Celebrating International Women’s Day with the Hillary Doctrine

In commemoration today of the 100^th anniversary of International Women’s Day, I suggest we read Newsweek’s recently published article, The Hillary Doctrine. Gayle Tzemach Lemmon, the author, puts it this way: 

In a time of momentous change in the world, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton sets out on her most heartfelt mission: to put women and girls at the forefront of the new world order.

That’s quite a mission, but it’s consistent with a major theme throughout Hillary Clinton’s public career. Lemmon writes:

Hillary Clinton seemed to be in a rare moment of repose while the Middle East erupted. She’d just returned from a surprise trip to Yemen and now sat for 30 minutes against a blue backdrop in the State Department’s Washington broadcast studio as reports streamed in of Libya’s violent crackdown on its own people.

But Clinton was far from a passive observer. She was in energetic discussion on the Egyptian news site Masrawy.com, where her presence excited a stream of questions—more than 6,500 in three days—from young people across Egypt. “We hope,” she said, “that as Egypt looks at its own future, it takes advantage of all of the people’s talents”—Clinton shorthand for including women. She had an immediate answer when a number of questioners suggested that her persistent references to women’s rights constituted American meddling in Egyptian affairs: “If a country doesn’t recognize minority rights and human rights, including women’s rights, you will not have the kind of stability and prosperity that is possible.”

The Web chat was only one of dozens of personal exchanges Clinton has committed to during the three months since Tunisia’s unrest set off a political explosion whose end is not yet in sight. At every step, she has worked to connect the Middle East’s hunger for a new way forward with her categorical imperative: the empowerment of women. Her campaign has begun to resonate in unlikely places. In the Saudi Arabian capital of Riyadh, where women cannot travel without male permission or drive a car, a grandson of the Kingdom’s founding monarch (Prince Alwaleed bin Talal bin Abdulaziz al-Saud) last month denounced the way women are “economically and socially marginalized” in Arab countries.

Read more:

Palin and Clinton: facing the two extremes of sexism

From Taggles a comparison between the sexism faced by Hillary Clinton in her presidential run compared to the sexism now face by Sarah Palin as John McCain’s running mate (reprinted in full):

Extremes of Sexism - Same Results
October 4, 2008

I have been thinking a lot lately about the sexism that Hillary faced in her run for the White House and contrasting it with the sexism that Sarah Palin faces in hers. There is some commonality between the two, but in general there have been two extremes of sexism that can be identified. They are both undermining to women. Here’s how I see it:

Hillary

· Hillary is cold.

· No man would ever want to have sex with Hillary.

· Men are afraid Hillary will castrate them.

· Hillary has too much Washington experience.

· Hillary has too much baggage.

· Hillary was too wonkish.

· Hillary craved power

· Hillary’s old.

· Hillary wears a pantsuit.


Sarah

· Sarah is hot.

· Men want to have sex with Sarah.

· Men are not afraid for their private parts around her.

· Sarah does not have enough Washington experience.

· Sarah has no baggage.

· Sarah’s a beauty queen.

· Sarah’s power is not earned.

· Sarah’s young.

· Sarah wears skirts.


It is all so damaging. All too pervasive. Women are continually clubbed with these biases. Make it stop, please!

So, Clinton Supporters: What Do We Want, and What Must We Get Over?

Photo credit: AFP

Kate Phillips has a post at the Caucus (NY Times) this evening, titled Obama’s ‘Get Over It’ Moment.

Phillips begins:

“The Republicans are having fun with a simple phrase Senator Barack Obama apparently, reportedly, purportedly, used during a meeting with members of the Congressional Black Caucus last week.

‘“Women, loyal to Senator Hillary Clinton, will ‘get over it,’ he reportedly told C.B.C. lawmakers, once they learn what Senator John McCain’s positions are on women’s issues.”’

Phillips follows up by citing a post by Jake Tapper and Kate Snow at ABC News, and she concludes with several questions that those of us who continue to support Hillary Clinton might want to consider:

“But isn’t it also plausible that it doesn’t help the so-called “healing” of the Democratic Party to use phrases like they’ll “get over it” with women who aren’t the type to run out and buy the latest Michelle Obama dress off the rack? What if they just stay home, or at work?

“Or don’t vote?

‘“We’d guess the most important question for this election cycle, now, given Senator Clinton’s failure to clinch the nomination, is, not as she said, ‘What Does Hillary Want?’ but again, to borrow from the old feminist book title, ‘What Do Women Want?’

That’s a question both Republicans and Democrats are asking, with that predominant voting bloc — albeit not monolithic — of women voters, mothers and single women, elderly and young, out there, watching and listening. And hearing.

And wondering. What is it that they have to get over?”’

So, Katalusis readers, what do you think women want and what is it that we have to get over?

Your comments are always appreciated!

Women for Hillary: Party Loyalty Be Damned

Froma Harrop at RCP gets it. She understands that women for Hillary are no longer willing to “shut up, sit down, and get with the program.”

And Harrop sees the women’s rebellion as a danger sign for the largely clueless Democratic party as it continues its lemming-like plunge over the cliff in support of Barack Obama.

‘“The woman who shouted "McCain in '08" at the Democratic rules committee was speaking for a multitude. After mounting for months, female anger over the choreographed dumping on Hillary Clinton and her supporters has exploded -- and party loyalty be damned. That the women are beginning to have a good time is an especially bad sign for Barack Obama's campaign.

