Hear, hear! I give this an unqualified rec and agree wholeheartedly with everything you've said. This feminist is also truly disgusted and dismayed with her, and as much as I would love to see a woman in the White House she is NOT the woman.

Troll alert.

She's like Bill, but times ten:
Triangulating.
Pandering.
Lying.

I have a wonderful woman Senator. I am represented in Congress by another wonderful woman.

There is that festering sore on the hindquarters of humanity named Norman (Quimby) Coleman to be dealt with soon enough...

And then there is Hillary Clinton. Perhaps we might turn to the theater for a quote from Dame Edith Evans: "When a woman behaves like a man why doesn't she behave like a nice man?"

Great blog. Highly recommended.

I always thought that it was a disappointment that Hillary wasn't more female, in the classic sense, while running for the nomination. She could have been nurturing, supportive, incisive, instinctive, intelligent, peaceful. Instead she was delusional, aggressive, arrogant, warmongering.

She was more he than she.

That's not to say that women can't kick some ass, but in my experience it is much more of a subtle ass whipping than the Baby Bush variety.

Barack Obama seems more feminine in his approach to winning the primary, especially when it comes to the more biting aspects of campaigning. His criticisms are more subtle, more intelligent, cut a little deeper through the bullshit.

That explains every argument I have had with a woman where she has won. Hillary simply adopted the wrong tactics. She saw male domination as public acceptance. Barack recognized the need for a more feminine nuance to balance out a purely masculine government.

He bet on the American people being able to see the difference and won.

Excellent post, I wish I could recommend it twice!

Great post and very well written.

I'd like to reach out to all candidates out there in candidate land and tell you something:

Please don't down boilermakers in the attempt to impress me. Drinking does not impress me. I was a pro - I know how easy it is. And for some reason I just cannot figure out what the hell is has to do with being a good choice for president.

I'm not sure that it's fair to expect a more "feminine" style of government from a woman candidate. Look at Margaret Thatcher, Benazir Bhutto, Indira Gandhi, Kim Campbell, etc.

But I fully agree with your basic thesis, which is that Clinton realizes that, as a woman, she's likely to be judged as weak if she comes across "too feminine", and she's likely to be judged as strong (but unattractively feminist/macho etc.) if she apes the "masculine" style of the the male politicians colloquially described as *ssholes. It sucks that women politicians find themselves in this catch-22.

As a black man, Obama faces a similar catch-22. On one hand, a number of racist stereotypes (drugs, Muslim, radical black man, etc.) get deployed against him. When he proves to be far too smart, skilled, likable and sophisticated for those tropes to fit, he's judged to be "elitist". Unlike Clinton, though, Obama doesn't just play along with the manichean social givens that associate all things "presidential" with whiteness (and maleness), and all things "unpresidential" with blackness (and femaleness). He invites us to change the game.

... come to think of it, Clinton does invite us to change the rules of the game. But only when it comes to seating the delegates from MI and FL -- not when it comes to gender justice.

My problem with her is that her pandering is bordering on psychosis (I know, not really, but the definition is to lose touch with reality, so figuratively...) This is getting absurd!

Hillary is a political whore, plain and simple.

Why am I supporting Sen. Obama? Becuase he hasn't defined this job as a 'man's job'.

lol! What a spectacularly stupid statement.

all historical evidence of "matriarchies" shows that they gave equal respect to male and female

Care to share your sources here?

Efficient and successful organizational structures are determined by function, not gender.

As you point out, it's not 1970 anymore.

Nor is it 1950.

But you wouldn't know that from this post and comment thread outlining acceptable female comportment.

traits that make a President successful are intelligence, decency, integrity, and backbone - which has nothing to do with gender.

this can not be said enough, on the airwaves, over cable, shouted from tall buildings, talked about in schools and at the dinner table, etc

I agree with the post - but I think HRC's macho, militaristic, economist-doubtin' stance also seems to be a piece of classic Big Bill pol-driven calculation:

If the uneducated, poorer, more "bitter", more openly or subliminally racist white voters are the ones HRC can chip away to pull up her vote tally, she goes for them.

If it was the lesbian vote that could make the difference, she'd be wearing a vest and chugaluging Pinot Grigio in Provinctown right now, instead of telling everyone how she went huntin' with her dad with his left-handed Mauser rifle.

Am I the only one who thinks that Dee Dee Meyers should be the president someday?

The double irony with Hillary is that, despite her macho posturing and self portrayal as a strong woman candidate, her campaign has depended enormously upon the full-time on-the-stump efforts of a popular and (naturally) male, former President.