Wednesday, July 14, 2004


Excuse me, but, Hillary Clinton isn't the nominee. Nor is she on the ticket. Nor was she, if I recall, an integral part of Kerry's victories (correct me if I'm wrong, readers, I am still recovering from primary fatigue).

So now there's a NY state party official decrying Hil's absense from the prime-time stage as an outrage to all American women.

For the record, I am not outraged.

First off, I didn't see Boxer or DiFi in the list at issue either. Nor the other women senators - though they are all to be part of feature on, uh, our women senators.

A main beef seems to be the inclusion of Christie Vilsack, wife of Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack:

"To include the wife of the governor of Iowa, who I'm sure is a wonderful woman, and to not include Hillary Clinton is just such a glaring injustice," Hope said.

"It is, frankly, very stupid," she added.

If I may betray the sisterhood - or champion the sisterhood - for a moment. Let's play with this a bit, shall we. Let's see . . . . what makes this Iowa chick qualified, after all, she's only married to the . . . um, right, Hillary was married to a governor, then a president, as well, and as I recall did quite a bit of speaking. And fought back against those who questioned her right to do so.

And - to further hypothesize: I know nothing about the First Lady of Iowa, but let's pretend for a moment that she isn't anything but a wife and homemaker. Less legitimate woman? Doesn't have a job? Doesn't do work? That's the implication here. As one raised by a woman who chose to stay home and raise me, I'm very, very sensitive to arguments that a woman working in the home isn't really working. Untrue. Bad argument. And in fact, it flies in the face of that other freedom of choice we fought/fight for - freedom to choose our career paths free of condemnation from anyone (men for leaving the home OR women for staying in the home).

"It's a total outrage," Hope said. "Women all over New York state and all over America are being asked to carry a very heavy responsibility for winning this election for the Democrats."

She's right - women have a heavy responsibility. Of course, Democratic women have the weight, really. And any other peace loving patriot woman, too. But I find it abhorrent, self-serving and counterproductive to spend a second of the 2004 election cycle bitching about rightful airtime. I hate it when any faction of the Democratic party whines about "not getting their due" (the implied threat being "you better pay attention to me or I'll just pout my way to the other side."

You really want to re-elect George W. Bush out of SPITE for the Dems? 'Cause you're upset?

Puh-lease. Ladies - and gentlemen - forgive this foolish New Yorker, shes knows not what she does.

And clap extra loud for Ms. Vilsack. We're the party of inclusion - she has as much right to speak and represent our party - both genders and all beliefs - as Hillary, my mother, me, or anyone else.

In related news:

Democrat Barack Obama to deliver convention keynote address

This guy is the Next Big Thing. I wish him luck.

No comments: