Thursday, May 05, 2005

In The Republic of Me, Hillary Clinton Would Be Flayed And Brined

Hillary Rodham Clinton is a disgrace, a hypocrite and an insult to feminists everywhere. Discountenanced as I am to find myself in agreement on any point ever with New York Republican spinster (not that kind, in fact he recently married his [male] partner; looove me the gay Repubs) Arthur Finkelstein, one this one point and this one alone I heartily concur: Hillary must go.

Not, I hasten to add, for the reasons given by Finkelstein's delusional mouth-frothing campaign: viz, that HRC is 'a confirmed left-wing radical and life-long liberal who long ago sold her soul to the divisive, radical and ultra-liberal special interest groups who see everyone as "victims" and want to use your tax dollars and the power of the state to make things right.'

Au maximum possible contraire: she is a consummate political opportunist who will sell out any and all principles to achieve and retain office. 'Life-long liberal' she may have been, but she's in the process of skidding rightward at such a rate that Rasmussen Reports maintains a whole (ridiculous and methodologically incomprehensible) Hillary Meter just to track her progress.

The ember at the heart of my long-smoldering loathing of HRC is her rank sellout of feminist principles. Born in '47, educated at Wellesley and Yale, married in '75, she had every opportunity to embody the feminist ideals she was unquestionably marinating in, and which presumably moved her to keep her surname (until it became politically expedient to augment it with his; anybody else remember old Hillary Rodham, now so carefully wiped from the public record? Damnatio memoriae is not dead). She could absolutely have pursued a political career under her own steam in the 1970s, as other women (like Bella Abzug) did. Instead, she prosecuted her manifestly voracious ambitions the old-fashioned way: via a surrogate cock. Hillary Rodham spent the '80s churning fat coin in sketchy business deals, while the star she'd hitched her wagon to rose as planned.

Then, when he hit the big time, she expected to just waltz into a policy-making position, and was shocked and horrified when America spat at her. Now granted, they spat at her for many unacceptable reasons, but the spitting itself was not wrong. Not only was her bid for conjugal power amazingly politically cack-handed, it was a gross perversion of feminist and democratic agendas. Yes, in the strongest possible terms, women must hold the highest offices and make the critical policies. No, they fucking well must not have wifed their way there.

Hillary's political progress on the back of this naked jeu de casting-couch can only be interpreted as a serious step backwards for feminism in America; on that basis alone she is a horrendous role model for young women and girls, who may be quite confused enough about the status of feminist ideals in contemporary culture. Aetiologically, HRC is basically a Washington Wife writ large and hungry: Tipper Gore on steroids.

All these years, that's pretty much been enough for me to situate her comfortably beyond the pale. Lately, though, she's obligingly rendered ever more proofs of her profound fibrelessness, to the point where I'm genuinely astonished that anyone on the left can look at her rictus-frozen face without spontaneously vomiting.

She voted to authorize the war in Iraq, and disgustingly mantled herself in 9/11 sanctimony and spurious New Yorker solidarity to justify it.

She rushed to return $50,000 in campaign donations raised by the American Muslim Alliance, in response to a smear campaign denouncing the AMA as supporters of Palestinian terrorism, on the basis of their web site's quoting from the 1976 UN General Assembly resolution on Palestinian self-determination.

In the aftermath she fell all over herself to back away from hopes for Palestinian statehood, and affirm in the most slavish terms her fealty to 'Israel's safety and security'.

In 2000 she was already running on foreign policy sentiments eerily consonant with the views of the current Administration: 'It very much is in our interest to assert the leadership required to meet our strategic and national security needs and interests around the world.'

Since then, she's not only not sorry for having voted for the war, she came back from a visit in February bearing the intelligence that Iraq was 'functioning quite well', and that the intense insurgent activity was 'an indication of their failure'.

In March she shared a platform with Rick Santorum, than whom progressive values have no more committed foe in American government.

And, of course, as I won't shut up banging on about, the abortion about-face. In many ways the ultimate, because so very iconic, betrayal of the progressive left. If none of the other transgressions did it for you, surely she's crossed your line with this one.

And if not, it may be time to ask yourself, where are my lines anyway? Do I have any?

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by