Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘women in government’

Hillary Clinton made a major policy speech yesterday.  She’s running for president of the United States.  Every time she opens her mouth – and she has a pretty mouth that says smart things that some people sometimes dislike – somebody has something to say about how she sounds.  Seems it is never “just right.”

This popped up in my newsfeed which pretty concisely packages the issue.

03/23/2016 06:09 pm ET

I don’t know.  What does Hillary Clinton have to do to get it “just right?”  To  get anything just right? Personally, I was worried about how her poor voice would hold up, it had suffered such abuse these past weeks on the campaign trail.  It held up fine, and for my money her tenor was fine.  When Hillary gives policy speeches, she generally is calm and deliberate.  I have watched many over the past eight years since I began keeping track of her secretary of state tenure. That is her policy speech style.  I don’t even want to go into that.  Paige Lavender did the topic justice.  But what does Hillary have to do to get things “just right?”  More to the point, why does she have to?

Everybody has something to say about what she wears, how she sounds, how she looks.  Wear that yellow for the speech.  No!  Oh!  Not that awful yellow!  Be forceful!  Oh no!  Don’t yell.  Smile more!

Why can’t Hillary just be Hillary?  Why can’t the most qualified person ever to run in my life (Harry Truman began as a haberdasher – youngsters, just go google it –  I’m too tired – he was the first to run in my life) have a fair chance to spell out her plans without everybody talking about her tone, facial expression, and whatever other third element hits the windshield of the armchair quarterbacks.

When Hillary and I were in college, Marshall McLuhan (go look him up – I am tired of spoonfeeding voting age people) said the “medium is the message.”  He meant medium as print v. video.  So video is the message today, even though I still like to get my hands on transcripts and lift the passages I think are important. Video – and audio – are the whole show.

I know I am biased.  But WTF??????? What is so offensive about Hillary that Bernie’s foghorn and gesticulating, Ted’s cartoon voice, John’s bedtime story voice, and Trump’s bellowing (“Get ‘im out!”) fail to surpass in offensiveness, condescension, plain old annoyance?

Why is her wardrobe an issue?  They all look like a suit rack at the cleaners.  Why, when she puts forward the only sane. thought-out, and comprehensive plan to combat terrorism is anything other than her words and her plan an issue?

It really never entered my mind that we would have a woman president. I loved Shirley Chisholm.  She sat them all down like she was the detention teacher in the halls of Congress. Pat Schroeder gave it her best, and Gerri Ferraro made me proud coming within a margin of being a heartbeat away.  But this was never a goal.

It’s just that right now we have the best candidate I have ever seen.  She happens to be a woman with a message, a set of plans, and a way of explaining things. She’s not hard to look at, not hard to listen to, and, when you bother to listen, not hard to understand –  she explains well.

Why can’t Hillary get it just right?  Or is it that the chairs keep getting moved around while the music blares?

02-13-14-Y-02Why don’t the guys have to be pitch perfect?  Why don’t they even have to pitch it over home base, actually, as long as they throw?

Thank you Hillary Clinton for running for president when you didn’t have to.  Thank you for your plans, your brilliance, and for always being right on target while looking pretty and being your spunky and empathetic self. Your Homegirls love you!

 

Read Full Post »

OH!  This is one of those moments when I so wish I could have been in that crowd. This is a great read!   Everyone knows who Chelsea and Sandra are. New Yorkers know Christine well.  She’s the one with the auburn hair who stands just behind Michael Bloomberg’s shoulder in every shot she can get into and is probably going to be the next mayor.  Nicolle Wallace?  What can I say?  Anyone who worked as hard as she did to try to get Sarah Palin to understand campaign tactics and foreign policy (or even history and geography) gets an A+ in my book!  Wish I had been there.  Fun read.  HRC  looms large,  Rosenblum notes.

10:27 am Mar. 29, 2012

It’s been more than 30 years since women began to vote in greater numbers than men in presidential elections, and four since Hillary Clinton almost became the Democratic nominee for president. 

But of course Hillary didn’t make it, and it’s going to be at least another four years before a woman is nominated by either of the major parties.

“We’re either not having the right conversation,” moderator Chelsea Clinton told the seven-woman panel and a full audience last night at the 92nd Street Y, “or we’re not being heard loudly enough, whether we’re running in heels, or flats or boots.”

READ MORE>>>> (YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO!!!!)

Read Full Post »

Cross-posted  from Uppity Woman  per her request.

