It has probably dawned on H. Clinton that she is what many have been accusing her of: a divider. So she did what she probably doesn’t do a lot. She apologized.
“I want to put that in context. You know I am sorry if anyone was offended. It was certainly not meant in any way to be offensive,” Hillary Clinton said. “Anyone who has followed my husband’s public life or my public life know very well where we have stood and what we have stood for and who we have stood with.”
And she made her apology in front of the National Newspaper Publishers Association, a group of more than 200 black community newspapers across the country.
Does this mean that she will apologize to everyone else they’ve offended in the last few weeks: educated white people, non-feminist/womanist women, independent voters, space aliens…. Okay, maybe not the space aliens, they are still backing Kucinich, but she and her crew have pretty much tried to lay waste to everyone who stood in her way of the presidency. I’m unsure if she has pissed off Hispanics, Asians, and poor whites but everyone else she pretty much insulted.
I feel she was sincere in her apology. And even if it’s strategical, it still means something.
Yet, in the party, there is still a rift…
By trying to change the focus that she felt the media had on Obama she made race the issue and she played up her gender more by saying that the media was more fascinated with an intelligent black man who wasn’t saying much than they were with a rational woman. She has kept repeating that her gender is a liability whereas Obama’s race is a plus. It’s not really the case, though. Her liability is her personality which has nothing to do with being a woman, it’s about her being who she is as a person that turns a lot of people off. It’s the pushiness, the hardheadedness, the arrogance and the smarminess.
It’s not a good look.
People say, well oh, it works for men why can’t it work for women. It doesn’t always work for men. Obama doesn’t seem to be affected with it. Her husband, the charmer, didn’t come off that way in ’92 and ’96 (although its sure looking like him now, but then we become different people when we are fighting for something for our family than when we humbly ask for something for ourselves).
The attitude she is affecting is the same one GWB threw at us in 2000 and then again in 2004. It worked for him against milquetoasts Al Gore and John Kerry (who foolishly thought intelligence and experience were on their side) but for a party who selected Gore and Kerry as their representatives, those tactics don’t necessarily draw them in.
H. Clinton needs to lay aside her gender; it should never factor in as a deficit or credit and she shouldn’t allow the media to bait her in doing so. She was going well in that vein back in December but as the race has gone on she succumbed to whining about her gender. Her campaign, which could have been a triumph for women of any color no matter what the outcome of the race, has now become a lodestone for us. Her vision of womanhood is not the way I see it. I didn’t think it was the way she saw it until she started hiding behind her sex and throwing out accusations of misogyny. The ideas of feminism/womanism/womanhood are in an inter-generational clash. That is another problem that her campaign seems to have, an inability to reach out to women born after the movement. Just like Obama can’t win in November on the votes of African Americans alone neither can H. Clinton win with a female crowd hopped up on Geritol backing her up.
Or am I a self hating woman for saying that?