The Democratic front-runner's wife did not comment on other rival candidates for the party's nomination, but she has been sniping at Clinton since last summer. According to Obama sources, those public utterances do not reveal the extent of her hostility.And please don't call it the "Queen Bee Syndrome."
Do you know what the Queen Bee Syndrome is? There will not be two women sharing power. One of the women will see to it, that the other woman is under the bus.That definition of the term came from Rush Limbaugh in the context of saying why Nancy Pelosi would want to prevent Hillary from getting the VP slot:
So Nancy Pelosi... was asked about the concept of a "dream ticket" for the Democrat Party.... The Queen Bee in Washington, Nancy Pelosi, threw "cold water" on this whole idea. She said, "Take it from me -- that won't be the ticket." A bunch of reporters then shouted, 'Why?' Pelosi declined to elaborate. 'Do you want me to go through a lifetime of political gut?' said Pelosi... 'I do think we'll have a dream team -- it just won't be those two names,'" meaning, if Nancy Pelosi has anything to say about it, Hillary Clinton will not be anywhere near the Democrat nomination.... The last thing she wants is Hillary Clinton in the White House. That will render her unnoticeable as speaker of the House. Neutered, if you will. Spayed. So what will happen here (laughter) is that Pelosi, who already holds her seat, is going to do whatever she has to, to see to it that Hillary does not get hers. I mean, it's fine if she stays over there in the Senate, and even better if she goes back to the Senate as a loser.Do powerful women hate to see other women succeed? Do they want to be the only woman? Or do you think "sisterhood is powerful" at the highest levels? Surely, Michelle Obama has plenty of reason to hate Hillary, but don't you think she wants to be the First Lady? If a woman is Vice President, that woman seems to be above the President's wife. She'd be the first lady.
Michelle would even have competition as the top spouse of the land, what with a former President roaming in and about the VP mansion. He'd catch the spotlight, project the glamour.
And speaking of Bill Clinton... Hillary certainly made it her business over the years to keep other women down whenever those women interfered with her plan to ascend to power via the spousal role. There was no powerful sisterhood then. And now: turnabout! Turnabout is... a bitch.
पोस्ट्स
५१ टिप्पण्या:
Maybe Michelle's holding out for the veep slot herself.
My thought exactly. Then she would be the First Lady as well as the First Lady.
Balderdash. Complete and utter balderdash.
Between 1998 and 2002, all five of our top elected officials here in Arizona were women (four Republicans, led by then-Governor Jane Hull and one Democrat, then Attorney-General and now Governor Janet Napolitano.) And guess what? Despite their ideological differences they worked together very well, to the point that government here probably ran as smoothly during those four years as I've seen it run. The personalities fit very well together.
For that matter, speaking of Arizona Governors, three of our five most recent Governors have been female. The other two were Evan Mecham, who was impeached, and Fife Symington who resigned after being indicted (and whose subsequent conviction was nullified after he was ironically the recipient of a pardon from Bill Clinton.)
With Hillary as VP, no First Lady would have the china-picking limelight to herself!
Hillary: The once, and future Agnew!
I imagine Pelosi objects not so much to Hillary but Hillary + Bill = The Machine.
It's time to put those lights out and move on. At this point, they're a liability and, yes, a distraction.
Incidentally, Napolitano has been discussed as a possible running mate for Obama. Her being from Arizona is a plus and a minus-- on one hand McCain is expected to win his home state, but on the other hand Napolitano has an unbelievably low 9% disapproval rating here (even more amazing given that she's not been a bit shy about vetoing bills she doesn't like), and last year an Arizona poll came out that showed she would beat John McCain in a hypothetical matchup for his Senate seat in 2010 (a matchup that almost certainly won't happen-- if McCain wins he's gone, and if Obama wins, Napolitano, even if she's not the veep, will very likely get the call for a cabinet position.)
Other females who have been rumored as potential running mates for Obama include Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius and California Senator Dianne Feinstein.
Here is the whole list: Between 1999 and 2003, the top five elected positions in Arizona were:
Governor Jane Hull, Secretary of State Betsey Bayless, Treasurer Carol Springer, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Lisa Graham Keegan, and Attorney General
Janet Napolitano.
As opposed to men. Men just loooove to share power.
Do people like Novak even think when they write about women this way?
Not much of a story, really. I don't think there's any reason to think that Obama would like to pick Hillary in the first place so why would Michelle have to "veto" her? Surely it's no surprise that the rival camps have no great love for each other at this point.
If Michelle vetoes another female VP contender the Quenn Bee theory will have some credibility.
I would bet a large amount of money that Obama will pick a man for his running mate. A white man.
And not just out of Michelle's feminine territorialism.
Jim Webb is the best VP pick I can think of right now.
Hillary Clinton is a terrible choice for VP, no matter who is at the top of the ticket. That Pelosi and Obama recognize this is of no significance.
