![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
Salon has been publishing a series of pro-Clinton pieces, claiming, basically, that to be an Obama supporter, you must be a sexist and hate Hillary because she's a woman.
Here's the thing, folks: I don't like Hillary Clinton because she's Hillary Clinton.
First, I think she's smug and dishonest. Now, that's not all that odd for a politician; all politicians are smug and dishonest to one extent or another. However, I think Hillary's more so than most. And the dishonesty is often about things (hello, Bosnia!) that are easy to check in the media record, or easy to disprove (35 years of public-service experience?!) with very little digging. Reasonable people can disagree over whether working-class Americans are bitter; reasonable people don't disagree that Hillary has never been shot at by snipers. Now, there are many men who are more smug and dishonest than Hillary Clinton. There are, likewise, many women who are far, far less smug and dishonest than Clinton. Calling Clinton, specifically, smug and dishonest does not a sexist make. But neither does Clinton's femaleness make her any less smug or dishonest.
Further, I think Clinton is divisive. I think she is divisive because she is Hillary Clinton. When Georgia Republicans were after Zell "Democrat Keynote Speaker At The Republican Convention" Miller during his Senate campaign, their ads featured Zell talking about how much he loves Hillary Clinton. A hardcore Republican party-liner would vote against a tax-cut bill if the Clinton name were attached as a co-sponsor. And this is the real problem with the Clinton campaign and the idea of a putative Clinton Presidency: while her policy plans don't differ in many major ways from Obama's, there is much less chance Clinton would ever be able to convince a closely divided Congress to back her policies. Again, this is not a sexist observation: the same problem would attach if Bill Clinton were somehow to arrange to return for a third term. The Clinton name simply causes fits of irrational apoplexy in conservatives.
I don't like Clinton because--barring a miracle--she can't win the primary, and she continues to pretend that she can. It's Naderesque dishonesty and self-delusion, and, as somebody who fell for Nader's line in 2000, I'm doing my best to convince my fellow Democrats and assorted other Democrat-voting liberals not to make the same mistake I did. I feel the same way about Nader this year as I do about Clinton: you're wasting your supporters' time and money. And, unless Nader has recently undergone a sex change, I don't think that's sexist, either.
And, yes, I don't like Clinton, because for the first time since I've been able to vote, I can happily say that there's a candidate I can vote for. In 1996, I held my nose and voted for Clinton despite the messes of his first term. In 2000 and 2004, I voted against George W., because (in 2000) he was the idiot son of a loser President, and (in 2004) he was on his way to becoming the worst disaster to befall our country in nearly a century and a half. In 2008, we have the chance to elect somebody who has the potential to be truly transformative to the Presidency, and instead we're wasting time and money on a primary campaign that makes John "Did I mention I'm FUCKING 72 GODDAMN YEARS OLD" McCain look better with every passing day. Yes, Barack Obama has flaws. Lots of them. That doesn't change the fact that he's inspired me to do more work for a political campaign this year alone than I've done before in my life.
Those, Salon, are the reasons I don't like Hillary Clinton. One of the bedrock principles of feminism is, as I understand it, the radical idea that women should be treated as individuals. (I know, crazy, right?) So, here I am, treating Hillary Clinton as an individual, and as one that I happen to dislike. My reasons don't spring from the fact that she has a vagina, but from the fact that she is Hillary Rodham Clinton, and she has made a number of choices in her life that I disagree with. I am judging her on her own personal, individual merits, and she is coming up woefully short. If you think that makes me a sexist, then you clearly don't understand the term.
Here's the thing, folks: I don't like Hillary Clinton because she's Hillary Clinton.
First, I think she's smug and dishonest. Now, that's not all that odd for a politician; all politicians are smug and dishonest to one extent or another. However, I think Hillary's more so than most. And the dishonesty is often about things (hello, Bosnia!) that are easy to check in the media record, or easy to disprove (35 years of public-service experience?!) with very little digging. Reasonable people can disagree over whether working-class Americans are bitter; reasonable people don't disagree that Hillary has never been shot at by snipers. Now, there are many men who are more smug and dishonest than Hillary Clinton. There are, likewise, many women who are far, far less smug and dishonest than Clinton. Calling Clinton, specifically, smug and dishonest does not a sexist make. But neither does Clinton's femaleness make her any less smug or dishonest.
Further, I think Clinton is divisive. I think she is divisive because she is Hillary Clinton. When Georgia Republicans were after Zell "Democrat Keynote Speaker At The Republican Convention" Miller during his Senate campaign, their ads featured Zell talking about how much he loves Hillary Clinton. A hardcore Republican party-liner would vote against a tax-cut bill if the Clinton name were attached as a co-sponsor. And this is the real problem with the Clinton campaign and the idea of a putative Clinton Presidency: while her policy plans don't differ in many major ways from Obama's, there is much less chance Clinton would ever be able to convince a closely divided Congress to back her policies. Again, this is not a sexist observation: the same problem would attach if Bill Clinton were somehow to arrange to return for a third term. The Clinton name simply causes fits of irrational apoplexy in conservatives.
I don't like Clinton because--barring a miracle--she can't win the primary, and she continues to pretend that she can. It's Naderesque dishonesty and self-delusion, and, as somebody who fell for Nader's line in 2000, I'm doing my best to convince my fellow Democrats and assorted other Democrat-voting liberals not to make the same mistake I did. I feel the same way about Nader this year as I do about Clinton: you're wasting your supporters' time and money. And, unless Nader has recently undergone a sex change, I don't think that's sexist, either.
And, yes, I don't like Clinton, because for the first time since I've been able to vote, I can happily say that there's a candidate I can vote for. In 1996, I held my nose and voted for Clinton despite the messes of his first term. In 2000 and 2004, I voted against George W., because (in 2000) he was the idiot son of a loser President, and (in 2004) he was on his way to becoming the worst disaster to befall our country in nearly a century and a half. In 2008, we have the chance to elect somebody who has the potential to be truly transformative to the Presidency, and instead we're wasting time and money on a primary campaign that makes John "Did I mention I'm FUCKING 72 GODDAMN YEARS OLD" McCain look better with every passing day. Yes, Barack Obama has flaws. Lots of them. That doesn't change the fact that he's inspired me to do more work for a political campaign this year alone than I've done before in my life.
Those, Salon, are the reasons I don't like Hillary Clinton. One of the bedrock principles of feminism is, as I understand it, the radical idea that women should be treated as individuals. (I know, crazy, right?) So, here I am, treating Hillary Clinton as an individual, and as one that I happen to dislike. My reasons don't spring from the fact that she has a vagina, but from the fact that she is Hillary Rodham Clinton, and she has made a number of choices in her life that I disagree with. I am judging her on her own personal, individual merits, and she is coming up woefully short. If you think that makes me a sexist, then you clearly don't understand the term.
26 comments. | Comment?