Lemur might not be too dumb to know the difference, but I seem to be. I’ve never heard of the term until this thread, and the wiki article reads a hell of a lot like all the Marxist theory we covered in critical analysis of literature back in college. (ftr, Marxist Criticism is one of the common ways to analyze literature.) Not communism in any of the actual attempts to apply the doctrine to date, but what Marx was aiming for when he wrote his manifesto. How is communitarianism different? The feel-good spin to it that promises to secure a list of rights for the populate?
Anyway, I don’t like Hilliary because I disagree with most of the positions she takes; I have voted against men for the same reasons, and will continue to do so no matter who gets the nomination. I find her personality abrasive as well, but that’s just the icing on the cake.
Not getting embroiled in U.S. politics I think that there is another dimension to this.
In a way it is similar to nepotism,an individual sets out to make a career in politics and makes the very long hard slog over the years through the political jungle and eventually gets the top political job in the world.
Obviously throughout that journey the individual gets 101% support from their partner who gives advice.wipes away the tears,campaigns,entertains and makes sacrifices for the politician in the family but its the politician who has actually got there.
Maybe they would have got there with a different partner,maybe they wouldn’t.
But when the partner starts a political career of their own many people see it rightly or wrongly as an easy ride with the partner trading on their husbands(or wifes) political contacts,record and savvy.
And yes all politics aside this does cause a lot of resentment.
Over here an ex PrimeMinisters wife Glenys Kinnock was tarred with that very brush.
Declaring an interest here I must admit that I think that she is a loathsome woman.
Huh. I’ve never met her, so I don’t know if she’s loathsome in person or not. Of course, I tend to find many politicos loathsome. Her husband was praised as charming by the US press, & I found him smarmy.
Her, I’m pretty indifferent to. Any dislike I had for her was largely as Bubba’s wife. If she can govern responsibly without corruption getting in the way, then OK. I still would prefer Biden or Obama.
But I was thinking more of the multiple rape accusations mentioned in this thread (that I’d never heard of - at least not in multiples - but seemed to be confirmed by [John Mace, so I went with it). That’s what put it over the top for me; I tried to imagine the situation of known multiple infidelities PLUS more than one accusation of rape.
I don’t get the overwhelming hatred for Hillary, either. She, like Bill, John, Rudy, George, and so on down the line, is a politician. Nobody with a serious chance of being elected is anything nobler than that. They all pander and morph when it is politically expedient. But as a left-leaning centrist, she appeals to me more than almost all of the other candidates.
She’s a mean old cuss, and doesn’t take shit from anyone (politically at least). I think that’s important in a leader. Is she pleasant to hang around with? Does she emit a foul odor? Do I care? No. You have to be a little touched to want the job of President, so I don’t expect them to be cuddly, wonderous beings. No, I prefer the cold, calculating, ball-breaking type of leader.
I don’t appreciate the sabre-rattling of late in Iran’s direction, but here’s what I foresee in a Clinton presidency: the cabinet will be comprised of the smartest people, not a bunch of retread ideaologues whose worldview is from the 1950s. I also think she will consider the advice of the smart people in the cabinet, and make decisions with a view to the long-term consequences for this nation. I also don’t see disturbing alliances and business links to oppressive Saudi politicians and oil robber-barons.
What she and Bill get, and do not get up to, is not of the slightest interest to me. The only thing I’m slightly interested in is how their kid came out, and by all measures Chelsea is a successful, well-adjusted person. I can acknowledge that GWB and Laura seem to have done a decent job raising their daughters as well. But that has fuck all to do with running the country… just something I’m interested in.
Many Americans feel that the Presidency has some kind of popularity contest dimension - I don’t. Obama seems like the coolest guy running, but it’s not the time that we can have someone sort of learn on the job.
Or here’s a crazy thought… maybe she loves her husband and forgave him for his mishaps like a good christian woman… which the right would praise (if she was a republican). It’s no ones place to judge how she feels about her husband or what goes on between them on a personal level. No one could ever no that so you shouldn’t judge something you know nothing about.
I think xxfireangel13xx makes a good point. What’s deemed offensive about her is changed by party affiliation.
Could it be that some people just object to a spouse of a politician running? If Kathleen Sebelius’s husband were to run for governor of Kansas in 2014, I’d regard it as suspect on its face.
Perhaps I should have worded it “nearly confiscatory” since I don’t think she’d get away with a 100% tax either. On the other hand any windfall tax on a specific industry does not bode well for shareholders and I’d get whacked in the end if I sit still.
On to my other reasons…
I own big pharma stocks as well. If she gets her wish with universal health insurance, health care, whatever you call it I think those companies will get spanked, too. Of course I’ll get out before that happens but I see another industry (pharma) as her personal target.
One more…
She has continued to stay married to her…let me word this right…no, let’s be blunt…immoral husband. I have an agreement with my wife. I cheat, she gets a divorce and half the dough. No questions asked. I think by staying with her admitted…no, wait…not admitted…lech of a husband she condones that kind of crap. I don’t know what her reasons are but it makes HRC seem like a weak person unable to stand on her own without Bill. The dude’s a pig and she stays in the sty.
Sure, live by whatever rules you want. Just don’t try to be POTUS. There are a heck of a lot of people in the USA that still live by the tired old rules. The simple fact that she’s still married to the guy is enough for me.
But hey, nobody here is going to have their mind changed one way or the other.
He’s already been POTUS for two terms. It’s her who’s running.
Just out of courisoity, what’s your opinions on Bush and Reagan and Nixon and Eisenhower? Did their affairs make them unqualified to be President? Or is this one of those Democrat-only principles?
Cheating doesn’t make the cheaters unqualified to be President, but the cheatee. I guess if Hillary cheated on Bill, she would then become qualified. Of course, if Bill then didn’t divorce Hillary, that would make *him * unqualified, after the fact.
BTW - I thought the “old tired rules” were supposed to be to NOT get a divorce?
