BlogHer - Mother Hillary - Comments

Welcome PunditMom! (Sorry

Dana J. Tuszke — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 13:04:58 -0600

Welcome PunditMom! (Sorry I'm so late to the welcoming party!) I'm so glad to see you here and your post is wonderful.

Honestly, when I watched Hilary choke up, I started to cry a little. It was that raw emotion that triggered a sort of empathy inside me. Finally, Hilary was admitting that this wasn't as easy for her as it looked. Finally, she was showing human emotions instead of the hard core politician exterior.

I can't say that it swayed my vote just yet, but it still meant something to me and women everywhere.

Hilary's Tear

terriclark — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:28:43 -0600

www.terristakefive.com

I remember years ago an interview with then Prime Minister of England, Margaret Thatcher. They asked her if she ever cried and she admitted to tears fairly often. Good post!

Enough already!

The End of Motherhood — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:14:54 -0600

I think Hillary won in New Hampshire because the women of New Hampshire finally got pissed at the nitpicking, sexist scrutiny (not to mention badgering by neanderthals in the crowd) that Hillary is subjected to while Obama gets a resoundingly free pass.

Torn twisted and tattered

larmsterpoet — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:30:33 -0600

I am very torn on this issue. I think it is pretty awful that she has to be humanized by an show of emotion. The men certainly do not. They are automatically given human status. Emotion just endears them to us. Though one side of me loves the phrase "motherhood made a man out of me" at the same time it implies that we were not equals before motherhood. Simple womanhood becomes a short falling. This seems to be the primary issue. When I ponder the question should women vote for Hillary due to solidarity? I am torn. One side says a resounding YES! It is our responsibility. She is on the verge of accomplishing what no other woman has been able to. Once this barrier is broken, it will open up possibility and rights for all women in this country. The other side says no. No, because we should vote for the candidate who represents our values the best. If this were an equal playing field, her gender would be a mute point. Though people are pretending that the field is level, there is a gender slant that you need rock climbing gear just to traverse. I have started blogging about just this. My first one The Presidential Crying Game and I have to write more. This is such a complex and fascinating issue and so important to womens history and feminism. We must all keep the dialogs open! I think people are just starting to learn how to actually talk about this.

Welcome to BlogHer

Erin Kotecki Vest — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 13:58:10 -0600

Welcome PunditMom!

I'm so glad people don't read that much into when I tear up. This sure is getting interesting, I'll say that much.

Politics & News Contributing Editor
Queen of Spain

Hi PunditMom

Morra Aarons Mele — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 10:51:23 -0600

I loved the tears. It's so interesting to me, as you say, kept her more feminine side stashed away. The first Senate Committee she joined was Foreign Affairs, I think. Working so hard to be tough!

I'm glad you wrote about this! I think any great leader needs to show vulnerability. God knews Bill was great at tearing up.

I think people are reading too much into it.

Lisse — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 10:13:33 -0600

I was in New Hampshire about a week before the Iowa caucus. It was clear to me that McCain and Clinton would be the winners. I think Iowa gave Obama the bump he needed to come as close to her numbers as he did, but that alleged 14 point lead he had in the polls was dead wrong.

That said, Hillary has a fine line to walk between the humanity of her candidacy (taking a page out of Edwards book, perhaps) and the strength that New Hampshire voters were clearly attracted to in the first place. Why the two must be mutually exclusive in people's eyes is a mystery to me.

I think it's safe to say that the "tears" did not hurt her. I'm not sure they helped as much as the right likes to grouse that they did.

And yes, for a whole host of reasons, I'd like to see Chelsea involved.

-Lisse

@ Home in the World

woohoo!

veronicaeye — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 10:04:19 -0600

Congrats on the new gig. Good to see you here.

Thrilled to have you here!

Kalyn Denny — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 09:45:12 -0600

I've been a lurker on your blog for a while.

Kalyn Denny
Kalyn's Kitchen

Welcome to BlogHer PunditMom

Catherine Morgan — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 09:32:24 -0600

Great first post. Welcome to the BlogHer team. :)

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan
also at CatherineBlogs.com and The Political Voices of Women

Mother Hillary

PunditMom — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 08:51:46 -0600

This is my first post as a BlogHer Contributing Editor, so let me say how thrilled and excited I am to be here! (OK, enough for my Sally Field moment)!

There's been plenty of commentary about Hillary Clinton's teary-eyed moment right before the New Hampshire primaries this week. Well, if you look closely, there wasn't really a tear -- just a some welling up. As Linda Richman might say, Hillary was just a little verklempt.

But maybe that's what some of us have been waiting for -- a moment when we could exhale a tiny bit after seeing a glimpse of genuine Hillary that peeked through the woman of steel facade some of her advisers believe she should maintain.

As Emily Bazelon said over at The XX Factor:

"... [I]t seems entirely plausible to me that undecided New Hampshire women shifted to Hillary in the last few days because they were both wincing and empathizing as they watched her struggle with her sudden second-tier status."

A warm and fuzzy Hillary? Who knew it was there? We knew she didn't like to bake cookies (most of the time, I don't either), but she's kept the more feminine side of herself stashed away like the crown jewels for most of her public life.

Getting her to show her softer side? Ann Althouse wouldn't be surprised:

"Is she just really tired? Or was it really something about about the questioner's expression of sympathy — how do you do it? — that brought out a truly vulnerable side? I don't know. But it seems a little like the feminine gesture she made at the debate when she said the her feelings were hurt. I think someone — an excellent actress? — is coaching her in how to display womanly emotion."

Stefcon at Political Base, however, likened Hillary's moment to that woman on the verge we love to hate and hate to love, Meredith Grey:

" ... Hillary opted for television drama, formatting her narrative to fit the story arc of her favorite television show, Grey's Anatomy."

But HRC apparently tapped a feeling in many like me -- the over-thirty but under-sixty-five woman voter who was still wondering. The woman like her. So it made me wonder, should she keep up with this nod to womanhood as a campaign tactic?

Maybe.

She's brought her mother and daughter out on the campaign trail, but I say that's not enough. What would happen with women voters -- with mothers -- if Hillary actually talked about how her role as Chelsea's mother has informed her views in politics? And what if she and Bill could actually convince Chelsea to start stumping for her mother and utter some words on the campaign trail, in the way that Cate Edwards has for her father, John Edwards?

I have a feeling it would be powerful. While some men voters might be put off by that, most people have acknowledged that it's women who are going to make or break this presidential campaign. So why not really tune in to it?

Hillary, we've already heard your wonky policy speeches. Give us more the 'motherhood made a man out of me' theme that I know you've got in you.

Just make sure you get a little verklempt from time to time while you're doing it.

You can also find Joanne at her personal blog, PunditMom, as well as MOMocrats and PunditMom's Spin Cycle.