 March 27, 2012 by Anita Finlay (“Ani”)

In her WaPo article, Twenty Years On, ‘Year of the Woman’ Fades, Karen Tumulty offers many reasons why women have not attained anything approaching parity in political representation, after female membership in the House and Senate doubled in 1992:

“…They made their presence felt beyond Capitol Hill, with the passage of legislation that made the workplace more family-friendly, that directed more medical research to women’s health issues and that made the criminal justice system more responsive to domestic violence.”

Women now represent 16.8% of Congress.  We have now hit a plateau, Tumulty says.  Another way of putting it is stagnation.  The treatment received by Hillary Clinton, who won more votes than any candidate in Primary history, and Sarah Palin, only the second woman to get on a presidential ticket, served as horrifying cautionary tales rather than encouragement.  Why would more qualified women run for higher office when a misogynist gauntlet awaits them?  What I witnessed in 2008 made the bile rise in my throat from such a deep place that I had to get off the sidelines and take action.  The sum total of that action follows:

Ms. Tumulty notes Democrats have declared that Republicans are waging a “war on women.” But the current “war” is being confined once again to a cynical and controlled narrative designed to benefit the President’s re-election bid rather than addressing the underbelly of woman-hate that still seems to permeate all levels of society.

Dirty Words On Clean Skin is a shocking exposé about the real war on women….who’s buying, who’s selling – and why they get away with it.

That war is waged daily by mainstream media, party backstabbers, opposing politicians, advertisers and lowbrow comedians of high powered television shows – all of whom miss no opportunity to degrade and marginalize; reducing women to body parts, wardrobe choices and vocal tics.

The quality and preparedness of Hillary Clinton was continually obscured by the bread and circuses of distraction and character assassination.  To a greater or lesser degree, these are tactics with which all females running for office have become acquainted.  We say the sky’s the limit for women in this country, but the reality was quite different when we were presented with a test case.

I am so proud to share my work with all of you and will be doing a pre-launch of Dirty Words on Clean Skin for all my kind blogger buddies and readers.  The book will be available on Amazon as of April 3rd…The book’s main launch will be April 24th and it will also be available on Kindle at that time.

Your encouragement has both fed me, and taught me to think critically, to make an argument, to stand my ground.

I am grateful to you all.

Read Full Post »

If there were a reality show called “Who’s the REAL Feminist?” Andrew Sullivan evidently considers himself a candidate for judge.  He, predictably,  had the unmitigated gall to assume the role of “feminist maven”on an “Overtime” segment of HBO’s Bill Maher Show.  How appropriate!

He debated the issue with Wendy Schiller, associate professor at Brown University on the segment.  Talk about picking your opponent!  Sullivan, once again, has shown himself to be the good old misogynist we have all come to know and despise.  There is a video in the article. WordPress would not accept the code, so I could not post it here.  You can watch it when you click into The Daily Caller article.

Andrew Sullivan slams Hillary Clinton: ‘Not a feminist’

Published: 6:26 PM 03/24/2012

On Friday’s “Overtime” segment of HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher,” Newsweek columnist and The Daily Beast’s “The Dish” blogger Andrew Sullivan made a comparison between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.

According to Sullivan, Thatcher’s legacy was “amazing” because she never played the sex card.

“Thatcher was amazing to me because … she never allowed another woman in her own cabinet, by the way, ever, in 11 years,” Sullivan said. “She’s also a woman in the 50s, got educated in chemistry and had a family and ran as a single woman, and never once in her entire life played the sex card. Never, never played it.”

“… she never allowed another woman in her own cabinet.”  What a testament!  These women would probably disagree with Judge Sullivan.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

There are many, many more like them.  Hillary Clinton has worked for 40 years for women, children, and families.  As Secretary of State,  her signature issue has been the empowerment of women and girls.   Meryl Streep stated,  introducing this amazing woman,  a hero to so many of us,  at the Women in the World Summit this month, that there are women in the world who are still alive today only because they had their pictures taken with Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Comparing her unfavorably with the woman who showed not an ounce of empathy with the mothers of the Long Kesh hunger strikers, defies reason and serves to disqualify Sullivan as any kind of judge of feminism.

How dare you, Andrew Sullivan!  You crossed the line, and we are watching you!

Read Full Post »

For those who are fans of this  awesome researcher, analyst, and commentator, I have a treat for you.

Karen Finney

Fans have been clamoring on Twitter for awhile for Karen to have her own show at MSNBC, but  of course, first things must come first.  As a popular guest commentator,  she has demonstrated the talents and gifts that are indispensable to success on current events talk TV.  She is animated, quick-thinking, well-informed, and circumspect.  Not to be shallow, but she is also very easy on the eyes.  She is the whole package, but that is not a direct route to a show.  What CAN be is filling in for hosts of current shows.

