# Why the hatred of Hillary? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 26, 2007, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080 "2007-10-26T05:24:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2007, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/61 "2007-10-26T22:16:45Z")
To me she seems like an unholy cross of Margaret Thatcher and Norman Tebbit. ---
**Author:** ![Bobotheoptimist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/919ad9/32.png) [@Bobotheoptimist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bobotheoptimist)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2007, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/62 "2007-10-26T22:22:20Z")
It amuses me when Clinton supporters tell me why I don’t like Clinton. Vast right wing media conspiracy to discredit the Clinton’s? Yeah, that’s it. I…must…hate…Hillary. Rush…Limbaugh…tells…me…to…hate…Hillary. Mega…Dittos…Rush ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2007, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/63 "2007-10-26T22:24:14Z")
[QUOTE=jackelope] I’m liberal on most issues, and my refusal to vote for Hillary has nothing to do with her politics. I won’t vote for her because there will be registered voters in this election who have never known a president who wasn’t either a Clinton or a Bush. To me, this appears to totally subvert the purpose of electing the nation’s leader from among the citizenry. [/QUOTE] Do not forget that the Founding Fathers – most of them, anyway – never envisioned the president being elected from “among the citizenry” in the sense you are using the phrase. They carefully excluded any hereditary principle from the Constitution, but took it for granted leaders would come from the gentry, and the idea of “great-family politics” would have been utterly familiar to them and in no way incompatible with their conception of “republican” government. Washington won the presidency based on name recognition, and might have founded an informal dynasty if he had had any sons (he had only stepchildren). Since then we have had two presidents named Adams, two presidents named Harrison, two presidents named Roosevelt, and those were not coincidences. If Sirhan Sirhan had been a poor shot, we almost certainly would have had two presidents named Kennedy. I’m not saying the Framers were right in their vision, only that we must consider historical context. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2007, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/64 "2007-10-26T22:31:35Z")
> [@F.U.Shakespeare](#): > > I find it appalling that America’s history of electing family dynasties like the Adamses, Harrisons and Roosevelts seems to be solidifying with the ascent of the Bush and Clinton dynasties. I’m not sure those two are really comparable. I can see how one could consider the Bush and Kennedy families as forming political “dynasties”. For instance, the current President Bush’s grandfather was a US Senator; his father was VP under Reagan and then President, besides having been head of the CIA before that; and his brother Jeb was a state governor. The Clintons, on the other hand, are a same-generation married couple, neither of whom, AFAIK, has any immediate relatives who have held any elective office. Dynastically speaking, they are not in the same league with the Bushes or the Kennedys, whose multiple generations of nationally ranked politicians do qualify them IMHO to be called “dynasties”. ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2007, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/65 "2007-10-26T23:03:44Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Ahh . . . yeah. Right. See posts #44 and 49. [/QUOTE] Whatever. :rolleyes: I see absolutely no difference between her political philosophy and the [platform for the U.S. Socialist Party](http://sp-usa.org/platform/). ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2007, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/66 "2007-10-26T23:06:54Z")
[QUOTE=Crafter\_Man] Because she’s a socialist. [/QUOTE] Yeah, that’s a rather curious statement. She’s centrist, if anything. She’s certainly more to the right than pretty much any other Democratic candidate. Then again, Bill Clinton got branded by the right as some sort of socialist, which makes me laugh. If Americans think Bill Clinton is socialism, then it’s not even worth arguing for me. At any rate, this thread exemplifies exactly why I have reservations about Hillary ever being elected president. When both Democrats and Republicans look at her with suspicion, it’s baffling to me to understand how she could possibly be leading all the polls. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2007, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/67 "2007-10-26T23:08:15Z")
[QUOTE=Bobotheoptimist] It amuses me when Clinton supporters tell me why I don’t like Clinton. Vast right wing media conspiracy to discredit the Clinton’s? Yeah, that’s it. I..must..hate..Hillary. Rush..Limbaugh..tells..me..to..hate..Hillary. Mega..Dittos..Rush [/QUOTE] Well, I made the mistake of watching Rusty Limbaugh’s lousy TV show when Bubba was running in '92. It did have an effect on me. Of course, since I was raised to value a kind of political thought higher than that of the insult comic, I got quite sick of Rusty within a year or so. But I did buy into the Vince Foster murder conspiracy for a while, until finally seeing it debunked on _60 Minutes_. And I did continue to read _National Review_, & maintain a strong dislike of Clinton’s administration to the bitter end. Now I have more perspective, & see how much worse a POTUS could be. It scares me that our politics is being driven by people who think dirty jokes & wild rumours are political discourse. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2007, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/68 "2007-10-26T23:42:26Z")
