On Hillary

While I’ve yet to exclude the possibility of voting for her, I must confess that I’ve never much cared for Hillary. In fact, I do not like her at all. I think she is a dreadful candidate whose only distinctive attribute is her spouse, who happens to be the single most accomplished politician of our generation, which is a non-transferable attribute that, sadly, falls not under the rubric of marital property.

The good news for Hillary is that the mere length and nature of her association with Bill has accrued to her, unique and invaluable experiences and insights that her opponents simply lack. This advantage is augmented by an intellectual résumé beyond reproach, and a high profile, highly successful and relevant political career of her own.

Hillary's got game.

She is exceedingly well-informed, adroit and savvy, both as a legislator and as a politician, and her espoused positions on a wide range of issues—particularly her advocacy for kids, education, and health-care—all seem imbued with a reassuring sense of sincerity that seems utterly lacking in her personality.

Herein lies the rub.

America could do considerably worse sending than the junior Senator from New York to the White House. Indeed, she is eminently qualified to be president. But the problems she presents are exceedingly bothersome.

First of all, there is the undeniable fact that a wide swath of the American electorate regard Hillary with unalloyed detestation—not unlike the sentiment that many of us have cultivated for George W. Bush. Moreover, between Bill & Hillary, George & Dick and the general state of planetary unrest over the last seven years, America is emotionally exhausted.

As such, there is something to be said for removing the Fuck You element from our national discourse. This cannot happen with Hillary in the White House, and as Bill’s role in the Hillary administration expands--as surely it will--the partisan strife will only worsen.

Secondly, some of the disdain for her is not without warrant. She brings to the race a thinly veiled sense of entitlement that is seriously unbecoming. She often projects an innate petulance that rings more truly than her efforts to seem affable, which can seem downright insulting in their falseness.

This defect may be purely a matter of telegeniety. Apocryphal tales of her warmth and charm in person infest the blogosphere. But the anecdotes to the contrary are undeniably persuasive. Either way, when a candidacy can be construed as per Leon Wieseltier of The New Republic…

“…like some hellish housewife who has seen something that she really, really wants and won’t stop nagging you about it until finally you say, fine, take it, be the damn president, just leave me alone…”

…it is not a good thing—regardless of her surname.

Thirdly, I understand that many women are enamored of the concept of a female president, in and of itself. Speaking as a man who is philosophically supportive of women’s rights, I find this obnoxious. As I understand it, a central tenet of true feminism proscribes bias on the basis of gender as anathema.

Yet, as this first, plausible, female candidate for president emerges, self-identified feminists from across the land respond giddily with proprietary references to Hillary’s vagina...

If I may... Eww.

This is as juvenile and irrelevant as was the scuttlebutt surrounding her husband’s penis back in the nineties. Nobody talks about Andrea Merkel’s genitalia—and I thank them for it.

When Hillary made her “Boy’s Club” speech at Wellesley a couple of weeks back, the entire scene was redolent with the tedious aroma of All-Women’s dogma—the tortured rationale that justifies foisting females onto the Citadel or VMI, but defends the single-sex tradition at Wellesley or Mills as if it were Masada.

Edwards and Obama are as pro-woman as Hillary. A 2005 study at Yale found male politicians with daughters to be more likely to focus on “women’s issues” than female candidates. It’s not hard to imagine Hillary pulling the proverbial ladder up behind her—especially if the price is right. This is a woman who plays for keeps--for better or worse.

So, to paraphrase Tallyrand, voting for Hillary because she’s a girl isn’t just a gross hypocrisy—it is likely a blunder. It certainly arouses contrarian sentiments--and haven't we had enough of that?

Finally, leaving the sadly, but most assuredly, critical politics of personality aside for the nonce, I like many of the things Hillary says--but I am leery of many things she does. She has the liberal gospel down cold, but she spreads it through the auspices of corporate interests that I would love to see frozen out of politics for a while.

We have been justifiably preoccupied since 9/11 with more pressing issues, but this does not mean that America’s campaign finance metastasis is in remission. Indeed, presidential politics has become little more than an auction, rigged by special interests (I.e., corporate media), to which Hillary is eminently beholden.

The undisputed Queen of the Fund Raisers doesn’t raise her money a dollar at a time over the Internet. She is by no means quaint, and I'm not sure how that matters, but it makes me uneasy.

So, as I say: We can do much worse, and I can certainly imagine voting for her, despite my misgivings. I’m not sure there is a preferable alternative. But if she does win, I’ll be pleasantly surprised if she doesn’t disappoint…

…and, isn’t that a shame.

~US~