Karen is a regular panelist on Bashir Live at MSNBC  3 p.m. ET.  Tomorrow and Friday, Karen will be filling in for Martin Bashir in his absence.  Her fans could not be happier to see have this opportunity to showcase her her appreciable skills as a host and moderator.

So tune in to MSNBC at 3  EDT (or check your local listings)  tomorrow and Friday and catch Karen!  We wish her the best.  She’s our homegirl, and we hope this is a step to a Karen Finney show to  be aired regularly.

Here’s lookin’ at YOU Karen!

Read Full Post »

HuffPo today featured articles by our Homegirl, Lady Lynn and Cherie Blair marking International Women’s Day 2012.

CEO of EL Rothschild

Women at the Very Top

Posted: 8/03/2012 00:00

As I join my colleagues to celebrate International Women’s Day at this year’s WIE Symposium in London, I laud the advancement of women over the past few decades, but know that we have much to do in order to achieve gender equality in our societies in the UK and the US.

Over the past four decades, society has broadly accepted and integrated women in the workplace. But, this has not yet reached the highest political offices, the boardrooms and the CEO offices of the corporate world. Women are still largely absent from leadership positions and are too often perceived to be incompatible with positions of power and leadership. This absence of women in positions of power is a painful reminder that gender equality is still an aspiration, not a reality.

Read more >>>>>

 

Founder, Cherie Blair Foundation for Women

Behind Every Successful Man is a Woman? Let’s Reverse That Saying

Posted: 8/03/2012 00:00

It used to be said that behind every successful man was a woman. They meant, of course, a wife. It was a clumsy way of recognising women’s contribution within marriage and the part this sacrifice played in helping husbands advance in their careers.

But as we celebrate International Women’s Day, I wonder if it’s not time to reverse the saying. Let’s, in fact, celebrate the role men are now playing in helping women’s rise to the top.

This is not to suggest that the fight for equality has been won. Any glance at the continuing gender pay gap or lack of women in the boardroom or parliament shows how hollow that claim would be.

Read more >>>>>

Happy International Women’s Day to all the awesome Homegirls here!

Read Full Post »

This is a “must read.”  Tina Brown has penned a masterpiece here. From Hillary Clinton, to Aung San Suu Kyi, to Marie Colvin, these are the women of history as we witness it being made today, they, and those more obscure to us upon whom Tina shines a spotlight in her annual Women in the World event.  Thank you, Tina, for this great post and for bringing our sisters in the battles to our attention every year!

In Newsweek Magazine

Symbols and Strength: Women in the World

Author

Tina Brown

When Hillary Clinton travels around the world as secretary of state, she is a global celebrity of the first rank. But that’s not how she felt when she went to Burma for the first time in 2011 to meet with the heroic Aung San Suu Kyi. One of the greatest living human-rights campaigners, Suu Kyi had chosen to endure—for the sake of the Burmese people—the daily threat of death and 15 years of house arrest, cut off from her husband and children. “It was, ‘Oh, my God, I cannot believe I am with Aung San Suu Kyi,” Ambassador Melanne Verveer told me of Clinton’s emotion on her two-hour talk with Suu Kyi in the house of her long captivity.


 

ed01-witw-tease
Saul Loeb / AFP-Getty Images

 
Read more>>>>

Read Full Post »

Having introduced,  last night,  the brilliant young woman whom I see as an up and coming leader, a powerhouse,  for the traditional principles of the Democratic Party, I thought I would share a little more about her.  Do not go looking for her on Wikipedia.  She is not there!  I have no idea why not.  But I have seen parts of her story at Mulatto.org.

https://i1.wp.com/images.politico.com/global/arena/karen_finney_250.jpg

The story I found at that website was poignant.  It was sad, challenging, triumphant, sweet, and hers.  The first time I read it, I welled up.

This week , in the wake of the overturn of Prop 8 in California,  where Karen grew up,  she posted her story on her Facebook wall.  Here is her story as she told it in 2010 at U.S. News & World Report.

