thedrifter
10-22-05, 08:21 AM
A ‘Woman President’? But Which One?
Written by John Armor
Saturday, October 22, 2005
This is not about Dick Morris’ latest book, Condi vs. Hillary: The Next Great Presidential Race. The issue today is “Should America have a woman President?”
I reply, “Of course, and not a moment too soon. But shouldn’t we put a LITTLE thought into which woman would be good for the job?”
The woman/White House issue is, of course, raised by the new ABC program “Commander in Chief,” starring Geena Davis. Does anyone have slight doubt that a President should be impeached and removed, rather than praised, if he/she threatened war against another nation for executing one of its citizens, under its own (barbaric) laws?
The writers of that episode expected Americans to applaud that action by fictitious President Allen (Davis). They choose an African nation as the target, perhaps to distract the viewers from the fact that the real President Bush went to war in Iraq over the lives of 22 million people, obtained a Congressional declaration, and still faces sniping over the “legitimacy” of the war.
The Clinton cronies who litter the staff of Ms. Davis’ show expect Americans to approve President Allen’s threat of war, without Congressional approval, over a single African woman’s life. At the same time, they expect the same Americans to question President Bush’s actions, approved by Congress, over war for millions of lives.
Do they believe that the critical faculties of Americans shut down like a hard reboot on a computer when the TV is switched on? Don’t answer that; it’s rhetorical. Frank Lloyd Wright answered it when he called TV “chewing gum for the eyes.” But I digress.
Dick Morris posits that Secretary of State Condi Rice is “the only person who can defeat” Senator Hillary Clinton for President in 2008. Rice is not running then. Rice should not be running then. The highest executive position she has held so far is Provost of Stanford University. Beyond that, she is just an academic and an advisor.
Admittedly, keeping the students at Stanford from drinking themselves into a stupor, getting each other pregnant, vandalizing the premises, and flunking out, while seeing they get a competent education is not bad preparation for being President. But it is not enough. Rice needs to run for, be elected to, and function well in a high position BEFORE she runs for President.
I could see her as the Vice President under Senator (and former Governor) George Allen in 2008, and then running for President in 2016. But back to the subject of woman/President.
Implicit in the question of whether a woman should be President is the idea that Hillary Clinton would be “a good role model for American women.” Let’s examine that premise.
I have two daughters, of whom I am very, very proud. Both are very successful in the business world. Both are married to men whom I respect. Both have children who are moving well down the bumpy path to becoming adult men and women. Is Hillary a good role model for either of my daughters, or any of my assorted granddaughters?
If either of my daughters decided to stay with her husband after he made it clear, repeatedly, that she is a doormat to him, I would lose all respect for them if they did such a thing. Especially if done for personal gain at the expense of self-respect.
What if either of my daughters treated her coworkers like dirt, blamed them for all failures, screamed obscenities at them, discarded them like trash when they were no longer useful to their ambitions? Role model?
What if they engaged in a public fraud involving $700,000 to $1.1 million and sought to evade all responsibility? (Google the names of “Peter Paul,” “Hillary Clinton,” and the word “fraud” for information on that.) Role model?
What if what they supposedly believed in and thought was important, varied from moment to moment like a weathervane in a cyclone? Role model?
To show how foolish the question is whether we should “have a woman President,” reverse the sex. Make it, “should we have a man President?” The answer is then obvious. Only if that person is the best choice for the job.
Yes, Hillary IS a role model, in the same sense that Lady Macbeth is the greatest model in English literature of a woman composed of nothing but ambition who would do anything to achieve power. Hillary IS a role model as was Lucrezia Borgia in real life. Again, an example of ambition wedded to a lust for power, and divorced from any other considerations.
A woman President? Yes. As long as the model is Dame Margaret Thatcher. But Hillary is no Maggie Thatcher.
About the Writer: John Armor is a First Amendment lawyer and writer who lives in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina. John receives e-mail at John_Armor@aya.yale.edu.
