Posted on 05/07/2015 5:48:30 PM PDT by massmike
This early in the presidential cycle, I make no predictions about how the race will play out. But one thing I’m sure of: America doesn’t need to send a woman to the White House.
Needless to say, many Clinton supporters vehemently proclaim the opposite.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, asked whether Clinton’s vote for the Iraq War should disqualify her from the support of progressive Democrats, responds that “what’s important is what it would mean to elect a woman president of the United States.” Never mind old controversies, Pelosi suggests; Clinton’s sex is what should animate voters now.
Making the point even more graphically is writer Kate Harding in the web journal Dame. “I intend to vote with my vagina,” Harding declares, embracing Clinton’s candidacy on the grounds that the United States has never had a president “who knows what it’s like to menstruate, be pregnant, or give birth.”
There was a time when Clinton purported to reject such gender-based appeals. “I am not running as a woman,” she told voters during her last campaign for president. Now she plays it up for all it’s worth. “Don’t you someday want to see a woman president of the United States of America?” she pointedly asked attendees at an EMILY’s List gala.
Of all the qualifications to seek in a US president, few could be more irrelevant to the job than sex organs.
Of course voters are free to cast ballots for any reason they like, including feel-good symbolism or sentimental tokenism. But no one should imagine that there is honor in voting for Clinton because she’s a woman. Wasn’t the key point of feminism, after all, that women are more than biology?
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonglobe.com ...
When asked what qualifies her to be president, most of her supporters stare at you like you have two heads. Some may mumble something about her time as SoS but when pressed about WHAT she did as SoS, you get the deer in the headlights look.
Well we’ve seen how well it’s worked out electing someone solely on race so let’s go for gender next. Maybe after that we can elect on hair color or height or weight or how about a midget? We’ve never had a midget President. We must be bias against little people, this is an outrage. How about a midget Asian gay transsexual Jew for President, we never had that.
I can only wonder HOW she intends to hold the pen in the voting booth.......
It’s just as dum b as the libtards who are demanding “tits on the twenty”.
A woman for President, no problem. This Clinton woman, no way.
“...Gender is no credential for the White House...”
And race shouldn’t be a credential either.
Willingness to protect and defend the Constitution, plus a respectable resume that includes trustworthiness should be the thing.
It shouldn't be a guarantee either.
If the reason a woman should be in the White Hut is because of a vagina, wouldn’t someone like Palin also have that effect on women?
It’s not that the left thinks it’s time for a woman in the white house, but time for a liberal woman in the white house.
Like race.
Words have a gender, people have a sex.
A big plus for her is----Hillary's vagina is "like new"... "hardly used"... (as an eager used car salesman clinching the sale would say).
Oh sure, Bill rode 'er around a few times, but then decided he wanted a younger, snazzier model.
Course nobody's looked under Hillary's hood lately, but Bill better not base his hopes on being the first First Lady w/ gonads.
It's classic Clinton election MO---***-kissing as many voting blocs as possible.
God knows what blood and gore she'll throw the genital-sniffing rubbermaids over at Planned Parenthood to assure them "aggression over the unborn" will continue...and is her prime interest. Maybe she'll endorse post-birth abortions as the true measure of her abortion worship.
====================================================
PEGGY NOONAN OBSERVING HILLARY IN ACTION: "Never in modern political history has such tenacity and determination been marshaled to achieve such puny purpose: the mere continuance of Them.....unprincipled narcissists in a WH thoroughly penetrated by the political left."
Hillary is precisely the wannabe the Founders guarded against---a power-monger with an army of acolytes, lying in wait to undo the govt that protects everyday Americans and our freedoms.
Taxpayers are struggling and Hillary has a $2.5 billion spending "limit"...and no opponents, as yet.
Americans should be asking---why does this tired, over-the-hill political retread need $2.5 billion to get a job worth about $2 million w/ perks and free plane rides?
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.