This is a tough call, because her platform is so retrogressive that issues that seem personal are in fact very relevant because her stance is so retrogressive, she's proven herself to be a complete hypocrite and her personal ethics code is unworkable, not to mention unsuccessful, in reality.
Either women's issues matter, or they don't. If someone is saying to me that they don't, to me that says to me that I'm not fully recognized as a citizen of this country and that reproductive rights don't 'count' because women, who bear children, don't count. That is unacceptable to me. When people say these issues are 'personal' to me that is just code for 'second-class citizen issues'.
People seem to forget these are more than just her personal views. This is the standard of conduct she wants to enforce on the entire country, and in that respect it is anything but private. That puts me in the sector that thinks the press has been way, way too easy on her.
Let's run a poll on H Clinton and ask the same questions and see what the results are. I'm sure the answers would be interesting. I 'betcha' few would say the press is too hard on her, despite her being crucified almost daily by the right for the last 15 years and Limbaugh calling Chelsea a 'dog' when she was like twelve and things of that nature. Clinton never whined, or had proxy whiners like Poor wittle (witless) Palin does.
|