Tuesday, May 27, 2008

Women Count PAC Ad

A friend of mine hipped me to this ad in the New York Times the other day. (I'll wait while you go check it out.)

My friend was pissed - here's what she had to say:

I don't know how many of you saw the "It's Not Personal" ad run by the WomenCountPAC in the NYT yesterday but I am just beside myself. How dare they tell me that HRC represents my "voice... hopes, dreams and aspirations"? I'm sorry but assuming that I will vote for her because she is female is as misguided and ignorant as assuming that I am voting for Barack because he is black.

My mother raised me to be respected and loved, and neither could exist without the other. If I had a man that disrespected me the way Bill Clinton did (on multiple occasions, with multiple partners!), his behind and his belongings would be out on the curb. And I'm supposed to look to Hillary as an example? Why exactly did she stick around?

Assigning sexism as an excuse for not voting for Hillary is a sad, sorry, delusional excuse for loyalty. I want someone in the White House who is good and kind, strong and fearless, intelligent and able to solve crises by critical thought and action. Oh, and then there's the finances.... I'm sorry but she is in D-E-B-T. The contributions she receives from here on out will go partly to paying the interest that she must charge for having loaned herself money in the first place. And the poor vendors who provided services are still waiting to get paid. It's so convoluted I can't stand it. If she can't manage her campaign and her staff now, how will she manage in the White House?

The tone of the "It's Not Personal" ad suggests that I need Hillary to make my "values and votes count". I am an intelligent, motivated, inspired and strong woman who makes choices independent of some collective wave whose intent is to mandate my choices based solely on my sex. I make my own damn vote count by virtue of being here and speaking up.

So, with all of that said and done, please go out and vote your heart and your intelligence, not your race or your sex.



  1. Without attacking anyone's personal value systems, I think it's a bit of a stretch to apply the well-worn mantra '...if my significant other cheats, I'm (leaving)' to Presidential politics. the list of first ladies who quietly suffered their husbands' wanderings is quite lengthy. I wouldn't consider Eleanor Roosevelt (among others) to be weak-minded.

    Moreover regarding HRC, as calculating and ambitious as she is, it is not unreasonable to deduce she tolerated Bill's stuff because being the wife of Bill furthered her political aims better than the alternative.

    Lastly, HRC is all about pandering & doublespeak - it's the only way she can justify continuing.

  2. RJ, perhaps you have a point... it may be unfair for me to "attack" HRC's choice to stay with Bill, but in the context of the ad, HRC is supposed to be the feminist firestorm that represents us all. And if I'm not mistaken, feminists (at least the ones I know) don't "tolerate" wandering husbands nor do they "quietly suffer". That's the whole point isn't it? To be treated equally and respectfully? And given the choice, which I am fortunate to have, I don't choose HRC. If she is selling herself as representation of women besieged by societal ills, she's gonna have to work a hell of a lot harder to get my vote. I'll vote for a tough cookie, but not a whiny baby.

  3. ah, Ms. Adriane, 'fair' has nothing to do with it. the point is HRC is a shape-shifter and will don most any hat - including the feminist one - in pursuit of votes, or more accurately power.

    To your point, she is not nor cannot be a feminist as to do so would require she actually stand for something. Standing for everything and nothing doesn't quite cut it.

    On the other hand, it is oddly consistent for HRC to play the 'woman besieged' card - after all her greatest triumph in this campaign came when she busted out the tears.

  4. RJ, I like your style. I don't know what she's putting in the Kool-Aid but people are drinking it up. I am optimistic that come fall, when Barack is our nominee, her supporters will suture their wounds and vote for the only one who can offer us balanced Supreme Court appointments, the continued right to choose, affordable healthcare, a sensible way out of Iraq, and all the myriad things we so desperately wish for in our society. I'd like to think that these people are smart and not spiteful. We'll see.