Tuesday, January 08, 2008

hillary takes new hampshire

after weathering mysogenistic remarks and taunts from rethuglicans and democrats alike, hill comes back and takes new hampshire. i don't intend to vote for her but as a woman, i am making an appeal to other women--- and men, to stand against the sexism and mysogeny that is being thrown unfairly her way. let her defend her stand on the issues- she shouldn't have to defend her gender in the 21st century.

15 comments:

Renegade Eye said...

Two words: Margaret Thatcher

Scarlet W. Blue said...

Excellent points.

No said...

Go Hillary!

No said...

I admire the fact that she never backs down; no matter how much criticism she faces, she keeps going on ...like an energizer bunny...

No said...

also, I think the comparison to Margaret Thatcher is way off base...

guess I've gotten my 2 cents in today, huh?

WeezieLou said...

One word: Finally. It's been hard out here, being one of few people out of the closet abt their positive stance on Hillary. but she prevailed

The Future Was Yesterday said...

Hillary is a tough old bird. She can take care of herself, don't kid yourself.

If she was a man, the insults thrown her way would be considered politics as usual.

Lower the sensitivity settings, please!:)

Larry said...

Once again the media has anointed Hillary.

Expect the dirt to fly now toward Obama and Edwards.

betmo said...

fair is fair tua- gender should not a 'legitimate' question in the race. yes, hillary can take care of herself- and i don't think i am being sensitive. there is no place for calling into question her gender. women have proven themselves above and beyond in any field- this is no different. question her abilities based on her track record- not gender. the whole hoopla in the media about her crying and the 'iron my shirts' deal- and edwards implying she wouldn't be tough because she cried- can't be tolerated. it's just not relevant to the discussion and until we take that out of the debate- there can't be a good hard look at the real facts.

Naj said...

Forgive my cynicism:

As a woman, do you really wish to be given opportunities in life, just because you are a woman, or rather because you have qualifications?

This woman pulls three cards out when her defeat is certain:

* tears up
* brings on her womanizing husband to fend for her
* and suddenly someone yells "iron my shirts"
...

I am REALLY disturbed by teh fact that wopmen think they have to ELECT a woman, just to feel empowered. This is the most NAIVE form of politics that women can play. It serves NONE but to discredit women of talent.

I would have more respect for hillary if she stands for right causes than if she plays the "oh its so hard to be a woman in this race" card!

betmo said...

no- i don't think most women want to be given special treatment- just a fair shake. and in all fairness- edwards has elizabeth out there stumping cancer and all- and michele obama is at the forefront of her husband's campaign. why should bill not be? it has already been ascertained that mitt romney, most recently, shed tears on two occasions on the campaign trail. again, why is it hillary being called to task? hillary is take full bore brunt of the right wing attacks- hate radio is all over her- discrediting her because she is a woman. and then a clinton.

i am not voting for her- but i am defending her. why? because i think that gender should not play a role in this election any more than race should play a role with obama or richardson. do they? for sure. but if people like me stay quiet about it- it continues. if i stand up with others and say- hey- let's just focus on the issues- hopefully it will make a difference. i am voting kucinich.

TomCat said...

A woman as President works fine for me. It's the policies of that particular woman that doesn't.

dawn said...

I have been going round and round and I'm voting for Hillary and yes it has to do with wanting a woman in the white house. I also feel she became a real person this week.

fjb said...

betmo,
I'm probably really going to put my foot in it here, but I wonder how a woman as president right now would work out. As you guys are probably more aware of now than you were 7 years ago, what and who you elect to your highest office affects the rest of us out here in the world.

As is evident from the stalemate called "the war on terror", nobody's going to win this one, and negotiation is going to have to take place eventually (sooner rather than later, I hope). Now, in a perfect world, the Taliban and Al Queda would sit down with a woman and respect her as an equal. But, as we all know, the world is far from perfect and as we are all too well aware, these extremists have no respect for women and consider them useful for about only one thing: propagating the species.

I want this war over, then perhaps a woman as the leader of the most powerful country in the world and the commander-in-chief of the mightiest military force in the world would be a viable possibility.

I just hope people are thinking clearly about the consequences and not just voting with their emotions.

dawn,
Like any politician, she has become as "real" as she needs to be to win.

betmo said...

fjb- no- legitimate concern in an imperfect world. however, she could do a reverse george bush and send in her secretary of state to negotiate- or her vice prez- if they are male. understanding other cultures is a downfall of the current cabal operating out of the white house. i would like to think that mrs. clinton aka madame senator is smarter than they are. we'll give her the benefit of the doubt-- if she wins. :)