sideways is butterscotch and Hillary Clinton is qualified to be President of the United States.
No, absolutely not. Her political career began when she ran for the Senate in 2000, and she deserves the respect due any person with six years' experience in politics, with no apparent ideals, with no original ideas of consequence, with a track record supporting an idiotic war, and with a political agenda that can only be described as Hillary Clintonist. There is nothing, absolutely nothing in her life to suggest that she is of anything remotely approaching Presidential stature.
|
|
Lloyd, my defense of Hillary Clinton will be a bit half-assed, because I don't like her and never have.
That said, she was an absolutely credible candidate for President, for the same reason Dennis Kucinich wasn't -- because corporate-controlled media decides who’s credible.
And it's obvious to any honest observer that there's been plenty of sexism used against Clinton's candidacy by that same mainstream media. If you don't see it (you don't mention it) you're just not looking.
|
| |
As I've said, I'm no fan, but let's be fair: Hillary Clinton was the first lawyer to be First Lady, and she obviously has a lot more candlepower than First Ladies like, say, Laura Bush or Lucy Hayes. She has been in the Senate four years longer than Barack Obama. And yes, her fame came by being First Lady of Arkansas, but let's be fair about that, too: She came of age at a time when, realistically, being elected Governor of Arkansas was simply not a possibility for a woman.
Hillary Clinton deserves credit, lots of credit, for parlaying her First Ladyship into a Senate seat, and for playing the male-dominated game of politics so well that she made herself a viable candidate for President, and came close to winning. That's nothing to sniffle at, and there's more:
I'm certain she would have won the Democratic nomination this time around, if only she had shown herself to be a Democrat -- if, as a Senator, she had taken the lead in any policy matter that leaned leftward just a little, she would have been virtually unbeatable, at least insofar as winning the Democratic nomination.
But instead, in her short time in the Senate, she has always been among the most mundane, moderate, middle-of-the-road Democrats, and she has been wrong and essentially Republican on key issues like the war, torture, the godawful Bankruptcy bill of 2001, the PATRIOT Act, the Kyl-Lieberman crap, etc. Similarly, her campaign rhetoric, especially when attacking Obama, has been as Republican as any Republican's.
Hillary Clinton should be considered on her merits as a politician, not as a woman. And by that standard she would undoubtedly be a better President than either George W. Bush or John McCain ... but of course, so would you and so would I, and so would my husband, my landlady, my postal carrier, or the old guy down the street who sometimes plays guitar on his doorstep.
|
|
Our front page is free from nudity and profanity, but interior pages and external links may not be safe for work, and you may be shocked, offended, or in trouble with your boss. A link doesn't imply that we agree with every sentence and every sentiment on every site we link to. We use our noggins, and suggest you use yours.
Anything sent to Unknown News may be published. If you don't want it published, say so plainly. Of course, we publish all incoming hate mail.
|
|
|
| |
We sell our own progressive bumper stickers:
pro-peace,
anti-Bush,
pro-freedom,
anti-Republican
stickers you won't
find anywhere else.
$3 each or two for $5
bumper stickers
|
|
| |
|
Unknown News is more fun and more informative with your participation, so please don't be shy. Consider yourself invited to speak your mind.
Because we respect peoples' privacy, we do not keep records of friends' and contributors' contact information. This means we can't forward private communications between readers and writers, but we always welcome dialogue for publication.
When we publish incoming emails, we usually edit out the sender's last name, email address, or anything else that would tend to uniquely identify the author (if we slip up, please let us know). But if your email is unambiguously intended only to annoy, insult, or threaten us, we'll publish all the details, and leave it on-line forever.
We're especially interested in hearing and considering different perspectives. All we ask is that you conduct yourself sanely and civilly. For the most productive dialogue, it helps if you'll cite a specific article or concept we've gotten wrong.
You can contact Helen & Harry at <newsuneed at yahoo.com>. If that address ever fails, our back-up email address is <unknownnews at inbox.com>.
But please, don't email us unless you're really and truly, honestly, actually trying to send the publishers of News a communication you're not sending to anyone or everyone else.
Please don't send attachments or other cr*p we don't want.
If you're trying to reach us but getting no reply, it's probably because you've sent us cr*p we don't want, so we're filtering your emails into the trash, unopened and unread.
If you'd like to have your email address unblocked, simply send a sincere apology (from an un-blocked email address).
YOU CAN HELP
| |
|
| |
The dialogue page is our "letters to the editor" section.
To participate, email your comments to newsuneed at yahoo.com.
|
| |
