marjorie says...
Like Laura Bush, I won’t vote for Hillary Clinton because she’s a woman. But it's possible I might vote for her because she’s a former first lady, barring other factors. In the world we live in, other countries have no problem rewarding the wives with the presidency. Why not us? Afterall, they put up with the schmucks. Ok... seriously…I am serious. People seem to have this notion that a woman should achieve things on her own merit in a man’s world. I agree. They (we) should. But also, strong women have always emerged through the marriage/motherhood avenues, throughout history. And you won’t see me disparaging that. Hillary is a smart and competent woman. The proof can be seen in her calculated mastery of what it takes to get herself positioned to be a strong contender for the presidency. Does it mean I agree with how she has shifted over the years? NO. But I don’t have a problem with how she got to this place, given the world we live in. Ask me again in a couple of decades.
As for how she's shifted...
Joe Monahan quotes Bill Safire from the Sunday’s Meet the Press thusly about whether or not Hillary would ask Bill Richardson to be Vice Prez:
“Well, I was torn there, because Bill Richardson would bring a lot to the ticket, his Spanish background and all. However, he’s surprised all of us by going very strongly anti-war. Now, bring the boys home now—not the boys. Bring the troops home now. So I don’t think she could cross that bridge with him.”
To me, this really says it all about Hillary Clinton. Not to mention the other Democrats in the race to be our nominee. It says a lot about the Democratic party in general. Sure, it was a Republican wing-nut who rode hell bent for leather into perdition...but this is all the more reason for a Democrat to get us out...sooner rather than a ridiculous 4-5 years after they win election. Please.
There are plenty of studies and reasoned opinions from military and policy professionals with stellar resumes that say we can feasibly get out of Iraq within the space of one year. The general objection to Bill Richardson's plan seems to be it's 6-month timeline..."well, no...more like 9 months to a year." In the scheme of things, a year is nothing. We've been there already for 4.
If for nothing else, this is why I would vote for Bill. 6 months, 9 months, a year. Maybe he'd find he can't actually get out of Iraq. But at least he is saying it. If you had asked me in the 90's who I would choose, New Mexico's Big Bill or Hillary Clinton...what do you think I would have said? Well, times have changed...she's changed. The thing about her I don't like is that she's gone well right of center in key areas...because that's her path to power, not the fact that she was married to a powerful man.
|