California Prop 8 Gay Marriage Ruling a Win For American Values

August 5, 2010

Yesterday’s ruling that California’s Proposition 8 is unconstitutional reaffirms a long-held American value that no matter how you try to spin it, separate is not equal. While some may not agree with same-sex marriage, history should remind us that our Constitution calls us to recognize that the laws in it apply equally, not to be picked apart to support a political agenda or bias. The arguments being used against same sex marriage are frighteningly similar and equally offensive as those once used against interracial marriage. While a Gallup poll in 1967 found that 74 percent of Americans disapproved of interracial marriage, it’s almost hard to remember just how far we’ve come.

Read more >>>> PLEASE READ MORE >>>>

When you look at that picture of Karen on that webpage, you have to wonder what must have gone through her grandfather’s heart to have missed those preceding years of this little girl growing up.  You think about how committed and frightened her parents must have been to escape the South.  You also cannot avoid thinking how lucky we are that her parents did what they did to have and give us this remarkable young woman.

As someone who went through similar experiences in those same years,  I deeply appreciate the courage of her parents.  I have no daughter (or son)  as a legacy,  but I was part of the war against  the inhuman miscegenation laws.  I celebrate the phenomenal human being Karen’s parents produced in the face of terrible legal implications.

When I see Karen post this story – her story – in relation to Prop 8, I wonder.  What phenomenal children are being raised in same-sex marriages?   What new leader will come along who might have languished in the foster care system or might never have been born were it not for the right of their parents to marry?

Every time I read Karen’s story,  and I have many times,  I am thankful that her parents defied the system – an unfair and cruel system – so that they could have this wonderful daughter, this brilliant, cheerful, adorable, funny, young woman with insights from which we all can learn.   I am also thankful that her grandfather came to know her.  He had to be proud.  If my dad had been her grandfather, he would have known her from birth and the sun would have risen and set in her. But that was my dad. (I miss him!)

Follow Karen on Twitter and see when she is scheduled to participate on panels!

For more on this very impressive young woman, check out her public profile at Politico.

Read Full Post »

As any archer will tell you, there is a difference between hitting the bull’s eye and hitting the skirt.  Twice in a week now,  I see how the DNC damaged this country by contriving the 2008 nomination process.  Two issues that Hillary Rodham Clinton made eminently clear that she would own, from before she declared her candidacy for president,  were universal health care and a foreclosure freeze accompanied by restructuring of mortgage rates.  Well, we did not get HRC, so we did not see these issues addressed as she had outlined them.

Healthcare:  Yes, we did, after an 18-month battle get something, but a badly flawed something,  that continues to exclude too many, a large percentage of whom are women, and does not include the single most important factor that would  have neutralized completely this week’s argument between the administration and Catholic institutions: the single -payer option.   Had THAT been a non-negotiable part of the package, this week’s issue would never have arisen.

Now this morning, the president presents a plan to help some mortgagees in trouble.  Had HRC’s HOLC or HOME been passed, all mortgagees in trouble would have had access to renegotiation,  and foreclosures would have been temporarily frozen long enough for refinance to have taken place – years ago.

Mortgage Settlement Leaves Some Foreclosure Victims Wanting

Too little, too late for so many.

The Dems are trying to drum up some enthusiasm for an incumbent candidate whose inexperience and self-assuredness have served up insufficiency and inadequacy.  The one who was NOT ready from day one.  The unnecessary debate over women’s’ healthcare and the limitations of this morning’s settlement with the banks do little to inspire team spirit.

As usual, it is the surrogates who must argue with passion that the White House is doing the right thing by women, but is that enough?  It should be the incumbent inspiring the passion.   I find Karen Finney a particularly effective voice on the issue of women’s health care, but as I watch and listen to her, it occurs to me that,  as she inspires me,  it is not Obama I wish to follow into this battle, but rather Karen herself!  I do not know whose voice we will hear speaking for those left behind by the bank settlement, but certainly one will emerge.

In the same way that “Hillary Sent Me”, absent Obama personally reaching out specifically to HRC supporters,  left me completely unmotivated to support him (and even more passionately wanting Hillary), this continuing surrogacy strategy is doing nothing but spotlighting leaders, real ones, that I would much prefer to share a trench with than Obama.  Ms. Finney is quickly emerging as one of those.

So, as I continue to harbor hope that in some way Hillary Clinton ends up at the top of the ballot sooner rather than later, I see in some of the surrogates who defend Obama’s inadequate programs, my future leaders.  Elizabeth Warren is one, and Karen Finney is another to watch.  She has that Joan of Arc quality that HRC has.  Yes, I would follow her into battle just as I would follow Hillary.  Would I follow Obama?  No, I still simply cannot do that.  How can you follow the “leader” who leads from behind?

You only get points for hitting the target.  Obama continually hits the skirt.

