Herbert: With treasure of women voters, why campaign to "dimwitted guys, insecure in masculinity"?

[DeepModem Mom]

NYT: Hillary’s Tough Sell
BOB HERBERT
Published: November 6, 2007

The U.S. is in the midst of the most important presidential election campaign since World War II, and if there has ever been a time when women voters had the opportunity to decisively affect the nation’s future, it’s now.

Hillary Clinton’s historic candidacy has heightened the interest of women voters who would no doubt have been paying close attention to this election in any event because of its classic lineup of issues, including the war in Iraq, a highly uncertain economy and the makeover of the Supreme Court, with its implications for abortion, civil liberties and so on....

That means there’s a treasure trove of potential votes out there among women. But except for the recent flap over the treatment of Senator Clinton in last week’s debate, the campaigns are nearly all being waged as if the only votes that really matter are those of dimwitted guys fascinated by big guns and insecure in their masculinity.

Six years after Sept. 11 and nearly five years into the absurd war in Iraq, the election talk is still mostly mindless macho chatter about who’s toughest; who would be best at shoving Iran around; who would be most extreme in dealing with terror. Incredibly, torture is still on the table.

Most of the candidates would rather be locked in a cell and forced to listen to endless loops of Rush Limbaugh monologues than spend quality time on issues like pay equity or child care or anything else that might be of particular interest to women....

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/opinion/06herbert.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1194368446-3H9ckXP6jzelzhE5skHmGw

[DURHAM D]

1. Meanwhile -

Our national media dialog is lead by a bunch of self-satisfied white guys so what else could you expect.

MSNBC appears to be elevating Dr. Maddow. Perhaps they have figured out that women basically have nothing to watch. Hopefully they will give Rachel her own show and finally get the news business into the 20th century.

[DeepModem Mom]

2. You're right -- that would be part of the problem: the domination of political commentary...

by white males.

[CTyankee]

3. You better be careful. The Defenders of White Males will show up and bash you!

Poor babies!

[Guaranteed]

7. Wow. All of these posts are filled with bigoted bullshit.

You all are so enlightened.

[CTyankee]

8. See? What did I say? n/t

[kineneb]

9. need new glasses...read post as "white whales"...

either that or the stresses of caregiving are taking their toll...

as for candidates, the entire lot are either boring (Dems) or from a dinosaur museum (Repubs)...

Boring seems better than Jurassic Park.

[gratuitous]

12. Got it in one

And I'm surprised that Bob Herbert hasn't noticed that the choice spots in front of the national microphones are dominated by the insecure dim-wits? Why else do we spend so much time "debating" who supports the troops most?

[RaleighNCDUer]

4. Which brings us to the absurdity of Hillary trying to out-macho the

guys, and her supporters raving about how tough she is.

If Hill wants to be tough, she should take on the insurance industry and promote a genuine universal healthcare plan, instead of a mandated private-insurance-for-everybody plan. Talking about Iran's mythical bomb is not tough.

[DURHAM D]

5. Do you set the same "macho" standard for the males in the race?

Or do you give them a pass because of their anatomy?

[RaleighNCDUer]

6. Absolutely.

You can't fight the people you are taking campaign contributions from.

That leaves Dennis. The only one who shows any fight facing the corporatocracy.

[Major Hogwash]

10. So, if males don't agree with Hillary, they are just dim-witted? What crap!

Herbert should double-check his facts for once.

[CTyankee]

11. Good example of "reductio ad absurdum". n/t

[DeepModem Mom]

13. Huh? He's actually quite critical of Clinton --

Many want to see a woman elected president, but would rather have someone other than Mrs. Clinton as the standard-bearer. And a substantial number will bring up, without prompting, Bill Clinton’s misadventures with other women.

If there is one word to describe the feeling of many women about Senator Clinton it might be: ambivalence.

A woman from Coral Gables, Fla., said: “I resent the fact that so many believe that Hillary speaks for all women. She does not. I admire her and I think she is well-qualified, but she lacks heart.”...

The flaw in the Clinton campaign so far has been the absence of real leadership — the failure of the candidate to galvanize supporters with a vision so compelling as to be almost irresistible.

“She’s wishy-washy,” said one woman....

[DeepModem Mom]

14. Actually, I don't know why Herbert centered this column on Clinton anyway.

To me the relevant point was that whether Clinton is in the race or not, the majority of voters are likely to be women. Therefore, why is the campaign being pitched at macho men (not ALL men, but the ones Herbert describes, for whom military posturing, even bullying, is uppermost)? Is it a kiss of death in American politics to be concerned with "soft" issues such as health care, child care, etc., instead of campaigning as the toughest guy on the block (even if you're a woman).