> [@Crafter\_Man](#): > > I see absolutely no difference between her political philosophy and the platform for the U.S. Socialist Party. Here, **Crafter\_Man** , I can help you out with this one. I’ve labeled the quoted items “Socialist Party platform” and “Hillary Clinton position” so you can tell which is which. These are just a few examples; let me know if you need more assistance. [Socialist Party platform on military/security issues:](http://sp-usa.org/platform/internationalpolicy.html) > [@](#): > > 1. We call for the abolition of the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, and all other institutions of covert warfare. > > 2. We stand for unconditional disarmament by the United States. […] > > 3. We call for an immediate 50% cut in the military budget, followed by additional cuts, with the aim of rapidly reducing the military budget to less than 10% of its current level, with the “peace dividend” directed to essential social services and to the cost of cleaning up contaminated military sites. [Hillary Clinton position on military/security issues:](http://votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=55463) > [@](#): > > Voted “yes” on all Defense Department appropriations bills. > > Voted “yes” on the resolution authorizing the Iraq War. > > Voted “yes” on all emergency appropriations bills on supplemental funding for operations in Iraq. > > Voted “yes” on Patriot Act. [Socialist Party platform on economic/trade issues:](http://sp-usa.org/platform/economics.html) > [@](#): > > 1. We demand the immediate withdrawal of the United States from the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), and oppose the creation of a widened Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). > > 2. We call for worker and community ownership and control of corporations within the framework of a decentralized and democratically determined economic. > > 3. We call for a minimum wage of $15 per hour, indexed to the cost of living. > > 4. We call for a full employment policy. We support the provision of a livable guaranteed annual income. > > 5. We call for all financial and insurance institutions to be socially owned and operated by a democratically-controlled national banking authority, which should include credit unions, mutual insurance cooperatives, and cooperative state banks. In the meantime, we call for re-regulation of the banking and insurance industries. > > 6. We call for a steeply graduated income tax and a steeply graduated estate tax, and a maximum income of no more than ten times the minimum. We oppose regressive taxes such as payroll tax, sales tax, and property taxes. [Hillary Clinton position on economic/trade issues:](http://votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=55463) > [@](#): > > Voted “yes” on free trade agreements with Oman, Singapore and Chile. > > Voted “yes” on raising the minimum wage to $7.15/hour. > > Voted “yes” on HR 4520, which provides $145 billion in new tax relief to US corporations, and reduces corporate tax rate from 35% to 32% for certain corporations. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2007, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/69 "2007-10-26T23:48:29Z")
[QUOTE=Quartz] To me she seems like an unholy cross of Margaret Thatcher and Norman Tebbit. [/QUOTE] Could you expand on that for the benefit of ignorant Yanks? We know who Thatcher was, but I had to look up [Tebbit,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Tebbit) and nothing especially Hillarian jumped out at me. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2007, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/70 "2007-10-27T02:30:55Z")
[QUOTE=calm kiwi] YOU WHAT??? The ONLY people who get to decide the marriage is a sham are the people in the marriage! [/QUOTE] To be fair, I strongly believe that if most people (even here!) were presented with a marriage between a normal, everyday couple with the known problems and accusations that the Clintons have had, they would seriously advise the wife to get out NOW, and question her judgment for staying (thus the reason, I think, why it comes up so often on the other side of the aisle). ---
**Author:** ![F.U.Shakespeare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aca169/32.png) [@F.U.Shakespeare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/F.U.Shakespeare)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2007, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/71 "2007-10-27T03:29:25Z")
[QUOTE=Kimstu] I’m not sure those two are really comparable. I can see how one could consider the Bush and Kennedy families as forming political “dynasties”. For instance, the current President Bush’s grandfather was a US Senator; his father was VP under Reagan and then President, besides having been head of the CIA before that; and his brother Jeb was a state governor. The Clintons, on the other hand, are a same-generation married couple, neither of whom, AFAIK, has any immediate relatives who have held any elective office. Dynastically speaking, they are not in the same league with the Bushes or the Kennedys, whose multiple generations of nationally ranked politicians do qualify them IMHO to be called “dynasties”. [/QUOTE] Point taken (although Hugh Rodham ran for office unsuccessfully). We should revisit this topic in a few years – all dynasties have to get their start and take hold. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2007, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/72 "2007-10-27T04:47:30Z")
[QUOTE=Crafter\_Man] Whatever. :rolleyes: I see absolutely no difference between her political philosophy and the [platform for the U.S. Socialist Party](http://sp-usa.org/platform/). [/QUOTE] I’m a **member** of the U.S. Socialist Party and I can tell you, nobody in it thinks that false-flag DLC-DINO corporate-ass-kissing bitch speaks for **us!** (I’m sure most of us will vote for HRC in 2008, of course – I certainly will – what else we gonna do?! – just as most of the Christian white-nativist social-conservative Buchananite shitbags will vote for Giuliani, as they reasonably should, even though that egregiously worse corporate ass-kisser in no way speaks for **them!** Politics being the art of the possible.) ---
**Author:** ![denquixote](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9bd4f/32.png) [@denquixote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/denquixote)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2007, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/73 "2007-10-27T05:36:41Z")
[QUOTE=Crafter\_Man] Because she’s a socialist. [/QUOTE] If Hillary were actually a socialist I would withdraw my earlier crack about her and , rest assured, she would have my vote. Unfortunately nothing could be further from the truth. She is probably more conservative than you are. ---
