No Hillary Dissing Here

It's all the rage -- diss Hillary and force her into public humiliation. She must confess her sin of voting for the Iraq War before a large segment of the blogosphere will consider her a worthy candidate, let alone vote for her. Kos attempts to put her in her place here. He compares her to Dick Cheney!

The problem is that Hillary refuses to grovel. In politics, groveling is a display of weakness. As a woman fighting to be the first of her gender to win the presidency, she is damned either way, but much more so if perceived to be "weak."

I am not happy that she voted to allow Bush to have his Iraq adventure (now disaster). It was a pragmatic political decision and it rubs my idealistic self the wrong way. However, she has responded to the changing situation and says she will end the war when elected. I rather like it that she's found a way of stating her case that doesn't involve a load of wallowing in humiliation. She put it this way in an AP interview:

"I have said clearly and consistently for quite some time that I regret the way the president misused the authority," said Clinton. "He misled Congress and the country on what he was seeking and what he intended to do."

The responsibility Clinton said she accepts was helping clear the way for Bush's path in Iraq. "I take responsibility for having voted to give him that authority," she said. "My focus is on what we do now. That is the proper debate."

This is not good enough for Kos and many other liberal pundits and bloggers. They want to bring this woman down. How many times am I going to hear from male voters, "I"m voting for the best candidate -- and gender will have nothing to do with it."

Gender has everything to do with it when it comes to Hillary. In order to compete in a male-dominated profession (politics), she has found it expedient to show toughness. She has also played up her centrist persona and tried to avoid the dreaded "lefty" label. Would she be in this strong position so early in the pre-primary race if she had taken the far left, anti-war stance?

She voted against making flag burning a constitutional amendment, but joined with a Republican to offer a bill to make it a federal crime. This absolutely outraged me when it went down. Now I'm seeing it as yet another one of Hillary's very clever moves to avoid the left-wing label. She is critiqued for too much nuancing, as opposed to George W Bush who wouldn't know a nuance if it hit him in the face:

"That careful, deliberate style impresses some Democrats but irritates and deflates many others: She tends to tweak her views and her rhetorical nuances to position herself in the center of most issues, leaving an uninspired impression for some."

Edwards, the darling of the netroots, is fading fast as Obama climbs the charts. Hillary is on top, much to the dismay of many. She's the top runner here in Ohio, according to this Quinnipiac poll. And here, in a collection of many polls, Hillary is seen to be running away from the pack.

We know the Right is going to send the attack dogs full force. I rather think Hillary will do better against them than Kerry did. She sticks to the issues and to proposed policies, which is going over very well with the voters.

Let me be clear here -- I could live happily with an Obama presidency, or Edwards, Gore, Kucinich and so on down the line. Anybody the Dems send up is better than the Bush mistake we've been living with for 6 years. However, I'm going to admit upfront to a secret thrill that Hillary is leading the pack. She's smart and she's determined, and I have no doubt she will actively run things, and run them well once elected president.

I just hope she takes one big risk and picks Obama for her running mate. I think it would be a heckuva ticket and would steamroll over any Republican opponent.