Why Do They Hate Senator Clinton?

On Chris Matthews' weekly Sunday show this morning, he and a panel of femme-bots were discussing the fact that the American psyche is now more in tune with Laura Bush than with HRC. In other words, feminism is dead.

Well, I'm not certain if feminism is dead or not. What I do know is that no person in American life inspires more vitriol than Hillary Clinton. However, I'm not 100% sure of why that is. You've got to forgive me for not knowing as I was out-of-the-country during Clinton's 2nd administration. From the barstool I was warming in Japan, it seemed to me that most Americans would feel sorry for HRC because of the Lewinsky deal.

It has to be more than a fear of strong women. It has to be more than good old fashioned American anti-intellectualism. It has to be more than envy.

So, what is it?

Comments

[Amanda]

Outspoken wives of respected men are the most loathed people because they prove what people don't want to admit--that a man doesn't have to have a wife cowering behind him to be a real man.

The only person as hated as HRC is Yoko Ono, for the same reason.

[Denise Thomas]

i wonder about this, too. It started as soon as the war against her husband did, tho. Certain radio "personalities" made a career to make smirking "jokes" about her from the beginning. i think perhaps because she was an actual human and not just a "presence" during his campaign (at least the first), that she had changed her name to Clinton after having kept her own for so long--heavens! That she actually tried to do something of substance regarding health care . . . in short, because she didn't play the demur and devoted helpmeet and gods forbid, she was a Democrat.
just rambling

[Rad Geek]

I've never seen any actual evidence that "Americans" hate Hillary Rodham Clinton (or, mutatis mutandis, Teresa Heinz Kerry, who got a lighter but still pretty sharp version of the same treatment). It's obvious that Right-wing blowhards hate her with a passion, and it's also clear enough that the personal loathing of Right-wing blowhards gets a disproportionate airing on Sunday morning news commentary and in other outposts of the cultural elite. But does that actually translate into anything outside of the commentary echo chamber and the dittohead legions? Is my experience atypical for never having noticed it?

[alt hippo]

When I get into conversations with conservatives, this is one of the questions I ask. Here's some of the explanations I've received.

1.) She killed Vince Foster.
2.) She's Lady MacBeth.
3.) Hitlery Care.

Ignoring those first two as random dimentia, I'll note that universal health care is a hot button issue in the red states. I don't know why, but I can see how people react. She stepped into a hornet's nest there, and in some eyes, she's never recovered.

It's also impossible to ignore the Chaife-sponsored Arkansas Project. As half of Billary, she's been the subject of a decades-old smear campaign.

There's some things that weaken her from the left as well, not the least of which is her Iraq stance. There's also a facade that I've seen in her interviews over the last couple of years, that suggests she's going to have trouble with the "cares about people like me" votes.

[Omar K. Ravenhurst]

It has to be more than a fear of strong women. It has to be more than good old fashioned American anti-intellectualism. It has to be more than envy.

Why?

In fairness, the Clintons do not appear to have any principles whatsoever.

[ricky]

Right, them ol' Clintons don't appear to have any principles whatsoever. Though, both of them went to Yale Law School, and while Hilary did some private practice, the Clenis spent his whole life working for the government. And now Hilary works for the government.

And both of them could have made a hell of a lot more working in the private sector.

So, what was motivating them both to give up all that money and go into government service, where their lack of principles could really pay off?

Ahhhh! That's right!

The Earned Income Tax Credit! Head Start!

Those souless corrupt Clintons! They let nothing get in their way of such unprincipled stuff like that--like brokering peace in Northern Ireland--not even if it meant killing dozens of people who got in their way!

Is there no end to their greed and hunger for absolute power?

[tas]

Omar, in all fairness, I really cannot fathom how you can make such a statement, especially since the right harbors druggies like Rush Limbaugh and sex crazed, masturbating womanizers like Bill O'Reilly.

[thehim]

This is truly a terrifying development. Not as it related to women, but instead how it relates to men. You see, I really like Laura Bush. She's a lovely gal. But her role in her marriage with our glorious leader has been one of rehab counselor, babysitter. She was the crutch that replaced W's bottle of Jack Daniels and his bricks of cocaine. Bill, on the other hand, didn't need a woman to be his crutch, and just married a woman with some brains and loads of cash. I like Hillary too, but more in a "that woman would work her ass off for me if I could manage to get on her good side" kind of way.