Ellie
http://p089.ezboard.com/bthefontmanscommunity
Written by John Armor
Saturday, October 22, 2005
This is not about Dick Morris’ latest book, Condi vs. Hillary: The Next Great Presidential Race. The issue today is “Should America have a woman President?”
I reply, “Of course, and not a moment too soon. But shouldn’t we put a LITTLE thought into which woman would be good for the job?”
The woman/White House issue is, of course, raised by the new ABC program “Commander in Chief,” starring Geena Davis. Does anyone have slight doubt that a President should be impeached and removed, rather than praised, if he/she threatened war against another nation for executing one of its citizens, under its own (barbaric) laws?
The writers of that episode expected Americans to applaud that action by fictitious President Allen (Davis). They choose an African nation as the target, perhaps to distract the viewers from the fact that the real President Bush went to war in Iraq over the lives of 22 million people, obtained a Congressional declaration, and still faces sniping over the “legitimacy” of the war.
The Clinton cronies who litter the staff of Ms. Davis’ show expect Americans to approve President Allen’s threat of war, without Congressional approval, over a single African woman’s life. At the same time, they expect the same Americans to question President Bush’s actions, approved by Congress, over war for millions of lives.
Do they believe that the critical faculties of Americans shut down like a hard reboot on a computer when the TV is switched on? Don’t answer that; it’s rhetorical. Frank Lloyd Wright answered it when he called TV “chewing gum for the eyes.” But I digress.
Dick Morris posits that Secretary of State Condi Rice is “the only person who can defeat” Senator Hillary Clinton for President in 2008. Rice is not running then. Rice should not be running then. The highest executive position she has held so far is Provost of Stanford University. Beyond that, she is just an academic and an advisor.
Admittedly, keeping the students at Stanford from drinking themselves into a stupor, getting each other pregnant, vandalizing the premises, and flunking out, while seeing they get a competent education is not bad preparation for being President. But it is not enough. Rice needs to run for, be elected to, and function well in a high position BEFORE she runs for President.
I could see her as the Vice President under Senator (and former Governor) George Allen in 2008, and then running for President in 2016. But back to the subject of woman/President.
Implicit in the question of whether a woman should be President is the idea that Hillary Clinton would be “a good role model for American women.” Let’s examine that premise.
I have two daughters, of whom I am very, very proud. Both are very successful in the business world. Both are married to men whom I respect. Both have children who are moving well down the bumpy path to becoming adult men and women. Is Hillary a good role model for either of my daughters, or any of my assorted granddaughters?
If either of my daughters decided to stay with her husband after he made it clear, repeatedly, that she is a doormat to him, I would lose all respect for them if they did such a thing. Especially if done for personal gain at the expense of self-respect.
What if either of my daughters treated her coworkers like dirt, blamed them for all failures, screamed obscenities at them, discarded them like trash when they were no longer useful to their ambitions? Role model?
What if they engaged in a public fraud involving $700,000 to $1.1 million and sought to evade all responsibility? (Google the names of “Peter Paul,” “Hillary Clinton,” and the word “fraud” for information on that.) Role model?
What if what they supposedly believed in and thought was important, varied from moment to moment like a weathervane in a cyclone? Role model?
To show how foolish the question is whether we should “have a woman President,” reverse the sex. Make it, “should we have a man President?” The answer is then obvious. Only if that person is the best choice for the job.
Yes, Hillary IS a role model, in the same sense that Lady Macbeth is the greatest model in English literature of a woman composed of nothing but ambition who would do anything to achieve power. Hillary IS a role model as was Lucrezia Borgia in real life. Again, an example of ambition wedded to a lust for power, and divorced from any other considerations.
A woman President? Yes. As long as the model is Dame Margaret Thatcher. But Hillary is no Maggie Thatcher.
About the Writer: John Armor is a First Amendment lawyer and writer who lives in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina. John receives e-mail at John_Armor@aya.yale.edu.
Ellie
http://p089.ezboard.com/bthefontmanscommunity