Hillary Clinton’s Ugly Run
Email This Post
-
Print This Post
-
I’ve waited to write a recap of the Hillary Clinton campaign until the feeding frenzy was over.
In nearly every article I read, the author was quick to point out that it wasn’t the media’s horrible treatment of Hillary Clinton that caused her to lose. I agree. However, the reporters and pundits who had a field day attacking Hillary Clinton on personal grounds rather than policy issues do not get a bye on this one. Maybe they can justify their actions in their own small minds, bit I do not think we should. Women, in particular, should view this as part of a broader attack on our participation in government. Here are some of the more brilliant comments issued during the Clinton campaign that represent an affront to all women:
“There’s just something about her that feels castrating, overbearing and scary.”
-Tucker Carlson
“Mrs. Clinton’s testicle lockbox is big enough for the entire Democrat hierarchy, not just some people in the media.”
-Rush Limbaugh
“The reason she’s a U.S. senator, the reason she’s a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around.”
-Chris Matthews
Now, if you can believe it, all of these political hacks have their own shows. That’s right. Somebody considers these gentlemen (and I use the term loosely) worthy of broadcast status. However, nobody ever said they appealed to anyone’s intellectual side and it is certainly clear that the three of them have issues with women in general that they projected onto Hillary Clinton.
If you want to talk about the fact that Hillary Clinton was one of the members of the Senate who saw fit to give President Bush unprecedented war powers as a reason she should not be elected, then I’m behind you. That’s one of the reasons why she wasn’t my number one candidate. If you don’t agree with Clinton’s immigration policy, then by all means call her to task. If you think her economic policy is doomed to fail, then say so. However, the line should be drawn when the banter borders on verbal abuse. The fact is that Tucker Carlson, Rush Limbaugh or Chris Matthews would never treat John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney with such utter disrespect and disdain.
When NBC Political Director Chuck Todd was asked if the media covered Clinton fairly he said, “You can only cover the campaign that is in front of you. And the fact is the campaign that was in front of us was one that was being presented as somebody who was running for Bill Clinton’s third term.” Honestly, Todd should consider going into politics because his answer had nothing to do with the actual question he was asked. If the media raised this issue, one could at least argue against that premise. You could argue that Hillary Clinton was her own person. However, let’s take this comment at face value because even this is a bunch of blarney.
Many will argue, myself included, that John McCain is running George Bush’s third term campaign. How do we know that? John McCain is in 100% voting agreement with George Bush over the last year from tax cuts, to war funding, to torture and beyond. His campaign employs high-powered lobbyists and fund-raisers, many of who worked on the Bush campaigns. You know, the guys he has taken a public stand against. Neither NBC nor any of the other mainstream media have chosen to address these issues. Instead, they insist on presenting John McCain as an anti-Washington, straight-talking, special-interest-battling maverick. Hillary Clinton would never have been given such a break by the media.
Rather than discuss her policies and positions, the media focused on such pressing national issues as her cleavage, her wrinkles, or her choice of clothing. Prior to the Democratic primary kick-off, Fox News Channel conducted focus groups to determine what kind of campaign the voters wanted to see from Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Fox consultant, Frank Luntz, was aiming high on the intelligence scale when he conducted these focus groups. “How many of you want to see them really argue,” he asked. “And, how many of you want them to make love to each other?” Can anybody figure out what’s wrong with that picture? It’s no wonder then that we have men in the audience at Hillary Clinton events yelling, “Iron my shirt!” The media’s total lack of responsibility in presenting objections to Clinton’s presidency in fair, balanced and truthful terms goes a long way toward fostering such a bigoted response from the general male population.
When you put the pieces of the anti-Hillary media coverage puzzle together, it is pretty obvious that the majority of the bashing comes from conservative news outlets and commentators. Now, I understand that people will argue that point where Chris Matthews is concerned. He did work for Jimmy Carter and Tip O’Neill. That was then, however, and this is now. Matthews admitted voting for George Bush in 2000, and he has done absolutely nothing but present the president in the most respectful, glowing, positive terms, no matter what transgressions the man has committed. The popular misconception that Matthews is from the ‘liberal media’ gives MSNBC an advantage, allowing the network to present itself as being balanced.
Those who employ the ilk of Matthews, Limbaugh, Hannity, and Carlson are conspicuous by their silence. Of course, the mainstream media has been thoroughly ‘corporatized’ and aren’t the least bit interested in being credible news outlets. Those days are gone. When David Schuster made a degrading remark about the Clinton’s “pimping out” Chelsea to campaign for her mother, MSNBC apologized and gave Schuster a token suspension. However, they allowed mad dog Matthews to remain on the loose to regularly attack Hillary Clinton on everything but the issues. While she was actively campaigning for the presidency, his fixation on Clinton neared obsessive proportions.