******************************************************************

*Edited to add*  It was atrociously negligent of me not to add the link to Karen’s seminal article on this issue which is one of many reasons why I point to her as a leader.  A “must read!”

Church, flock at odds

******************************************************************

Read Full Post »

This came up in one of my news feeds.

Obama’s Hillary card

By Brent Budowsky – 11/30/11 05:51 PM ET

President Obama has the extraordinary option of rekindling the historic spirit of his presidency and riding the sweeping tides of history for the advancement of women by naming Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as his vice presidential running mate in 2012.

Read more >>>>

The title is a molotov cocktail.  We all have seen “The Hillary Factor” and “The Hillary Effect.”  Recently, we were heartened to see “The Hillary Moment.”  So what’s the big deal?  What’s the difference?  What is wrong with “The Hillary card?” 

From Dictionary.com:

fac·tor

[fak-ter] Show IPA

noun

1. one of the elements contributing to a particular result or situation: Poverty is only one of the factors in crime.

2. Mathematics . one of two or more numbers, algebraic expressions, or the like, that when multiplied together produce a given product; a divisor: 6 and 3 are factors of 18.

3.  Biochemistry . any of certain substances necessary to a biochemical or physiological process, especially those whose exact nature and function are unknown.

4. a business organization that lends money on accounts receivable or buys and collects accounts receivable.

5. a person who acts or transacts business for another; an agent.

ef·fect

[ih-fekt] Show IPA

noun

1.  something that is produced by an agency or cause; result; consequence: Exposure to the sun had the effect of toughening his skin.
2. power to produce results; efficacy; force; validity; influence: His protest had no effect.

3. the state of being effective  or operative; operation or execution; accomplishment or fulfillment: to bring a plan into effect.

4.  a mental or emotional impression produced, as by a painting or a speech.

5.  meaning or sense; purpose or intention: She disapproved of the proposal and wrote to that effect.

mo·ment

[moh-muhnt] Show IPA

noun

1.  an indefinitely short period of time; instant: I’ll be with you in a moment.

2.  the present time or any other particular time (usually preceded by the ): He is busy at the moment.

3.  a definite period or stage, as in a course of events; juncture: at this moment in history.

4.  importance or consequence: a decision of great moment.

5.  a particular time or period of success, excellence, fame, etc.: His big moment came in the final game.

card

1    [kahrd] Show IPA

noun

1.  a usually rectangular piece of stiff paper, thin pasteboard, or plastic for various uses, as to write information on or printed as a means of identifying the holder: a 3″ × 5″ file card; a membership card.

2. one of a set of thin pieces of cardboard with spots, figures, etc., used in playing various games; playing card.

3. cards, ( usually used with a singular verb )

a. a game or games played with such a set.

b. the playing of such a game: to win at cards.

c. Casino . the winning of 27 cards  or more.

d. Whist . tricks won in excess of six.

4. Also called greeting card. a piece of paper or thin cardboard, usually folded, printed with a message of holiday greeting, congratulations, or other sentiment, often with an illustration or decorations, for mailing to a person on an appropriate occasion.

5. something useful in attaining an objective, as a course of action or position of strength, comparable to a high card held in a game: If negotiation fails, we still have another card to play

I have emphasized the definitions I consider most relevant.  Most of these nouns name a person or intangibles: an element, a state, a period.    Card   is different.  It is a thing, a piece of paper, or worse  a tool (#5).  To couple this word with the name Hillary (and everyone knows which Hillary), is demeaning, insulting objectification of  the most powerful, recognizable, effective, and altruistic human being on earth who happens to live in a female body.

What is the implication?  A president who inspired hope in so many and then let them down would use the one gem he managed to acquire for his measly crown to retain his position.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is a world hero.  She reaches out to the poorest, the mutest, the most downtrodden, the disenfranchised, the ignored… yes, the invisible … because they/we are not invisible to her.  She told us that in 2008,  and we have seen her act upon that statement as Secretary of State.

To suggest that this awesome woman is an object, a card to be played in a political game,  is deepest insult.  For shame!  Shame on those who suggest it!

If this is indeed from the Obama campaign playbook, shame on them!   She has gone above and beyond.  The Homegirls and Homeboys of HillaryHood excoriate this cheap political move.

Here is our hero with another hero from today – a day of history.

Do not try to cheapen her.  Do not objectify her.  She is not an object or a card to be played.  She is a hero.  She is precious.  Treat her respectfully.  We will NOT tolerate objectification of this icon of human rights.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »