Who replaced Hillary Clinton with an animatronic doll? I liked the old one better. The one who was a chronic Glamour-don’t, with the silly headband and doughty clothes. The one who made gaffes about not being Tammy Wynette. She was a real person. I could relate to her. Can we have her back, like in the execrable remake of “The Stepford Wives?” I fear this is like the chilling, original film and that the human Hillary is lost to us forever.
I don’t get people who think she’s a feminist icon. She’s amassed a lot of power, but she’s become the living antithesis of feminism; cautious, people-pleasing, self-monitoring… She apparently can’t state an opinion that doesn’t test well in 10 focus groups. To put it bluntly, she has no courage.
This morning I learned from Chris Durang on The Huffington Post, that she weaseled out of answering yet another direct question.
In the short article — part of a blog called “The Caucus” on the New York Times website — Hillary Clinton is asked if she agrees with General Pace that homosexuality is immoral.
What do you think she answered? “No, I don’t agree”?
No, what she answered was: “Well I’m going to leave that to others to conclude.”
Thanks, Hillary! Really brave. Really forthright.
How hard would it have been for her to say: “Well, I think it is not immoral, and I know many Americans don’t think it is and don’t want to interfere with consensual adult behavior. But I understand other people believe other things. I hope in time that will change.”
Isn’t that probably what she actually thinks? Wouldn’t that be taking a stand?
For Durang, who was talking straight about bisexuality long before it was cool, that’s got to rankle.
Somewhere along the line, beltway Democrats seem to have decided that nothing bad can happen to them if they can make themselves completely inoffensive. And they have not yet learned that when you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing no one.
It’s a formula that works least of all for Hillary. She wasn’t born slick or charming and she can’t pull it off without appearing terribly inauthentic. She seems so afraid of being her natural, divisive self, she’s become positively insipid. She’s more and more like an overly airbrushed photograph, or a plastic surgery disaster. Her entire personality has become like a face immobilized and expunged of character by too much Botox.
Worse than her coy evasions, when asked directly if she thought homosexuality was immoral, is her politically calculated clarification.
“I should have echoed my colleague Senator John Warner’s statement forcefully stating that homosexuality is not immoral because that is what I believe,” her statement said.
In other words if the big, strong, military, Republican man says it’s ok to gay, it must be safe to have that opinion. This from someone who wants to be the first woman President?! A woman who needs a man’s imprimatur to state an opinion? She might as well go back to baking cookies.
I’ll just die if I don’t get this recipe.
I’ll just die if I don’t get this recipe.
— The Stepford Wives (1975)
Crossposted from The Blogging Curmudgeon and the Independent Bloggers’ Alliance.
What an excellent comparison. Hillary is a complete disappointment. Even in her prevarication she had to say what a big man a republican (Warner) was about it. No way could she say that John Edwards was correct and more honest than she was.
This woman who once served her country by working toward the impeachment of a bad president is now blinded by her ambition. She seems to be turning into a reflection of george bush. “Fool me twice – shame on…uh,….”
If she gets the nomination, I’d like to see a write-in campaign for a woman who is unafraid to be herself. Hah – will we even be allowed write-in ballots?
She has put aside many things in her attempt to ascend to the throne. Eyes on the prize, everything else is secondary.
ummm, on this very blog there is an HRC ad, utilizing the phrase “It’s time.”
I dimly recall some rally around a Dem prez candidate-was it BillC or Al Gore, where everyone was compelled to chant:”It’s time!”?
There is only one REAL Stepford Candidate.
And here he is.
Yup.
Have fun…
AG
P.S. There USED to be another, but the Animatron V.2 version is SO much less…threatening.
Yup.
If I really thought Bush was going to step down in ’09, I suppose I would get worked up about all this . . .
Oh, it DOES matter. But not in the way everyone thinks.
I don’t see Edwards as any less phony than the others.
I’m really sorry to see BMT become the “I hate Hillary” blog. Seems like it is almost everyday now that meme is prominent here. She is not my preferred candidate, but seems like it would be more productive to talk about the candidates people here DO prefer. Certainly, it is grist for the mill when candidates make statements that we feel compelled to counter or deconstruct, but this constant Hillary bashing is a bit strange to me. I think the Republicans do enough of it to spread out over the masses. The DLC will most likely tell us who the actual candidate will be, as they are accustomed to doing. Pardon my cynicism, but I think they have earned it.
So any way, jmo and probably of no consequence to anyone, let alone of any interest. It is way too early for me to pick a favorite, but obviously you all have picked a “not under any circumstances” candidate.
Really? I hate to see it become the type of blog where people try to intimidate people out of stating their opinions.
If you felt any attempt at intimidation from me, then you don’t know me very well. That’s okay, why should you know me. But it is rather comical to think that I could intimidate anyone.
I am not against free speech of any and all kinds. Not fond of racist and hate speech.
I was not actually referring to this particular diary in a specific way, I should have been more clear about that. It is just the constant diet I see about the many things that are constantly stated about Hillary from factual to absolute personal opinion about her style (or lack of it), her manner of speech, and some who apparently can read her thoughts as they speculate about them as well.
It is not exactly a pleasure for me to defend Hillary in any way. As I said, she is not my preferred candidate. So I will leave you all to continue the negative path. I know the solution, so I will save you the time to state it. Stop reading here.
You don’t intimidate me… at all. But I know a bully tactic when I see one. You’re shaming people for stating opinions you don’t like and think are “negative.” Sorry. I have little patience with the positivity police.
With all do respect, Shirl of the Stars, I think it is important to keep spreading the info on Clinton. She is not a progressive choice and has made it very clear with her stance on Iraq. However, since she is the media’s darling, it is up to the blogtopia (yes, skippy coined that phrase) to make sure the word gets out before the primaries that this is not the kind of candidate we want. I recommended this diary because it very much says what I have been seeing in Clinton and I, for one, would be greatly saddened if she wins the primary.
It’s not about hating Hillary.
It’s about hating her sponsors, and her deference to her sponsors.
It’s about feeling that her and her fellow DLC types have done tremendous damage to this country.
It’s not Hillary at all with us.
It’s who and what she represents that is so unpalatable.