Poor Hillary

If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. Or, to quote a friend of mine, if you can't take the heat, go back to the kitchen. This diary is by no means a veiled attempt at sexism. However, within the post-debate spin coming from Hillary's campaign, it is widely being implied that she, a woman, was attacked by six (gasp!) men during Tuesday's debate. But if this election and her candidacy is really not about sex, why is she framing it that way?

The Hillary campaign's post-debate framing of what went down there is exactly the reason she should not be our nominee next fall. No one who has payed any attention to this presidential campaign thus far can doubt that she is a strong candidate. However, she has, and pretty much always has been, in the frontrunner mode. Throughout the campaign, she has projected an aura of invincibility. She laughs off attacks, avoids tough questions, and portrays any probing assault on her record as a "desperate" attempt to dethrone her from her perch. It is this kind of arrogance that we do not need from our next nominee. For when she finally does get put in a corner, as she did on Tuesday night, she throws up her hands, plays the sexist card, and seeks empathy from the voting public. While this might work on a playground, it is certainly not going to work when facing the Republican Rove barrage that will certainly be aimed at her come next fall should she be the nominee.

For those of you who might have missed the debate, here is what happened. Hillary was asked about her opinion on drivers licenses for illegal immigrants according to the plan to do just that in her home state of New York. At first, she seemed to support it. Then, after being challenged by Sen. Chris Dodd and then by moderator Tim Russert, she backtracked and gave a shady, non-committal answer which left her rivals (and the audience) somewhat confused about how she actually feels on the proposal.

But this thing goes deeper than illegal immigrant drivers licenses. While that is certainly an important issue and her opinion should be clarified, she has a tendency (though usually not during the debates) to present her position on certain issues in different lights (See: Iraq, Iran, diplomacy).

When she does this, her rivals call her out. And when I say call her out, they more often than not present vague criticisms of her veiled as generalizations on "people who do this are dangerous." So far in this campaign, direct criticism of her from her opponents has been polite to say the least. No one, perhaps save the GOP, has been mean-spirited or sexist towards her. And, at no time, has anyone "crossed the line." But if you relied on news simple from the Hillary spindoctors, you would have thought John Edwards and Barack Obama had s*** on her and her gender during the debate. This is not the case. They merely were pointing out the fact that she has consistently not only changed positions, but also disguised certain positions and generally managed to avoid answering tough questions posed to her throughout the course of the campaign.

The worst is yet to come for her, I'm afraid. And yet, I don't feel bad. If she really is a strong candidate, not just a strong woman, she should be able to deal with minor attacks from her fellow party members. If she was to win the nomination, which I hope she does not, she is going to deal with a lot worse from the like of Rudy, Romney, and the right. If she cannot be questioned on her policies without crying foul and playing the gender card each and every time she is asked a tough question, how is she ever going to be the kind of transparent candidate our party AND our country needs in the post-Bush era?

If she cannot be trusted to tell the truth and take a stand, how can she ever be looked upon as strong?

Politics is a tough business and Hillary should and does know that. After all, her husband is probably one of the most hated politicians in America. If you lived through the 90s, it would be hard for you to remember a time when the "right wing conspiracy" wasn't attacking either Bill or Hillary. So her post-debate performance is not a abrupt welcome call to politics - she has been down this road before. So why react as if she was taken off-guard by the fact that people don't like her? The only thing I can think of is that she would like to win an election based on the fact that people feel sorry for her. We don't need someone to feel sorry for, we need someone to look up to.

Poor Hillary. More importantly, if things keep going the way they are, Poor Democratic Party. Let's nominate a leader and winner, not a cry baby.