 |
By Stephanie Herman Rightgrrl Co-Founder stephanie@free-market.net March 13, 1999 Originally Published in USA Journal |
Last week she announced to the world that Bill Clinton was our nation's first woman president. So much for our understanding of what constitutes a "woman."
Old-fashioned people have always described women as those possessing a uterus, a couple ovaries, projectile breasts, the ability to bear children... the legal right to abort them. But the enlightened, open-minded, beyond-the-box thinkers (otherwise known as Clinton apologists) have obviously surpassed the un-deconstructed cognizance of these traditionalist neanderthals. Man is now woman, white is now black. Rape, for that matter, is now sex. And vice versa.
David Horowitz called this one a few months back, explaining to Rush Limbaugh that Democrats win at the political PR game for their ability to boil down complex political issues into easy-to-swallow symbolism. What better symbol to defend a presidential rapist than to dub him an honorary woman? By a fellow supportive woman, no less!
Heaven knows they're practiced at this art. When Republicans argue against affirmative action, suggesting that it traps the poor into a dependence on government, fails to reward their achievement and production and furthermore aids in the lowering of their self-esteem, Democrats call this reasoning "racist."
When Republicans argue against green policies, citing that eco-funded research produces biased results, that federal regulations result only in fines paid into an already swelling government, and that free enterprise would likely bring about the best system of recycling and environmental reclamation, Democrats describe these Republicans as "pro-dirty-air."
And when Republicans condemn the actions of a president who has allegedly harassed and raped subordinates, willingly demeaned his wife
and daughter, casually commited felonies to cover up his actions, and blatantly lied to the American people, Democrats dub him a...woman. Oh yeah, and he's black, too.
Apparently the female nature is not only definable but fully represented in the persona of our president. But just what limiting qualities define the female nature? According to Quinn: softness and sensitivity -- qualities she labels as "feminine," surely to the disgust of Gloria Steinem. Let it be known that these qualities, when possessed by President Clinton, are enough to elevate him to the position of top gal. The ovaries be damned!
Such an absurdity, though, does deserve another look. Can it really be explained away as just more ridiculous symbolism on the part ofDemocrats? Probably not.
It shouldn't be overlooked that Quinn's remark came just days before Elizabeth Dole was to announce forming an exploratory committee to assess the viability of a run in 2000. Republicans are positioning themselves to potentially offer up the first female presidential candidate in our history and this had to come as a blow to the party "known" for championing women. And not the first blow in recent months.
The question had to be, how can We, the Democrats steal Dole's thunder, and defy reality by proving we got there first? Easy -- evince Bill as our first woman president. Then, if Liddy does ascend the throne in 2000, she and the party she rode in on are relegated to -- at best -- second place.
Whatever their motivations, the only sane response to such drivel involves unabashedly mixing the British witticisms of Red Dwarf's Kryton and Black Adder's Baldrick: "I think I see the flaw, Sir, in your otherwise cunning plan." And it is this: the American people aren't that stupid.
It's not lost on We, the Dolts that when Democrats needed to woo back the black constituency in the '98 elections, Bill Clinton became our first black president. Now, when Democrats need to woo back the female voting bloc, so horrified by the allegations that Clinton not only harassed but raped, and the majority of whom (when polled) believe Juanita Broaddrick's story... well, it doesn't take a genius to predict the next phase of this ludicrous strategy.
So go ahead, Sally Quinn. Defy reality! Redefine the English language! It's certainly not a stretch for you -- trying so hard, as you have, to convince women they're indebted to a misogynist.
This article copyright © 1999 by Stephanie Herman and may not be reproduced in any form without the express written consent of its author. All rights reserved.