The Female Vote

What always annoys me is when ppl say they'll vote for Hilary b/c they support a woman. Basing your vote on a candidate's gender is antithetical to feminism. Just b/c she's a woman doesn't make her the best candidate for the job, just as being a man doesn't make one the best candidate.

And I don't think she's the ideal feminists' candidate either. Her identity and her defining quality is that she's Mrs. Clinton. Marrying your way into power is not much of an accomplishment. In addition to that, when she faltered in a debate, she said she was being grilled unfairly by a panel full of men (see http://www.countercurrents.org/roberts061107.htm for a description of her extremely sub-par performance and her gender card excuse). First off, most world leaders are men- if you can't hold your own in a panel of male candidates, how can you hold your own on the world stage? And second, the ideal feminist candidate would have no problem with being in a room full of men, b/c she would be strong and see past gender. Clinton just isn't a feminst's candidate.

Moreover, a vote for her means Bill back in the whitehouse, and if you did feel she was a leader when he was president, that you can effectively view them as power-pair that had their 8 years already- giving them another 4 is essentially creating another dynasty, horrific for any sense of democracy. Do we really want 28 years of either a Bush or a Clinton in the whitehouse? Aside from that, she had her chance to make change as a senator and she failed: she voted for the war in Iraq and then she voted a second time for the Patriot Act. She apologizes for nothing and will not admit any mistake- reminds me of Bush. A bill essentially voting on action that would lead to war in Iran was recently run through congress- Clinton voted yes. The bill was created by Lieberman (see http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/14/weekinreview/14cooper.html).
In the end, Clinton is another one of the same old people that were always in power: she's nothing new. And what we need now is change and a fresh perspective with new ideas. After all, nobody had more experience than Dick Cheney and look what enormous damage he did to our nation. Can we get rid of the same old ppl, please?

Obama has senatorial experience in as much as Clinton does. In terms of actual careers, Clinton does not surpass Obama.

Moreover, claiming Clinton has experience because she was a first lady is an unfair claim. There's no way Obama could have been a first lady or a first man- that kind of presidential status is exactly what he's working toward, so saying he doesn't have presidential experience wheras she does is absurd. It's more important to look, then, at their actual careers, not what opportunities fortune or chance happened to give. On that playing field, Obama has been exceptional while Clinton has been merely mediocre. I read an article a few months ago dissecting the claim that Clinton has been extraordinary in any way. The truth is, any woman given the opportunities she had in life would have produced much the same results: from her Wellesley graduation speech to her behavior in the White House, Clinton has achieved, but not in a remarkable way. She is not a woman of change but simply a woman who has been in the right place at the right time.

"She hasn't accomplished anything on her own since getting admitted to Yale Law," wrote Joan Di Cola, a Boston lawyer, in a letter to The Wall Street Journal this week, adding: "She isn't Dianne Feinstein, who spent years as mayor of San Francisco before becoming a senator, or Nancy Pelosi, who became Madam Speaker on the strength of her political abilities. All Hillary is, is Mrs. Clinton. She became a partner at the Rose Law Firm because of that, senator of New York because of that, and (heaven help us) she could become president because of that."


Obama, on the other hand, has struggled throughout his life to create substantive change. He has overcome obstacles and will continue to do so. His campaign is not based on his eloquence or mannerisms but something deeper. To see him as only charming is to fall prey to all the dark speech Clinton and the Republicans are spewing.

The truth is, Clinton is just more of the same. I'll quote a comment someone gave on an online discussion: "Hillary doesn't have very much political experience at all, unless you count being First Lady as experience, which is ludicrous. While I don't like any of the democratic candidates, I agree that for a democrat to have a chance, Hillary can't be on the ticket. She's too conservative for most democrats and represents little change and big business. She isn't conservative enough for most republicans. I think an Edwards/Obama ticket would give the democratic party a chance to win this."

And to quote a more extreme but in amany ways true statement, "Clinton is Bush in disguise."

My last point on why Clinton is not the feminists' ideal: she's so petty that she attacked an essay Obama wrote in kindergarten:

CNSNews.com) - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) took aim at Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) on Sunday, claiming that Obama is "rewriting history" when he says he has not had long- held aspirations for the White House.

In a statement released late Sunday, Clinton criticized Obama for saying, "I'm not running to fulfill some long-held plans or because I think it's open to me." In Boston on Sunday evening and in Iowa earlier that day, Obama had said: "I have not been planning to run for president for however number of years some of the other candidates have been planning for."

Clinton spokesperson Phil Singer, in the statement, said: "Senator Obama's comment today is fundamentally at odds with what his teachers, family, classmates, and staff have said about his plans to run for President. Senator Obama's campaign rhetoric is getting in the way of his reality."


"Senator Obama's relatives and friends say he has been talking about running for President for at least the last 15 years. So who's not telling the truth, them or him?" said Singer.

Clinton cited members of Obama's Senate staff, law school friends, and a comment from Obama's brother-in-law 15 years ago, as well as his kindergarten and third grade teachers.

According to the Associated Press, "Iis Darmawan, 63, Senator Obama's kindergarten teacher, remembers him as an exceptionally tall and curly haired child who quickly picked up the local language and had sharp math skills. He wrote an essay titled, 'I Want To Become President,' the teacher said." Obama attended elementary school in Indonesia.

The Obama campaign did not return requests for comment for this article, but according to the New York Sun , a spokeswoman for Obama, Jennifer Psaki, ridiculed the Clinton camp's tactics. "I'm sure tomorrow they'll attack him for being a flip-flopper because he told his second-grade teacher he wanted to be an astronaut," she said.



/quote
Actually, one more reason I don't like Clinton: her speech in the south where she put on a southern/black accent- "Nobody told me it would be easy....I didn't come all this way to" etc, from what I remember. How derogatory was that?!