Time: room for only one powerful woman in politics?
By on Jan 10th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Time: room for only one powerful woman in politics?
Jay Newton-Small on Time’s Swampland blog wonders:
[I]s there room in Washington for both a Speaker Pelosi and a President Hillary?
Scott Lemieux at TAPPED observes, “A blogger at Swampland (via) is inventing a mythical catfight between Pelosi and Clinton because…another (male) member of Congress [Rep. George Miller (D-CA)] endorsed Obama. I’m serious.” (via Atrios)
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Certainly. It means we can have two fewer fat balding white males.
January 10th, 2008 at 6:35 pmPelosi? Powerful? She and Reid are a total disappointment!
January 10th, 2008 at 6:41 pmAs a fat balding white male, I concur.
January 10th, 2008 at 6:42 pmAs a thin balding white man, I apologize to my portly compatriots.
January 10th, 2008 at 6:47 pmBut not for the spirit of my post…. ;)
The only thing worse than people who think a vote for Clinton is a vote for a woman in the Whitehouse are people who think that a vote for someone other than Clinton is because they don’t want a woman in the Whitehouse. I thought the objective of equality for women was to let people judge everyone individually on their merits, not judge men on their merits and women on the merits of being a woman.
Not to mention the fact that a woman who votes against another woman is not automatically discriminating against women. If Pelosi’s advisor supports Obama, then the only thing that means is that Pelosi’s advisor likes Obama. It might (gasp) have nothing to do with Clinton or the idea of a woman in the Whitehouse. But I guess it’s more sensational to make everything to do with Clinton be about about equality of the sexes.
I’m not voting for her. Does that make me a male chauvanist? No. I’m not voting for her because she’s barking mad.
January 10th, 2008 at 6:52 pmOff Topic.
Huckabee using push polls in Michigan.
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/005054.php#comments
Since when did the Commandment against “bearing false witness†not apply to political campaigns? What has Christianity come to? David in NY
ROSSinDETROIT wrote on January 10, 2008 5:46 PM:
I’m in MI near Detroit. My ZIP Code is heavily Dem. I just got one of the push poll robocalls described. It urged me as a Democrat to cross over and vote in the GOP primary for Huckabee! It was immediately clear at the beginning of the 2 min 45 sec call that this was in favor of Huckabee. I was surprised at the end when the disclaimer stated it was not sponsored by a campaign. It’s clearly candidate advocacy.
Sorry, for the second post. Meant to post it here.
January 10th, 2008 at 6:52 pmThere’s only room for one powerful woman at a time — if you’re totally inadequate man.
BTW guys, there are worse things than being bald.
January 10th, 2008 at 6:53 pmFor example: Mitt Romney.
Pelosi needs to go.
January 10th, 2008 at 6:55 pmFaked up hair is worse than no hair, anyday and everyday.
And thanks swordsbane, for a well written and right on post.
January 10th, 2008 at 6:55 pmI’m not voting for her. Does that make me a male chauvanist? No. I’m not voting for her because she’s barking mad.
Comment by swordsbane — January 10, 2008 @ 6:52 pm
I’m not voting for Hillary for the same reasons. Does that mean we’re having a cat fight? Call Chris Matthews!!
January 10th, 2008 at 6:58 pmZooey- You know, I’ve seen this election analyzed every way one could think of. But, this is about the most inane piece I’ve read.
What the hell is “barking mad” swordsbane?
January 10th, 2008 at 7:00 pm’m not voting for her. Does that make me a male chauvanist? No. I’m not voting for her because she’s barking mad.
Comment by swordsbane — January 10, 2008 @ 6:52 pm
that’s a bushit rationale. she’s not barking mad, at all, she’s very sane. she’s just wrong. your misogyny is showing.
January 10th, 2008 at 7:02 pmEver since Hillary made the cookie comment in the 90’s I just can’t see her any other way than “mean”. Every boy likes his mom’s cookies.
January 10th, 2008 at 7:06 pmmossburg- ever since Bush made the Evil Doer’s comment I’ve been losing my cookies.
January 10th, 2008 at 7:08 pmthanks for reminding me to delete my cookies…
January 10th, 2008 at 7:09 pmummmmm cookies!!
