When she writes something like this about Hillary, and it appears in a widely read newspaper, one that is highly respected, and her column is thereafter syndicated throughout the nation, and reverberated on the Internet, she gains a wide hearing. If Hillary is to be taken down, she must be taken down by other females. When men do it, the Clintons simply deploy their surrogates to slander the truth teller. Of course they try the same thing against female critics, but that raises problems for them and it is not nearly as effective. The Clinton war room can dismiss Rush Limbaugh as a hatemonger and sell that lie but it cannot effectively smear Peggy Noonan that way.
It is just possible that the tide is turning against Bitch Clinton. I consider the reaction to her performance in the last debate to be fascinating because she has done the same thing countless times before and generated no such reaction. Why now? Are the stories about the Chinese money laundering having effect? Often the media are motivated to attack a public figure for reasons which have nothing to do with the subject matter of the attack. Could it be that even the media are beginning to understand the implications for America of the Clinton presidency? Could it be these rumors of lesbian connection are generating the same reaction and for the same reason? Are the drive-by media worried that this rumor will be confirmed only after Hillary is nominated, or worse, as an October surprise before the election? Do the media really want to get rid of her now and clear the decks for Obama in time to save the election for a Democrat? Are the media finding some vestigial righteousness and trying to destroy Hillary because she is a lesbian but they are too politically correct to admit it?
Before one dismisses this soap opera analysis out of hand, it is well to consider that when the Hillary put on her pink suit and damned the vast right wing conspiracy, there was another dynamic at work. We men reacted to the ill logic of the conspiracy charge but the women of America were empathizing with Hillary as the martyred spouse. They were watching a different soap opera.
Hillary cannot be a martyr, she cannot be the figure of the wronged woman, if she's a lesbian in a marriage of convenience with Slick. The whole dynamic changes, it will not be Hillary who was betrayed but the women of America who were betrayed by Hillary. They must either reject Hillary or except their own gullibility and foolishness.
As a foaming at the mouth, flopping on the floor conservative, I am unmoved by Peggy Noonan's conclusion that the problem with Hillary is, "policy." We conservatives have known about Hillary's policy deficiencies from the beginning. Why the Epiphany now? Why should middle America, the women of America who will decide this next election, only now after this debate conclude that Hillary is on the wrong side of "policy"?
Are we reading and airy -fairy proxy for the lesbian charge?
Terrific analysis--and good to read you again.
You're dead-on when pointing out that if Hillary's going to fail it has to be at the hands of women, and men have their blinders on when they laugh at her "touchy-feely" approach (remember how many people laughed at her "listening tour"?).
The reason HRC is so hard to defeat is because as politically incorrect as it is to say, women ARE different from men in terms of their thinking, not just their physical anatomy. When women hear men laughing at things like "listening," they think that men don't get it, and that maybe someone like HRC IS what they need in office.
Many women are going to vote for her because she is a woman. If that solid core can be cracked, HRC has no "up" she can reach through other means--men, conservatives, minorities--she's already nailed down all the hardcore support she can from the "edges" so now she needs to get more from the mushy middle. Those women who aren't wedded to ideology will look at her, and if they don't find too many objections they'll say "Why not?" If they look at her and see an incompetent who will be calling the shots in the post-9/11 world where their children might be getting blown up by suicide bombs in the USA, she's done.
“It is just possible that the tide is turning against Bitch Clinton”
No, no, no: then we must hope that “the tide” subsides.
As aforementioned by yours truly here at Freep:
“Please, oh Lord, please, please, please, oh pretty please, please oh Lord: let the Dems make Hillary Klintoon their POTUS nominee in 2008.
Pretty please with a cherry on top.”
I don’t know if I accept your premise that lesbianism trumps policy with the average liberal (and semi-liberal) woman voter in America.
I think that the average woman voter who is inclined to vote for Hillary (and that leaves out most conservative women) wouldn’t change their vote simply because Hillary turned out to be a lesbian.
I think one issue and one issue alone will move those women: fear for the security of this country and their families. Which gets back to policy.
If the average liberal or semi-liberal woman begins to think that Hillary’s policy will lead to more terrorist attacks on America, they will vote against Hillary.
That’s the issue. Not lesbianism. In my opinion.
As much as I enjoyed the original post, I always enjoy your follow-ups. Just getting in a "me too..."
Are the media finding some vestigial righteousness and trying to destroy Hillary because she is a lesbian but they are too politically correct to admit it?
Hillary cannot be a martyr, she cannot be the figure of the wronged woman, if she's a lesbian in a marriage of convenience with Slick.
Are we reading and airy -fairy proxy for the lesbian charge?
I don’t think so. I think the time now is for a presidential election and that changes everything.
And until men quit doing as you did, quit calling her “bitch”, she won’t be taken down. All that word does even to a conservative woman is set any woman’s teeth on edge. It muddies your fine argument with something that women instinctively hate, men who call women, any women, “bitches”. It is like the “N” word for many many women. I know there are exceptions, but I don’t like women who call women “bitches” either. It is a sisterly kind of thing.
Otherwise interesting post.
God bless the ignorant among us ya’ll!
As a foaming at the mouth, flopping on the floor conservative,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Interesting comment, we have reached the point that one who would advocate constitutionally mandated government stripped of socialism and with respect for the rights of individuals is himself aware that he is seen by perhaps a majority of Americans as being in the throes of a grand mal seizure. Those of us who still understand the meaning of the word freedom are widely considered to be as mad as a hatter.