I won't go entirely downfield with this comment, since if I follow this thought to its conclusion, I'm likely to offend every demographic on the planet (I'm sure I'll get close though even with this), but I will say that men don't necessarily count on being the kind of guy that ends up with a millionaire wife that could leave them if they fooled around with a star-stuck chubster at the peak of their popularity. They would never expect to get away with it. And the fact that Bill Clinton was able to pull that crazy shit off with no consequences makes people hate Hillary for not proving to all those that don't have the ability to cheat on their wives that those people don't even get their comeuppance. Don't underestimate the effect that her decision to stay with Bill has had on the way that many conservative Americans view her. Many Americans think that Laura Bush would leave George in the same situation. They'd be wrong, but George Bush will never let us find out, and that's why Karl Rove loves him so much.

[eRobin]

I'll be unpopular here and side with Omar. I lost all respect for Hillary when I hear the Moyers interview with Elizabeth Warren. It's a long excerpt but I'll put it here:

WARREN: I had written an op-ed about a piece of pending bankruptcy legislation. The credit card companies have been pushing to try to tighten the bankruptcy laws, sort of like locking the doors to the hospitals and then claiming nobody's sick in America.

So, they were trying to get the bankruptcy laws constrained, constricted, so that fewer families could get in. Why? Because you can make more money if those families don't go into bankruptcy, if you're a credit lender.

And so I'd written an op-ed about how this would fall disproportionately hard on women who were raising families and who would be put in the position under this bill of trying to compete with Citibank, MasterCard, Visa, Bank One for getting alimony and child support from their ex-husbands.

Mrs. Clinton evidently saw…

MOYERS: The First Lady then.

WARREN: The First Lady. She was then First Lady. This is the 1990s. Late 1990s. Mrs. Clinton saw the piece, and I got a call from the White House. And they said Mrs. Clinton was going to be in town to give a speech in Boston and would I come and meet with her. I said, "Sure."

And so I put together all my files. I show up at the appointed place. After she's finished her speech, we're ushered into a tiny, little room somewhere in the bowels of this hotel, and just the two of us. They close the door. Mrs. Clinton sits down. We have hamburgers and french fries.

MOYERS: You tutor her.

WARREN: And she says, "Tell me about bankruptcy." And I got to tell you, I never had a smarter student. Quick, right to the heart of it. I go over the law. It's a complex law. Went over the economics. Showed her the graphs, showed her the charts. And she got it.

Within 20 minutes, she could play where the rest of it would come. Well, then that will mean this part's happened. That will mean this has happened. I said, "Yes, that's right." And at the end of the conversation, Mrs. Clinton stood up. She said, "Let's get our picture taken" which we did, and she said, "Professor Warren, we've got to stop that awful bill," referring to this bankruptcy bill that sponsored by the credit card companies.

So I left. She went back to White House, and I heard later from someone who is a White House staffer that there were skid marks in the hallways when Mrs. Clinton got back as people reversed direction on that bankruptcy bill. President…

MOYERS: That was supporting the industry. And because of her…

WARREN: President Clinton had been showing that this is another way that he could be helpful to business. It wasn't a very high visibility bill. And when Mrs. Clinton came back with a little better understanding of how it all worked, they reversed course, and they reversed course fast. And indeed, the proof is in the pudding.

The last bill that came before President Clinton was that bankruptcy bill that was passed by the House and the Senate in 2000 and he vetoed it. And in her autobiography, Mrs. Clinton took credit for that veto and she rightly should. She turned around a whole administration on the subject of bankruptcy. She got it.

MOYERS: And then?

WARREN: One of the first bills that came up after she was Senator Clinton was the bankruptcy bill. This is a bill that's like a vampire. It will not die. Right? There's a lot of money behind it, and it…

MOYERS: Bill, her husband, who vetoed…

WARREN: Her husband had vetoed it very much at her urging.

MOYERS: And?

WARREN: She voted in favor of it.

MOYERS: Why?

WARREN: As Senator Clinton, the pressures are very different. It's a well-financed industry. You know a lot of people don't realize that the industry that gave the most money to Washington over the past few years was not the oil industry, was not pharmaceuticals. It was consumer credit products. Those are the people. The credit card companies have been giving money, and they have influence.