Have to disagree about Webb. The most important thing a VP candidate can do for the ticket is to not embarrass himself. The risk of Webb doing or saying something detrimental to the campaign is too high.
So none of those Arizona politicians mind sharing the intense national spotlight and the power that comes with it with each other? Well then, consider that debunked.
"As opposed to men. Men just loooove to share power."
As opposed to sharing it with who exactly? If things were reversed and you had 1 man for every 100 women in power (numbers clearly made up) and that one guy was on top, I suspect he would be reluctant to share power with another man.
How about Jackie Chan? He always does good teamed up with a brother.
Collin Powell switches parties and joins the Obamanator. Slam dunk.
Or Collin Powell joins team McCain. Slam dunk.
I would bet a large amount of money that Obama will pick a man for his running mate. A white man.
Agreed, and he'd be foolish not to pick a white male, preferably from a Midwestern state. It's obvious that's the demographic where he has some weak spots, and he shouldn't let PC considerations guide his judgment. Jim Webb may be too much of a loose cannon to pick, and it would probably be good for Obama to pick someone aligned with Hillary for that slot, for party unification purposes. Gov. Strickland from Ohio would probably be the best choice for that, followed by someone like Evan Bayh from Indiana or General Wesley Clark.
Also, while Obama has some weakness among white women, many if not most of the white females voting against him are pro-choice feminists who feel more of a tie to Clinton than to him. Most of them will not go to McCain. White males who voted in the Democratic primary are more likely to be swing voters in November, I suspect, given that the GOP picked McCain as their nominee. Thus, Obama needs to go hunting where the ducks are.
"I would bet a large amount of money that Obama will pick a man for his running mate. A white man."
I'll bet a small amount of money it will be a man too, but only one with the correct hybridization. Obama will never cave to the Man.
It takes very little to convince me that Michelle fosters some reservations about having Hillary Clinton one heartbeat away from the Presidency. Not to mention nobody on the Obama team is very happy with the pit bull tactics that have been employed by the Clintons.
It's either Jim Webb, Evan Bayh, or Al Gore.
Big score Ann, a triple triple as they say in round ball. Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, and Michelle Obama exposed (no not that way) as clawing female cats, instead of rational human beings. And how clever of you to use the Fat Man with the Big Cigar to mouth you distaste of Pelosi, and Clinton… Ever clever with words, the Fat One comes right in with the cat images: ” The last thing she wants is Hillary Clinton in the White House. That will render her unnoticeable as speaker of the House. Neutered, if you will. Spayed.”
You are a tad bit late in the game, Uncle Rudolph, who knows what color the salad is, is already spreading this kind of vitriol in England. And of course, our Lady with the White Gloves and fine Irish Name knows how to wield the sheave: Are the Obamas, at bottom, snobs? Do they understand America? Are they of it? Did anyone at their Ivy League universities school them in why one should love America? Do they confuse patriotism with nationalism, or nativism? Are they more inspired by abstractions like "international justice" than by old visions of America as the city on a hill, which is how John Winthrop saw it, and Ronald Reagan and JFK spoke of it?
Have they been, throughout their adulthood, so pampered and praised--so raised in the liberal cocoon--that they are essentially unaware of what and how normal Americans think? And are they, in this, like those cosseted yuppies, the Clintons?
Why is all this actually not a distraction but a real issue? Because Americans have common sense and are bottom line. They think like this. If the president and his first lady are not loyal first to America and its interests, who will be? The president of France? But it's his job to love France, and protect its interests. If America's leaders don't love America tenderly, who will?”
Love it, just love it… Our image of a Presidential wife should be: The One who Consults Sooth Sayers? or perhaps The One with Million of Bucks Who Bought a Married Man?
If you can’t smear the candidate, go for the one that is standing next to him… Try getting back to the issues. Your recent post on Supreme Court was thought provoking. Perhaps a post examining the National Debt might be in order?
Barney Frank for Veep!
Would add much needed toughness, smarts, and humor to the ticket. That's my choice and I'm sticking to it.
What woman cares about force times velocity.
Which of officium, potestas, auctoritas and imperium do queen bees care about?
It's more likely they don't want to be out-dressed.
Good God, does anyone doubt for a moment that, if Hillary were made VP, the Clintons would have Obama killed? Seriously, does anybody think that unlikely? Maybe Michelle Obama is considering the obvious risk.
I doubt very much that Pelosi worries about being outdressed, RH. And this woman is interested enough to wonder what you mean about force times velocity. If you're going for momentum, isn't that a funtion of force and time?
LOL Mike, I've thought about that too.
And yes. It IS the Queen Bee effect. Two or more strong women competing for power. Someone has to go. The men may 'think' the women are getting along, but you guys can't seem to detect the currents and rip tides that are below the surface. A man will attack his opponent openly. A women will be much more subtle and more lethal. This is why I hate working with other women. :-)
Do powerful women hate to see other women succeed?
Maybe.
