NYT Feminists Still Giddy About Hillary's Chances In 2016: Any Gender Problems Have Been 'Wiped Out'

Newsbusters ^

[Sub-Driver]

NYT Feminists Still Giddy About Hillary's Chances In 2016: Any Gender Problems Have Been 'Wiped Out' By Tim Graham Created 05/26/2013 - 7:52am

Politico’s Katie Glueck reported two feminists who’ve written opinion columns for The New York Times are still giddy about Hillary Clinton’s chances in 2016. Benghazi, schmengazi.

Appearing Thursday at the liberal Center for American Progress, former Times columnist Anna Quindlen asserted any gender-related problems Hillary encountered in previous races have been “wiped out,” and her gender would only be an asset if she runs in 2016.

“I think the gender issue as a problem or a deal breaker — ‘Can we have a woman as president of the United States?’ … it was wiped out,” Quindlen said. “It was wiped out when she ran and nearly won in 2008, and it since has been even further wiped out by her performance as secretary of state.”

Feminists don’t want to hear anything about four Americans dying because the female Secretary of State somehow failed in her duties. That ought to at least slow down liberals from saying Hillary’s allegedly stellar performance has “wiped out” any concerns about her competence, irrespective of gender.

“I think there will be many issues around her candidacy if she runs in 2016,” Quindlen continued. “I do not think her gender will be one except that there will be a whole bunch of women quietly saying, ‘Yay,’ every day [until] the election.”

Current Times columnist and former editorial page editor Gail Collins was eager to agree:

“When she ran for the Senate, … you’d see these mobs of women, … many of them tended to be middle-aged. I took from them a sense of excitement about the idea that you can have your life, raise a family, … maybe then, once when the kids are gone, you can have some amazing thing — not just another job or degree but just some spectacular adventure,” Collins said. “That seems to me to be the great Hillary message that just resonates with women of a certain age.”

The event was tied to the 50th anniversary publication of Betty Friedan’s feminist manifesto “The Feminine Mystique.” Collins wrote a new Introduction, and Quindlen wrote an Afterword.

[billhilly]

Exactly.

[sten]

so they’d endorse Sarah... right?

oh, it’s not about ‘women’... it’s about ‘progressive women’. gotcha

hypocrites

[Wuli]

“Any Gender Problems Have Been ‘Wiped Out’”

Why?

Just because Obama gave her a job to keep her off his back side while he was in office; a job where his staff made all the actual foreign policy decisions and all she had to do was jet around the world and collect the thousands of photo ops of her appearances with officials, as a sort of pictoral resume;

even while on her watch at State,

in the Middle East no diplomatic breakthroughs,

in Afghanistan no diplomatic breakthroughs,

as regards Syria the opposite of diplomatic breakthroughs,

as regards Korea the opposite of diplomatic breaktrhoughs,

as regards Russia a so-called “reset” that turned into a one-sided farce.

And more.

No. All over the world, other than her thousands of photo ops, there is no record of success from Hillary’s term at State.

I’m sure she is not worried. If she cannot win in a 2016 race for POTUS, all those photo ops and all the international political networking she has done will allow her to join her defacto husband in his retirement job - selling inluence in U.S. political circles to foreign buyers. She didn’t ask for Sec State for nothin.

[Nemoque]

Gender is about language. Sex is about biology. I hate to be a jerk about this, but it drives me crazy. People have sex. Words have gender. Hillary, according to her book, is a switch hitter. She is of the female sex. She will always be a female. She is just a sexually immoral female. No doubt that will cause some to support her, and others to reject her. Do you really want a practicing lesbian as POTUS? If she divorces Bill and marries another woman, how perverted would that be? Do married women really want to support lesbianism as the “new norm”?