Posted on 10/21/2005 2:50:00 PM PDT by Congressman Billybob
Deep in the recesses of the collective brain of our society, where all the deepest, darkest secrets lie, is the undeniable truth that, political correctness aside, we are not yet ready for a woman president. No more than we are for a Jewish president, or a black one.
All this trepidation and fear of a Hillary candidacy fascinates me, though. I can't imagine a bigger disaster for the rats. Her thighness's vaunted husband, with all his charm and bubbaness, never garnered more than 46% of the vote, and owes his being elected in the first place to a Texan that literally hated George H.W. Bush.
Without the Perot phenomenon, there would never have been the eight-year-long nightmare of the first Clinton presidency. Unless McPain opens a very well-funded third-party run for POTUS -- and I doubt that can happen --, there will not be a second one. Trust me on this one, and relax, already.
I just don't think the United States is ready for a women and in my own opinion I hope we never are.
well im waiting for the first trans gender metrosexual retrosexual president that switches gender going into second term president...
Should my head be throbbing right now?
yes
Got that right...
Oh Good! I was...concerned.
Since then I never underestimate the stupidity of mainstream America.>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Likewise! I never do the impossible either!
bttt
Reviews of "Commander-in-Chief" mislead; they suggest that this new ABC offering, this electuary of suds and psychologizing, is optional for missus clinton, that Rod Lurie's latest clinton agitprop is nothing more than the icing on missus clinton's inaugural cake. The reviews miss the point of the show, (i.e., the show is not optional but necessary (though hardly sufficient) if clinton is to prevail), because the reviews fail to identify missus clinton's problem in the first place. And circular reasoning compounds the error.
While America appears not to be ready for a female president under any circumstances, the post-9/11 realities pose special problems for a female presidential candidate. Add to these the problems unique to missus clinton. The reviews make the mistake of focusing on the problems of the generic female presidential candidate running during ordinary times. These are not ordinary times. America is waging the global War on Terror; the uncharted territory of asymmetric netherworlds is the battlefield; the enemy is brutal, subhuman; the threat of global conflagration is real. Defeating the enemy on the battlefield isn't sufficient. For America to prevail, she must also defeat a retrograde, misogynous, troglodyte mindset. To successfully prosecute the War on Terror, it is essential that the collective patriarchal islamic culture perceives America as politically and militarily strong. Condi Rice excepted, this requirement presents an insurmountable hurdle for any female presidential candidate, and especially missus clinton, historically antimilitary, forever the pitiful victim, and, according to Dick Morris, "the biggest dove in the clinton administration." It is ironic that had the clintons not failed utterly to fight terrorism... not failed to take bin Laden from Sudan... not failed repeatedly to decapitate a nascent, still stoppable al Qaeda... the generic female president as a construct would still be viable... missus clinton's obstacles would be limited largely to standard-issue clintonisms: corruption, abuse, malpractice, malfeasance, megalomania, rape and treason... and, in spite of Juanita Broaddrick, or perhaps because of her, Rod Lurie would be reduced to perversely hawking the "First Gentleman" instead of the "Commander-in-Chief." Mia T, 10.02.05
|
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.