MOYERS: And Mrs. Clinton was one of them as Senator.

WARREN: She has taken money from the groups, and more to the point, she worries about them as a constituency.

MOYERS: But what does this mean though to these people, these millions of people out there whom the politicians cavort in front of as favoring the middle class, and then are beholden to the powerful interests that undermine the middle class? What does this say about politics today?

WARREN: You know this is the scary part about democracy today. It's… We're talking again about the impact of money. The credit industry on this bankruptcy bill has spent tens of millions of dollars lobbying, and as their profits grow, they just throw more into lobbying for how they can get laws that will make it easier and easier and easier to drain money out of the pockets of middle class families.

No principles sounds right to me - although the evidence of that never comes up in the constant Hillary bashing. She inspires strong feelings because the VRWC has never let up on her from Day One. The public likes or hates what the public gets. She maintains a high profile in public life so that fuels their fire but believe me, if Clinton's wife were Laura, they would have found ways to hammer her too - or his wild daughters. Or his mother. Look what they did to Dean's wife - a blander person you couldn't find. Trying to find out what Hillary does to invite these high passions is blaming the victim.

[eRobin]

I forgot the link to the Moyers interview. Here it is.

[Kathy]

The anti-Hillary crowd doesn't hate her because she switched positions on a bankruptcy bill. Their intense disdain started well before she became a Senator.

I asked this question on my own blog and only got one conservative to respond. His reasons? She's shrill, liberal, a lawyer, and didn't dump Bill. Huh.

I think she's hated because she didn't stay in "her place", because she had the nerve to dismiss traditional expectations of a first lady as a smiling supporter championing only a social cause. She did so in almost an off-hand manner, with a laughing scoff. Like her comment about not having time to stay home and bake cookies.... She clearly saw herself as her husband's equal - gasp - and that's unacceptable to traditionalists on so many fronts. Add to that her seeming lack of concern for her appearance (headbands, et al), her intellectualism, and her grasp of real policy and she's doomed.

[MustangSally]

According to my ditto-head co-workers, it's the fact that she had so much influence & power over Bill, the person who was *elected* when she was not elected..... There's no bigger fear to a certain segment of the population than of a man being "pu**y-whipped" by a strong woman who has her own agenda and isn't afraid to use her influence over her man to advance that agenda.

Honestly, a big part of the Left had the same problem with Nancy Reagan, as I recall.

[Amanda]

I see--people hate Hillary because she "allowed" someone to cheat on her.

Okay guys, I'm warning you. Remember and cherish that feeling. Nearly everyone gets cheated on at some point in their life. When someone cheats on you, don't forget. If you weren't a loathsome turd, it wouldn't have happened. If you're cheated on, it's your own damn fault.

[Nancy]

Being a senator is not about voting for specific bills, it is about all the tradeoffs behind the scenes. For example, do you know whether that bill was going to pass anyway? If so, what might she have gained by voting for a done deal? Hillary and Bill are both pragmatic politicians not ideologues.

I think Hillary is hated because she has been systematically maligned by the right and by the press (who gleefully jump on such criticism because it appeals to peoples baser instincts in the same way gossip does). I consider her a personal hero because she has shown courage in the face of this sort of attack. Clinton seems to find a philosophical space from which to endure the unfairness of it all. I don't know how Hillary does it, but I admire her for it.

Anyway who violates social norms will suffer for it. She violates a whole bunch of them. If we are going to take gender equity seriously, we have to allow women to have personality defects just as men do.

I cannot abide Laura Bush. She sacrifices her own values at the drop of a hanky in order to support not her husband but the GOP platform. She was a librarian and yet does not support any of the values of education or access to media without censorship, nor does she support head start or other early childhood education programs, nor anything related to child welfare. According to bios of her, she is a neatnik and a compulsive, stern and not much fun as a person. I think neurotic would describe her pretty well. They can blame Hillary for sticking with Bill, but why would anyone stick with an alcoholic cocaine addict? I can see what there is to love about Bill Clinton that might offset his infidelity, but what can there be about Bush that would enhance our opinions of Laura? His money? His family? His looks? Not his intellect. Of course, he is someone to clean up after.