‘“Obama will NOT get my vote, and one step more," Ellen Thorp, a 59-year-old flight attendant from Houston told me. "I have been a Democrat for 38 years. As of today, I am registering as an independent. Yee Haw!"

“A new Pew Research Center poll points to a surging tide of fury, especially among white women. As recently as April, this group preferred Obama over the presumptive Republican John McCain by three percentage points. By May, McCain enjoyed an eight-point lead among white women.

“What's dangerous for the Democratic Party is that, for many women, the eye of the storm has moved beyond Hillary or anything she does at this point. The offense has turned personal.

“They are now in their own orbit, having abandoned popular Democratic Websites that reveled in crude anti-Hillary outpourings -- and established new ones on which they trade stories of the Obama people's nastiness.”

Read More.

Pennsylvania Women Line Up for Blocks to Hear Hillary

From left to right are State Senator Connie Williams, Phila. councilwoman Marian Tasco, Senator Hillary Clinton and Rep. Allyson Schwartz at the "Pennsylvania Women for Hillary" event.

Photo Credits: ERIC MENCHER/Philadelphia Inquirer

The Philadelphia Inquirer’s Jeff Gammage vividly describes Hillary Clinton at her “Pennsylvania Women for Hillary” event in Blue Bell, Penn. yesterday:

“Hillary Clinton evoked themes of sisterhood and motherhood while addressing women voters in Blue Bell today - and reminded them she'd be a strong commander-in-chief and a fighter for universal health care.

‘“We have seen changes that are unimaginable for our mothers and grandmothers,’ Clinton said at a crowded gymnasium at Montgomery County Community College. Yet, she noted, even when she was growing up, ‘there were colleges I couldn't go to, scholarships I couldn't apply for.’

‘“Her talk resonated with the crowd, one of whom told the candidate during the question-and-answer period, ‘I'd like to say 'Madame President' just once.’

“Nearly a thousand people filled the room, and more were directed to an overflow space, the line to get inside stretching for blocks along campus sidewalks. The crowd at the "Pennsylvania Women for Hillary" event looked like Clinton's base - female, white, a little older. Not that the over-35 crowd were the only ones present. Mothers came carrying babies or trailing teen daughters, and two little boys held up a sign that said, "Our Mama's for the Mama!’

“Clinton emerged onto a platform at the center of the gym, her red blazer punctuating a sea of white and blue signs that said, "Hillary for President." The first two dozen people into the building claimed much-sought-after space, pressing against the barrier that surrounded the platform like fans around the stage at a rock concert. Some carried copies of Clinton's book, and one had a small stuffed Hillary-bear.

“Sister, wife, daughter, mother - she's all of these, Clinton said, and she takes the experience of those roles ‘with me on the campaign trail and I hope into the White House, with your help.’”

Read More:

Can Obama or Clinton Break the Patterns in Upcoming Contests?

Photo credits: Getty Images

Posting at Caucus (NY Times), John Harwood provides a good analysis of demographic patterns that in order to win the Democratic nomination either Obama or Clinton must break.

Crediting in part identity politics, Harwood notes:

“Mrs. Clinton, of New York, who would be the first woman to be president, has dominated among women; according to exit polls, they have consistently constituted 55 percent or more of the Democratic electorate. Mr. Obama, of Illinois, who would be the first black president, has dominated among blacks by even more lopsided margins.”

He then elaborates:

“But with the exception of a few states like South Carolina and Georgia, where blacks represented a majority and Mr. Obama won, they have represented a far smaller share of the vote.

“Mrs. Clinton, drawing on memories of prosperity during her husband’s presidency, has held steady advantages among Hispanics, older voters and blue-collar whites. Mr. Obama’s inspirational “Yes We Can” message has produced an edge among young people, independents, college graduates and higher-income Democrats.

“Those disparate collections can to some degree be distinguished using labels — Mrs. Clinton’s as more moderate, Mr. Obama’s as more liberal. But “the ideological differences clearly seem to be driven by demographics,” said Geoff Garin, a Democratic pollster.”
The Harwood analysis goes one step further. He says, “Those differences have helped define another important element.”

That element would be the difference between caucuses and primaries:

“While Mrs. Clinton has performed best in primaries, like New Hampshire and California, Mr. Obama has excelled in caucuses that turn on organizational prowess, from the kickoff event in Iowa to the Washington and Nebraska contests over the weekend.
“That is partly because Mr. Obama invested more heavily in grass-roots organization in his bid to overcome Mrs. Clinton’s establishment advantages. Moreover, the time and information required for caucus participation attract demographic elites drawn to the Illinois senator in the first place — his “Starbucks Democrats,” rather than Mrs. Clinton’s “Dunkin’ Donuts Democrats,” as Chris Lehane, a former aide to Al Gore, puts it.”

Finally, Harwood predicts the outcomes of upcoming contests based on his analysis of Clinton’s and Obama’s strengths:
He predicts that Obama will take Washington D.C. with its heavy black population, and Maryland with its “above-average proportion of both blacks and college graduates.”

And he also puts Hawaii in Obama’s column as he grew up there.
Harwood suggests that Clinton is favored in Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania.

In conclusion, Harwood acknowledges that either candidate could forge new patterns and come up with surprising outcomes of upcoming contests.