hillary's burqa
by Mia T, 10.6.05
|
|
Tina Brown is onto something with her 'burqa' reference, but as is the leftie wont, she has it exactly backwards. While Brown is correct to suggest that the swath cut by missus clinton isn't "aggressively masculine," she is wrong to imply that underneath the self-imposed burqa, missus clinton is female. Genderwise, missus clinton is exactly what you see: submissively male. Brown's reason for the pantsuits is, thus, wrong. Missus clinton's gender has nothing to do with this particular clinton coverup. (NB: Tina Brown's 'theory of the hillary pantsuit' is also easily disproved by two counterexamples: missus clinton's burqa-length dresses and her reflexive use of the victim pose.) The reason pantsuits are a must for missus clinton is that she must screen out her lower (as opposed to 'lowest') extremities. (That she is also screening out her submissive affect remains viable, however.) Do you recall ever seeing hillary clinton during, say, the last ten years, wearing a skirt or dress whose hemline fell below the knee and above the ankle (as best as those bounds--and, hence, that area of leg--can be distinguished from the whole)? Early in the clinton 'presidency,' a photo of a shin-length beskirted clinton made the rounds. Even the Times ran with it, as I recall. A clinton poll wasn't needed to determine that with her legs and low center of gravity, hillary-in-a-shin-length-skirt as a political construct would be rejected by virtually every male voter extant. Never again, therefore, did this purported feminist wear anything shorter than a burqa....
|
... 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 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 |
 |
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2005