(no subject)

[austin_tycho]

Based on the crap my dad's emailing me, the Right seems to hate Hillary Clinton worse than cancer, anal warts and mimes combined. What gives? Why is she so awful?

Comments

[marillion.livejournal.com]

I think it's because she's a woman, but I'm not sure.

[mielikki.livejournal.com]

It's got to be something more than that. There's plenty of women in politics, but she seems to be really getting the lion's share of the vitriol.

[burgundy.livejournal.com]

I think in part it's because she stepped out of her place. Not just that she was advocating for a more comprehensive health care program (bad enough), but that she did so, in an active advisory capacity, while she was First Lady. So, hints of nepotism and unfair access, and also there are very firm ideas about what is acceptable for First Ladies. That kind of muscular work is frowned on. She should champion bland, uncontroversial causes (like literacy), and smile at her husband during press conferences. She should not take power into her own hands. (This is something that's going to be very interesting when we finally have a First Gentleman or whatever they'll call him; will he have a different role than the wives do?)

Add to that the fact that Hillary is an outspoken liberal woman, and you have a recipe for hate. But I think that if she were just a senator on her own, it wouldn't have been so bad. Also, she's a Clinton, and for some reason the whole family inspires rabid loathing. I remember some of the things that were said about Chelsea while she was still in the public eye, and that was really repulsive.

[beckyms.livejournal.com]

Not being a liberal or a conservative (closest to libertarian), I really didn't take to Hillary. I have no problem with women politicians and would like to see more of them.

Mostly, I didn't agree with her ideas about increasing the size of government.

I also didn't like that she wasn't elected and yet was proposing some pretty significant and controversial changes in government - while behind closed doors. I think there's a good reason First Ladies don't normally take on controversial projects - they're not elected and yet they are in a position of power.

I think there is more to it, but I can't really put my finger on it either. Call it a gut feeling. A sense that she didn't actually have much respect for the intelligence of the people her husband was elected to govern. I think that's it. She came across as a snob. I didn't like President Clinton either. He struck me as a liar and a weasel. I think that's mostly because he proposed things that, at the time, I thought were pretty much contradictory.

[austingoddess.livejournal.com]

My brother a few years ago made some mention of me being a Clinton love because I was a liberal, an kinda went on about it for a while. I was totally caught off guard - I mean, there were better and there were worse and he's out of office now, so what is the big freakin' deal?
It's the right-wing radio talk shows that are doing it. It used to be him and now it's her. They need their Satan On Earth, and that's who they've decided to pick on, for whatever reason.

[austinpanda.livejournal.com]

Yep, props to the above for their acumen. I think that's the main reason.

I think the republicans find her an easy target, and the fact that she won't slip away continues to create a situation where they can use her as such. I consider it kind of sad that politicians are still allowed to tap into the still-existing misogyny of the neanderthal right for purposes of smearing a viable female politician.

And, while I don't wish to start a flamewar, anyone who feels she exceeded the limit of her authority while First Lady should read up on Nancy Reagan.

I've yet to find a

[austinpanda.livejournal.com]

Yep, props to the above for their acumen. I think that's the main reason.

I think the republicans find her an easy target, and the fact that she won't slip away continues to create a situation where they can use her as such. I consider it kind of sad that politicians are still allowed to tap into the still-existing misogyny of the neanderthal right for purposes of smearing a viable female politician.

And, while I don't wish to start a flamewar, anyone who feels she exceeded the limit of her authority while First Lady should read up on Nancy Reagan.

I've yet to find a person who dislikes her who didn't also (a) get their information about her from the vituperative, bile-filled right, and (b) fail in the ability to answer the question: what, specifically, about her work in politics, do you think disqualifies her for office?

[(Anonymous)]

Crap! Hit 'post comment' by mistake.

Someone call Hillary! I know she could fix it! :o)