Letters to the Editor
-
Hillary Is Not Change
I agree completely. NOT voting for Hillary BECAUSE she is a woman is wrong. Voting FOR Hillary because she is a woman is also wrong.
But the main thing is that a second Clinton presidency is not the "change" Americans desire. Hillary, as the Democratic nominee would energize the Republican Party, and another four years of our tax dollars being used in an effort to bring down another Clinton president is not "change".
Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton. Sorry. There's got to be more, and it has nothing to do with her being a woman.
-
Imagine Clinton vs. McCain
In foreign affairs, McCain would do everything Clinton would, only better and with more conviction. With regard to domestic affairs, he's less likely to raise taxes or grow the size of the federal government, positions a majority of Americans are against. He's also got her beat in terms of experience. So, for all you Democrats touting Clinton's experience and record, be careful what you wish for.
John Edwards is an old-fashioned populist and therefore an old-fashioned Democrat and would lose the general election to McCain, Giuliani and maybe even Romney.
Barack Obama is the only one with the strength of character to inspire a broad based movement as he has already done. Therefore, he is the only one who stands a chance at winning the general election against McCain. Obama is younger, more charismatic, more inspiring than McCain and matches him in terms of integrity (all qualities Clinton lacks). He is also considered a Washington outsider to Clinton and McCain's insider reputations. Obama vs. McCain would therefore highlight change vs. establishment in a way Clinton vs. McCain could not.
Obama would also cream the fear-monger Giuliani. And Romney doesn't stand a chance against him.
The only Republican candidate Clinton is strong against is Huckabee and maybe Romney as a distant second. Giuliani would probably beat her in a general election due to his socially liberal positions.
Put all these characters together, and their so called experience, and they would still not hold a feather to what Barack Obama has to offer to heal the national and international wound inflicted by the Bush administration's swagger and arrogance. That is, black skin and a father from Kenya. As our American president, he would signal to the world, including the Islamic world, that we are a nation of immigrants and not a nation of evangelical Texans who want to steal oil, spit on the dark races, and line the pockets of our corporations. On top of that, he is every bit as driven, intelligent and progressive as Clinton. So fuck experience!
If Obama loses to Clinton based on experience then it stands to reason that Clinton will lose to McCain for the same reason, especially given their proximity on the issues of international affairs.
-
Good for you
And thanks for articulating this, it needs to be said. As a woman myself, and the mother of a young woman - I couldn't agree more.
I'm baffled, and disappointed by the apparently knee-jerk, incoherent support she gets from some feminist luminaries in this country - there seems to be a tribal aspect to this too.
Arguing in favor of such a flawed candidate from a gender equality perspective rather than her overall record actually diminishes women's struggles everywhere, in my view.
Also, this would not be the first woman elected leader of a country. It's been going on a while, and not just in the West. Ok, we have to catch-up on that, but it won't break new frontiers, might as well wait for a woman candidate women can really respect for her overall leadership, you know, someone who'll make us proud. Hillary is not that person, in my view.
-
Grow up Frances
You need other people to "give you hope?" What are you, twelve years old Frances. It isn't the president's job (or your parents' or your therapist's or the mayor's or the governor's) to "give you hope" and if you think Obama's nice words and vague, smiling promises are what will change and improve this country you will be sadly disappointed.
It says more about your own needs than about the country's that you look to the leader to "give you hope." Try to be an adult.
-
She Swings Both Ways
As an avowed feminist, I've frequently said that there was a time that I would have liked to have seen Hillary Clinton "inherit" the presidency -- by running and getting elected on her own merits, of course. Her own "experience," however, consists of amplifying the worst aspects of her husband's embarrassing acquiescence during his presidency, in a role with responsibilities that she has repeatedly failed to uphold.
To claim that this record is a foundation upon which she can enact change is a farce. (Wow, after 35 years she's "found" her voice! In New Hampshire!)
And let's not forget NAFTA and welfare "reform." When Hillary Clinton speaks of "restoring the middle class," one has to wonder how she really proposes to do so.
Much like the challenges confronting someone with cancer, mere "change" is an insufficient response to the calamities facing our country today. One has to address the cancer first and foremost. But removing the Bush and replacing it with an earlier, but less chronic problem will not adequately address the ills of this ailing and debt-ridden nation. Senator Clinton would literally have to undo the damages wrought first by her husband, and worse, those by George W. Bush, and worst, those by George W. Bush at her own hand.
I really would like to see a woman elected as president of the United States. But if we want real "change," I would rather see a dress in the White House, rather than just the same old pants.
-
Baloo.
When is the last time the Democrats actually ran a classic Democrat populist?
You know when?
FDR - ranked as one of the best US presidents in American history.
-
To: jgarth
Obama is, in fact, the most intelligent and capable candidate on the Democratic slate. The Clinton team has been unbalanced, leaning on the close edge of racism, and maxing out on the sexism scale, in addressing this mismatch in intellect, charisma and all of the other characteristics that go to electability. It just is, and no "strategy" will change these unassailable facts.
It is interesting to observe how gracefully Edwards and the others accept this, and how perturbed, baffled and frustrated it makes Clinton.
As a feminist, and as a Black woman, I have watched this unfold very closely.
Actually, more black feminists should be included in the discussions. Our perspective would perhaps provide some nuance to the debate.
I hope that the male candidates in the field will eventually throw their support behind Obama- not because he is Black, or male, but because he is the best, and he can win. Common sense politics.