January 10th, 2008 at 7:11 pmOT, pardon me, I just got an email from the John Kerry website, saying he’s endorsing Obama.
January 10th, 2008 at 7:15 pmAs a man with a great head of hair, I choose to shave my head every other day. Meh, who cares? As for two women holding the highest positions in our government? Who cares, we men have done such a buck up job,what difference could their possibly be? Go Hillary! Vote for Change.
January 10th, 2008 at 7:15 pmWow. I think that more women in government is the answer not the question. I mean, after all, women can hardly do any worse then the men have in 200+ years, and it sure as shootin’ might be better.
January 10th, 2008 at 7:19 pmSwordsbane has a degree in Frist remote psychology dontcha know…
January 10th, 2008 at 7:19 pmI believe, that for the sake of the simple survival of the human race on Earth, we have to evolve beyond the male dominated rule of the club and fist, and have more women leaders. Many more. More women leaders than men.
January 10th, 2008 at 7:23 pmIs there room for one INTELLIGENT political pundit in the TV, radio and magazine/newspaper arena?
Uh.
Obviously the answer is no…
January 10th, 2008 at 7:30 pmThe better question was asked in this column, does Hill’reh win in New Hampshire open the door to John McCain becoming president?:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2238148,00.html#article_continue
I knew the Independents were making a mistake taking their eye off the ball and trying to determine the Rep nominee, instead of cementing their choice of Barack Obama.
Tsk, tsk ….
Perhaps, they will get another shot in 4 years …..
January 10th, 2008 at 7:33 pmThey freak when Madeline Albright or Janet reno is too damn ugly and Hillary is too damn calculated, then freak when Condi wears a sexy Matrix outfit or Pelosi wears a designer outfit. Anyone looked into what brand of frilly undies Larry Craig wears, or how obscenely hideous Tom Delay, Newt Gingrich and 99% of the other farts running our nation are? Of course not, because men are to lead and women are to iron our shirts!
I mean, this is Time magazine – not People! Bill Maher was right when he called us a nation of adolescents. Most the folks who comment here are not the ones I’m ranting about. Political correctness is a stupid concept except for the fact most people lack the human decency to be mature enough to refrain from being assho!es.
Hopefully women will one day have strong media presence that doesn’t air during the daytime where they can call these idiots on this stuff. Liberals have our Keith Olbermann – now women need someone to stand up for them.
January 10th, 2008 at 7:43 pmI know what it is:
“Ever since Satan
gave Eve a vision of freedom God
has been pissed as hell that women
betrayed him… And it’s been war
ever since.”
http://www.CULTofEDEN.com
January 10th, 2008 at 7:48 pm(shameless self-promotion for my movie… sorry).
This whole argument about “women” being better or “needed” to break the glass ceiling, is a red herring being used as a political ploy to play on the emotions. I agree we need more women involved for a number of reasons, but to vote for or against one because she is a woman is not the best course of action.
I will vote for the person who I believe stands for what I believe is best for me, those I care about and the country as a whole. It matters not to me if it is a woman, man, straight, gay, black, brown, white, or any other stereotype, as long as they show me they are the best choice.
January 10th, 2008 at 7:50 pmComment by Merlin — January 10, 2008 @ 7:50 pm
I agree, Merlin. Women want/need equality to men, not superiority. Vote for the best candidate, not your guilty conscience because women have gotten the short end of the stick. That’s not equality.
January 10th, 2008 at 8:05 pmNo, powerful women are very territorial.
Oprah doesn’t want to play second fiddle to Hillary.
Pelosi is a total failure as Speaker. She should retire.
January 10th, 2008 at 8:22 pmComment by Jack Jett — January 10, 2008 @ 8:22 pm
yeah, tom delay.
there was a speaker!
January 10th, 2008 at 9:01 pmI’m so glad we can have more then one powerful man in office. Good to see we don’t have equality yet in the US. No worries about Obama as he has to have security guards as after he won in Iowa he got death threats from all over. I notice how much love and respect Americans have for candidates running for President. We are the model for the World on we conduct ourselves.
January 10th, 2008 at 9:09 pmNo. I’m not voting for her because she’s barking mad.