[Beth]

Does no one see the irony in the fact that there's a LOT of monkey poo flying around about cocaine use (addiction?!), which is complete nonsense, along with a lot of grumbling about equally nonsensical Vincent Foster conspiracy theories? It's ONLY right-wingers who engage in nutty mudslinging? Pleeeeeease.

And if conservatives hate strong women, as some claim, then please explain the Condoleezza Rice phenomenon?

Get real. Conservatives hate Hillary because of her politics. SO WHAT? Is it now politically incorrect to disagree with her--or any liberal? Does that make us anti-female? If so, may I suggest that liberal opposition to Condi Rice (for example) make liberals racists? Or are you/they just anti-female as well?

Hypocrisy sucks, and it doesn't make for a good argument.

[Omar K. Ravenhurst]

Why would I say that? What about this for starters? What about putting sick people in jail for inhaling? What about the effect on the Democratic Party, which seemed to stand for Bill Clinton and nothing else? Did he just not use his principles in these cases?

[eRobin]

I didn't say that they hated her because of the bankruptcy bill - I brought that up to make the point that she could be considered to be lacking principles. She certainly lacks any I respect. I think of her and her husband both that way.

It's no mystery to me why the right jumped on her. They had to destroy everything Clinton. If Chelsea stuck her foot into the public arena, she'd be pilloried as well. (http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:kC4L3sg69ekJ:www.nationalreview.com/derbyshire/derbyshire021501.shtml+chelsea+clinton&hl=en) The right started a productive bonfire in the nineties but it's biggest source of fuel is the Clintons, which is why they haven't let up on Hillary. And the wingers' audience hate her because the VRWC (including the more mainstream of the corporate press, which picked up on the bashing very early on (60 Minutes interveiw) and never let it go) keeps on her as well. She's a human meme for them all. If they looked at her record, they'd probably have to shut up. I don't know why anyone on the left likes her.

[Rick]

I, too, have wondered not just why there's such hatred, vitriol, end-justify-the-means thinking and "get her — by any means — just get her," as well.

eRobin makes some very good points. But, in the end, I don't think Hilary's "lack of principles" is a plausible explanation. If that were the case, we'd have a hard time explaining Tom DeLay. We would have a tough time explaining just about any other politician who has ever voted contrary to prior public comments or demonstrated beliefs and yet didn't inspire this level of hatred.

America — as my latest blog entry notes — has become a country where it doesn't matter how you play the game, so long as you don't lose.

Or, to put it in more familiar vernacular: "It's not how you play the game; it's whether you win or lose."

And as eRobin also said (which, incidentally, seemed inconsistent with the prior comments by her — so did she just become a candidate for the pillory?), the Clintons function as fuel for the fires of hatred in a way that seems independent of "principles." And in the face of numerous instances of Republican infidelities to their spouses, it seems hypocritical and unjust that Bill's infidelity is the ember that ensures the flame never dies.

[Maggie Thatcher]

>>It has to be more than a fear of strong women. >>

Strong women??!! You got to be kidding me. A woman who is like a doormat. Husband cheats on her not once, but multiple times, and worse than that humilites her in public and she does not leave him?! Only a true doormat and a very weak woman puts up with that kind of crap.A strong woman would have shown a door for a guy like that. Not a rolemodel for my daugter.

It's funny how you liberals go over your way to find excuses for that pathetic Clinton couple and it's funny how it so obviously pisses you of that you can't name a single flaw about Laura Bush. Must be devestating.

>>It has to be more than good old fashioned American anti-intellectualism>>

Liberal selfloath must be the most unatractive phenomenon I've ever run into (I'm european by the way, and very proud of my native country)

What is so intelligent about Hillary? I rember how you idiots considered Kerry intellectual merely because he can parler francais. Newsflash: Americans (liberals and republicans) are the only people who can not speak at least 3-4 languages. Outside US that's a must, and not a rare gift.