**Author:** ![Paladud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Paladud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paladud)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2007, 6:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/74 "2007-10-27T06:41:40Z")
Going by her record as posted in Wiki, I agree with her on abortion and the death penalty, and nothing else. Also, anyone who so much as breathes something about regulating video games automatically forfeits my vote for all eternity. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2007, 11:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/75 "2007-10-27T11:08:15Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Why, I wonder, does that old soundbite {It takes a village) keep getting quoted **against** HRC? [/QUOTE] Because she’s denigrating the value of the normal American family, including exactly one father and one mother, all sitting in the same pew on Sunday morning, to raise our chilluns, don’tcha know. If it’s the village’s job, then it must be okay and even desirable for unmarried and queer and even non-Christian people to warp their little minds and contaminate their precious bodily fluids. But it’s true, when you ask them for \*nouns \* instead of adjectives, the personal-level haters have nothing to offer beyond her futures profits. At most, we get absurdly non-fact-based statements like “Because she’s a socialist”, from those who think that’s a synonym for Democrat. They typically accuse her of being a “polarizing figure”, without considering why that is or even who’s actually doing the polarizing. I view her politically the same way I viewed Bubba - a high-average singles hitter, able to hit home runs but not willing to take enough risk to swing for them. I’d prefer a little less caution and a little more vision from a President, but a havit of actually accomplishing a good deal of smaller things, avoiding major blunders, and being willing and able to face being wrong and make corrections is not necessarily a bad thing. The last Clinton administration could have and should have accomplished more, the next administration (whoever it is) will have to fodus on restoring what it can of what Bush has destroyed instead, and that’s going to take a combination of singles and homer hitting. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2007, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/76 "2007-10-27T12:10:10Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Could you expand on that for the benefit of ignorant Yanks? We know who Thatcher was, but I had to look up [Tebbit,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Tebbit) and nothing especially Hillarian jumped out at me. [/QUOTE] The dark side of Norman Tebbit = Prince Phillip + Skinhead thug / East End bovver boy + Vampire. See the start of [this Youtube video](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVenR_f62g8). ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2007, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/77 "2007-10-27T14:53:42Z")
[QUOTE=Leaper] To be fair, I strongly believe that if most people (even here!) were presented with a marriage between a normal, everyday couple with the known problems and accusations that the Clintons have had, they would seriously advise the wife to get out NOW, and question her judgment for staying (thus the reason, I think, why it comes up so often on the other side of the aisle). [/QUOTE] What problems? Has Bill done drugs? Beaten Hillary up? Molested a minor? Benn arrested? If every women whose husband got something on the side divorced him, the divorce rate would be a lot worse than it is. Bill has always supported his wife, and if she is willing to put up with his faults, that’s nobody’s business but theirs. ---
**Author:** ![Justin\_Bailey](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/justin_bailey/32/8792_2.png) [@Justin\_Bailey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Justin_Bailey)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2007, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/78 "2007-10-27T15:09:02Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Why, I wonder, does that old soundbite keep getting quoted **against** HRC? All she was saying was that children need to be educated and socialized by more than just their own families – a statement not only obviously true, but so utterly innocuous, middlebrow and Rotarian in tone that I cannot see how the most radical conservative or libertarian could have the mildest objection to it. [/QUOTE] Because it’s a statement so obvious that people are amazed she would write a book about it, let alone spout it as some kind of revelation she came up with. Of course it takes a village. Friends, family, parents of friends, teachers, local store employees, the ice cream man and the neighborhood stray cat didn’t come out of the woodwork to help each other out just because Hilary thought it sounded like a smart thing to say. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2007, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/79 "2007-10-27T15:16:08Z")
[QUOTE=Quartz] The dark side of Norman Tebbit = Prince Phillip + Skinhead thug / East End bovver boy + Vampire. See the start of [this Youtube video](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVenR_f62g8). [/QUOTE] Funny, but I still don’t get how it relates to HRC. Nor how Thatcher does – the only thing she has in common with Hillary, so far as I can see, is a set of brass ovaries. ---
**Author:** ![F.U.Shakespeare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aca169/32.png) [@F.U.Shakespeare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/F.U.Shakespeare)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2007, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080/80 "2007-10-27T16:11:59Z")
[QUOTE=Justin\_Bailey] Because it’s a statement so obvious that people are amazed she would write a book about it, let alone spout it as some kind of revelation she came up with. Of course it takes a village. Friends, family, parents of friends, teachers, local store employees, the ice cream man and the neighborhood stray cat didn’t come out of the woodwork to help each other out just because Hilary thought it sounded like a smart thing to say. [/QUOTE] For something so obvious, a lot of people took exception to it. I remember Bob Dole saying (I’m quoting from memory), “It doesn’t take a village, it takes a family”. Much conservative rhetoric in the wake of the 1994 elections emphasized rights of the individual over community (and the family as the first extension beyond the individual). Historically, liberals usually come down more in favor of community than conservatives. Hillary’s phrase IMO neatly summed up the stance of liberals at the time on this never-ending debate. It takes both a family _and_ a village. Since conservatives at the time were speaking up a lot about the former, I think Hillary’s phrase made a very good point. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-hatred-of-hillary/424080.md?page=5)