And while we’re talking about the flak the Clintons took for having Chelsea campaign, let’s remember that Mitt Romney employed all of his children in his bid for the White House. While he was actively campaigning for the presidency, Romney was asked why his children weren’t serving their country in Iraq instead of campaigning for their father. Romney’s answer was steeped in sheer entitlement and arrogance. According to Romney, his sons were indeed serving their country by helping their father get elected. The mainstream media barely mentioned Romney’s comment, even though it was worthy of a thrashing for its total lack of sensitivity for the families whose members are in harm’s way every day fighting a war that is both unjustified and illegal.
The media’s assault on Hillary Clinton started months ago back in Iowa. They were calling for her to quit then. She showed true grit and determination for many months beyond that and, frankly, whether or not she was your choice for president, you should be proud of her efforts as a woman competing in what has historically been a man’s world. In the final analysis, Barack Obama didn’t win by a landslide. He didn’t embarrass Hillary Clinton. In fact, neither would have gotten to the necessary delegate count without the superdelegates thrown in. Carol Jenkins, president of The Women’s Media Center, said of Clinton, “All women have gained from her ability to go the distance and not be turned into a quitter.” Jenkins also rightfully pointed out that each woman would have to judge for herself whether or not she’d be willing to go through what Hillary Clinton went through.





Pingback by Todays Current Events in Politics » Alert - “Barack Obama” “Hillary Clinton on 15 June 2008:
[...] Hillary Clinton?s Ugly Run By Deb Della Piana Prior to the Democratic primary kick-off, Fox News Channel conducted focus groups to determine what kind of campaign the voters wanted to see from Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Fox consultant, Frank Luntz, was aiming high on the … Hypocrisy - http://hypocrisy.com [...]
Comment by Charlotte A. Weybright on 16 June 2008:
And don’t forget the “Hillary Nutcracker” that is still being sold on eBay. I still say if someone had put out some type of item that showed Obama eating watermelon or picking cotton or McCain in a prisoner of war cage, there would have been an outcry and the item would have been pulled.
But not in Hillary’s case. I am glad she stayed until the end. I am extremely proud of her and women, in general.
I am 60 and just a few months younger than Hillary, and I know I never would have had the stamina and the strength to withstand the beating she took from the male-dominated media.
Charlotte A. Weybrights last blog post..CEDAR CREEK - AN ILL WIND BLOWING
Comment by Sphynx on 16 June 2008:
You hit the nail on the head in regards to why I’m so upset at so many women. They want to take it out on Obama that all those Cosnervatives and/or Republicans used sexual innuendos to attack her campaign. The following of Clinton Supporters for McCain is appalling. I realize that the reason is to get Clinton in office in 2012 instead of 2016 (though, personally, I think this was the best year she could hope for and in 2012, she’d have a much smaller number of votes since she can never again hope for the initial media boost of entitlement).
But still, that’s like poking out your left eye just because you lost your right eye. Just doesn’t make any sense.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 16 June 2008:
Hey Charlotte: Thanks for the comment. I agree with you on the Hillary Nutcracker thing. Any women who truly believes that the playing field in this country is even…on any issue…is dreaming. It is not, and I contend that the conservatives have waged a war against women and are continuing to do so with John McCain’s candidacy.
I have the utmost respect for Hillary Clinton and always have. I think she’s bright, determined and admirable. She is not always right. She is not always politically correct. And I certainly do not agree with her on all issues, but I can respect her. And that’s more than I can muster for any of the Republican candidates.
I believe that she can run again in 2012 and be successful IF women in this country make equality an issue no matter who is elected in November. We need to band together and be heard all over this nation.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 16 June 2008:
To Sphynx: I agree with you also. I think if women move toward McCain simply as ‘payback’ the only group they’ll be paying back is themselves. John McCain is no friend to women, the GLBT community or, for that matter, any other minority. He’s a member of the white only GOB (Good Old Boy) party.
I encourage all women to read the 2008 Republican Platform. It’s out there on the web. They have great plans for us women, in family life, health care, you name it…as long as it includes abstinence and, barring that, carrying out every pregnancy to term. They also make sure to tell us where ‘our place’ is in family life. What a great bunch of folks, really. How would any of us dumb women get through the day without them!
Better still, go directly to John McCain’s web site. He’s got a whole page dedicated to overturning Roe v. Wade. Yeah, he’s a great friend to women…WAKE UP, LADIES!
Deb Della Pianas last blog post..Just say no to Joe!