>> It has to be more than envy.>>

Envy of what? Being married to a most famous cheater in a world? Being one of the ugliest women in the world? Being an unpleasant bitch (i actually thought she was the worst....till I was introduced to Tereza Heinz...Holymoly!)? Being a doormat, who puts up her husbands cheating? Oh yeah, lot of things to feel envious about :O)

>>And in the face of numerous instances of Republican infidelities to their spouses>>

OHMG Numerous? Ronald Reagan? GWB? Majority your liberal half-witt idols in Hollywood can't keep their marriages together even for one year. It is not a secret that republicans value relationships greater than liberals. Anyone who claims otherwise is a big fool....oh but you are, and you can't help it...afterall you're liberals.

And for the mega-idiot who mentioned Rush Limbaughs drug-addiction. There is a HUGE difference between being addicted to PAINKILLERS that you have to take, than being addicted to marijuana or cocaine.

.....and you guys seriosuly think you're intellectuals?!

And O'Reily....he's a moron who did something completely idiotic and got caught....but why do you guys insist on calling him conservative. He doesn't consider himself conservative, and most conservatives don't either. He does not qualify as conservative. This propably proves what I've suspected for long, you guys don't even watch Fox News, eventhough you sure do have a lot of oppinions about the channel.

One more thing, Jon Stewards The Daily News isn't a real news program.

This is one of the most pathetic blogs I've ever run into. Bunch of sore losers whining, having their post-election stressdisorder. You had your shot, you lost (and may I remind you, both electoral vote and popular vote), They "killed Kerry...Oh my god, those bastards!", get over it.

[Roxanne]

Wow.

I remember my first beer.

[eRobn]

Rox: Yeah, but give'er credit for the South Park reference.

Rick: I was answering two separate questions. I tried to make that clear in a post above. My lack of respect for Hillary is founded in politcal decisions she made. The Right's hatred of her and the reason that the powers that be stoke that hate are part of a separate matter.

[Chris]

People hate Hillary for her arrogance. She truly believes she knows more than anyone on so many different subjects (healthcare, education, social security, medicare, the list is endless). People hate being told what to do without their input (remember her closed door meetings on Hillary care?). Hillary has no time for listening to the little people unless it is an anectdote that will lend credence to her cause-du-jour. She is against tax decreases for any taxpayers. She once said something to the effect of "it would be great to cut taxes but how would we pay for it?" She and the other pinhead Democrats in congress think that it is their god given right to spend tax receipts on all sorts of worthless social programs that never achieve the objectives they were supposed to in the first place. Forget all that powerful/strong women crap. Elizabeth Dole and Condy Rice are both strong women (the case can be made Democrats are afraid of strong women) and Republicans love them. Hillary is only interested in establishing a legacy in the history books. She, like so many other wealthy Democrats/Liberals, know nothing about the life of the common american family. We shouldn't be forced to give our money to some crack addicted welfare mom in Harlem, however, most of us would very happily help a poor kid who shows promise and wants to work hard for his dreams.

[Jami]

whoever this warren character is that erobin cites, she lied/didn't check her facts.

hillary recused herself, is my interpretation, from the bankruptcy bill. she's the only senator who didn't vote:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00044

so. she didn't support the bankruptcy bill. not that anyone will see this now that the cow of misinformation is out of the barn.

[hello]

Why?

In fairness, the Clintons do not appear to have any principles whatsoever.
Omar

i'm with omar. vichy scum in D.C. take their cue from sticky willy. just read the transcript from his recent larry king interview. it was all about justifying the war and sucking up to the bushes. for nafta alone he deserves to be reviled.

one of the the reasons hillary makes my stomache curl is because she said if she knew then what she knows now, she would still have voted for the war. kerry turns around and echoes the same thing lest he be out machoed by hillary. as if that would have done the trick. my grandma is more butch than kerry.

after hillary saw the kerfuffle kerry got into for that statement, she ammended her stance, changing it to: if the senate knew there wasn't any wmd, the vote never would gone to the senate.

how do you like that nice straddle?

and please spare me the psychobabble that i'm merely internalizing the anti-feminist or anti clinton hatred spewed by the right. not a chance. i'd vote for boxer for president in a new york minute.

i hate this knee jerk game of tit for tat. just because the right hates something, i'm not going to reflexively defend it without reflection. we might share a disgust but for different reasons.

[hello]

oh and don't set up hillary as the face of feminism. i'm not buying it. just because the right conflates the two doesn't make it so. a true feminist would have gone to bat for lani guinier.