Comment by swordsbane — January 10, 2008 @ 6:52 pm
No, powerful women are very territorial.
Comment by Jack Jett — January 10, 2008 @ 8:22 pm
How are either of these comments any different from describing Obama as a “clean” African-American? Sexism, that is, bigotry, is alive and well in this election.
January 10th, 2008 at 9:20 pmWell, of course there’s room for ONLY one powerful woman in politics. It’s like how Lucy Liu was asked recently about if she thought that her upcoming new show, “Cashmere Mafia”, is in “direct competition” with another show, “Lipstick Jungle” because both shows star women.
January 10th, 2008 at 11:16 pmThe “pundits” and “analysts” just have to make up something to minimize women in politics (if they don’t meet the approval of the “right” people). Why do I have the feeling that if it were two conservative women in the equation there would be plenty of room for them?
Incidentally, a link to the story about Lucy Liu can be read at http://www.imdb.com/news/wenn/2008-01-04#celeb7 .
January 10th, 2008 at 11:18 pmYou’ve got to be kidding!
This is getting so unbelievably trivial.
Now Hillary Clinton isn’t electable because there is another
“powerful woman” in Washington already.
Wow, how about all the rest of us powerful women just quit right now.
January 10th, 2008 at 11:39 pm“No. I’m not voting for her because she’s barking mad.
Comment by swordsbane — January 10, 2008 @ 6:52 pm
No, powerful women are very territorial.
Comment by Jack Jett — January 10, 2008 @ 8:22 pm
How are either of these comments any different from describing Obama as a “clean†African-American? Sexism, that is, bigotry, is alive and well in this election.
Comment by leopold — January 10, 2008 @ 9:20 pm”
Well, barking mad isn’t a stereotype like “clean” or articulate has been used to put Uncle Tom in his place.
I don’t know if powerful women are any more territorial than other humans. But humans are territorial. Just remember that the next time you try to pass somebody and they speed up. I didn’t see either of these statements as sexist.
January 11th, 2008 at 12:10 amI read a lot of the comments at Swampland. That female blogger is getting a major smack down in her own thread.
Not a single comment was in agreement with her, and most were flat out nasty.
I suspect Jay Newton would be more comfortable covering arts and entertainment, since she clearly is unqualified to cover politics.
January 11th, 2008 at 1:01 am.
SORT ANSWER…
NO!
NEITHER represent what America used to be.
.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:33 amMrs. Clinton’s lack of qualifications have zero to do with Nancy Pelosi.
January 11th, 2008 at 6:37 amIf everyone is so hell-bent on electing a woman, please look at the newest Senator from Missouri–Claire McCasklill.
This is a woman who won her election based on her own merits, not her husband’s or anyone else’s.
She has truly hit the ground running, unlike Mrs. Clinton, who has languished in the Senate and has an unimpressive “list” of legislation to prove it. Go ahead, take a look at her.gov site–
I expected much more from a person who keeps screaming
“Ready from Day One”! I was underwhelmed.
What a stupid comment. Why are you giving it coverage? What if he had said the same about Blacks or Hispanics or Italians or gays or red heads? It’s time to climb out of the goo and into the 21st century.
January 11th, 2008 at 7:09 amThe media assault on Hillary on all fronts continues unabated–each day to cut out a little more of the ground under her–it is insidious and calculated!
January 11th, 2008 at 8:30 amThis is truly sexist. Why are women held to a different standard? The more the media and blogosphere hold Hillary to a different standard, the more female votes she earns. Not all women like Hillary, but when she gets attacked with sexist remarks, the more the women will gather around her and vote for her. So if you don’t want Hillary as president, stop the sexist comments.
January 11th, 2008 at 8:34 amIt will be a great day in America when our leaders are judged not by their gender, not by their race, but by their qualifications and how well they do their job.
When that day comes, nobody will raise the question of there being “room” in Washington for both a female president and a female speaker — any more than they would raise the question of there being room for both a male president and a male speaker.
January 11th, 2008 at 8:51 am1000 powerful men in Washington is okay and 2 powerful women is too much?! When is this Biblical and archaic “women are second class citizens” (in this country) going to be put to rest. The most masculine of men are those who are comfortable around strong women.
January 11th, 2008 at 1:02 pm