I have to admit, I understand the women voting for Hillary thing. I get that this is something so many great women thought they would never see. I can only imagine the grandmothers who have lived through global misogyny for decades, only to see the proverbial glass ceiling possibly shattered. I get it. But, shouldn't that initial feeling only guide you so far? At some point, shouldn't you examine who she really is. After examination, how can you not conclude she is just another politician, only she is a she and not a he. Outside of gender, how is she different? I have under good authority that Barack is tougher on a number of 'women's issues' (as if there is such a thing, they are ultimately human issues) including sex trafficking and abortion rights. Speaking of abortion rights, that brings me to the democratic women voting for McCain in the Fall. If you are against abortion, I understand. If not, if you are pro-choice, why would you vote for the prez candidate who would certainly overturn Roe v. Wade? Is vindiction so callous that you would cut your nose to spite your face? It makes no sense. My understanding of equality was that its' ultimate goal was freedom. Freedom to choose whomever you want, man or woman. So, why is it that women are so willing to caste aside that freedom which they have worked so ardently for and go with Hillary just because she is she. Aren't you just taking away the rights you just fought for? Unless of course, women are the new lobbying group. If that's the case. I'd like to know that. I mean, don't get me wrong--identity politics ar at work here. Blacks are voting for Obama 90/10. An before women and blacks were brought into the process it was Bush "the-guy-you -could-drink-a-beer-with" and other silly things that had no bearing on how effective a leader would be. What I am glad for is to see that black support for Obama was earned. Black voters were after all, for Hillary by 30 points pre-Iowa. But, I mean, if Hillary supporters were voting for Hillary because of her policies, how can so many of them now support McCain? Tlak about apples and oranges. That leads me to believe they were voting for Hillary because she was she. Not policy-based. If it was policy-based, you couldn't even conjure the words in your mouth to say McCain and Presidential Elect in the same sentence. Come on now. Even with all of the Clinton campaign's outright race-baiting, I said if she were the dem nom I was voting for her. Not happily, but I'm no fool. Even Hillary said that Democrats not voting for the Dem nom would be political suicide.
I think Hillary is brilliant. However, I also think she was hijacked by an inept campaign staff and blabbering hubby. I think, that if Hillary was allowed to run the type of campaign Obama was (and didn't have the past associations) you would be seeing a different outcome today. I remember a speech she gave, post-Pennsylvania--almost bought me to tears. I wish I saw more of her this political season, but alas, I didn't. Couple that with the Freshamn senator from Illinois being a political wunderkind and outright diaper-dandy and its no suprise--this outcome.
Hillary played politics in the year that her opponent played humanity. She was playing checkers, he was playign chess. That's not her fault. After all, the first viable female candidate couldn't ahve run under the banner of Hope she would have been seen as a weak woman and not a visionary. You see what they have done to Obama, imagine what they would have done to Hillary. The irony here is endless.
Ultimately, I don't think Obama should take Hillary, the politician, as his VP. Hillary the Yale law grad, champion for children and brain behind the first 8-year Clinton run--sure--take her. But the thing is, you can't get the latter without the former and that is just a damn shame.
No comments:
Post a Comment