Do they want to be the only woman?
Maybe.
Or do you think "sisterhood is powerful" at the highest levels?
Maybe so, but the biggest enemy of woman is usually another woman, not a man.
This is why feminism and female solidarity, even in the highest levels, often fails.
As Eli pointed out, women can work together. It's not that.
But the mixture of two powerful women in the same room, has a raw antagonism barely fathomed even by alpha males.
This may be one of the reasons few female Prime Ministers/Presidents have women in their cabinets or staff.
Even a figurehead like the Queen cannot stand working with women around her. Her most intimate staff is 100% male. She's never had a Private Secretary who was female. The post is traditionally male, but we're talking even to make some kind of PC gesture, of which she is famous.
And of course, she really hated Margaret Thatcher, even allowing the dropping of hints to journalists about that fact, unthinkable about her male Prime Ministers.
Cheers,
Victoria
When a woman looks at another woman --
Pure ice.
Gives the lie to the whole gentler sex thing --
Not nice.
Do powerful women hate to see other women succeed?
In my experience? Yes.
To explain why Speaker Peolsi and Michelle Obama may not want Hillary anywhere near an Obama ticket, it helps to understand the "crab pot" syndrome that affects the entire Pelosi-Obama wing of the Democrat party.
They project the very essence of the thinking of poor people: they worry about what everyone else has, rather than what they have themselves. For Hillary to be the Vice President, to the "crab pot" people is not an accomplishment that is separate and distinct from Michelle Obama being First Lady, and does nothing to diminsh the latter. To the "crab pot" people, another's accomplishment is diminution of one's own accomplishment.
Why do you think Obama is so hot to raise taxes. It's not a matter of revenue, it's a matter of what's "fair."
Their whole view of accomplishment and success is based on envy and resentment. It will be a shame if Americans once again adopt that as their governing philosophy
P.S.: I thought about that too, Mike/DBQ.
I think we all have (there have been several whisperings I've noticed, about this).
Given the penchant of Obama associates to think in terms of conspiracy, I'm sure they all saw "JFK" which had LBJ practically in bed with the military, who offed JFK to bring their guy into power.
Anyway, I'm not into conspiracy theories. But I'd watch my back with Hillary one heartbeat away from the Presidency...
Michelle Obama may eventually ensure that BarryHO himself doesn't get into the WH. She is beginning to look like the crone-hive queen from hell.
Omarosa-lite!
The only problem is that there's no law saying a nominee gets to pick their running mate, so it doesn't matter what Michelle or Barack Obama wants. With Obama edging Clinton out by a nose, if she goes to the convention and demands the veep slot, she can't really be denied, can she?
yours/
peter.
"If you're going for momentum, isn't that a funtion of force and time?"
Not at all a function of force, but in a sense one of time. Momentum is mass times velocity. Force is mass times acceleration. And always, ALWAYS, check your units.
project the glamour.
I think the bloom is off that rose (and on his nose) for most Democrats, finally.
I've seen a lot of guys who had Queen Bee Syndrome. The principal difference is that guys are less likely to pretend that they aren't dispatching a rival, when they actually are. Plus I don't think that Speaker Pelosi would have any trouble keeping Vice President Hillary in her place. Being Speaker carries power. Being VP carries no power, unless the President decides to loan some of his (or hers.) As to disliking Hillary, Mrs. Obama did not invent the concept, and there are so many reasons why she might do so.
This is both gender AND race related. As a general proposition, black women don't like or trust white women very much.
Jackson, the nominee picks their running mate, which the convention is expected to approve. Not to do so would be a HUGE embarrassment and the Dems have had enough of that.
Bill Richardson is the likely pick; it panders AND gives the needed experience to the ticket. McCain, picking afterward, would be smart to make Kay Bailey Hutchinson his choice. Good for pandering, slightly more conservative, experienced without being too old.
She certainly knows how many states there are, unlike some.
Omarosa-lite
Michellorosa...
Kay Bailey Hutchinson
Oh God, no? I mean, the ticket needs YOUTH. Or the appearance of youth.
Honestly, Condi would be the best choice (not for me, I've already stated that though I like her, she wouldn't be a good choice).
But if not, a black woman would be the ultimate trump card, especially given the other thread's implication that Hillary won't stand a chance at Veep.
If he chooses a black man, say like the wonderful Michael Steele of Maryland, it'll look awful in the compare/contrast way.
"Black guy good enough to be President for the Dems but not Repubs", whereas you can fine-tune the message about a black woman.
Either way, I'm against this pandering to PC messages.
Choose the most able / most loyal person for the ticket, e basta.
Cheers,
Victoria
They started the same crap about the first Barbara Bush when George the Elder was running. Then they called it the Aunt Bea syndrome.
Not at all a function of force, but in a sense one of time. Momentum is mass times velocity. Force is mass times acceleration. And always, ALWAYS, check your units.
p=mv
F=ma
v=at
p=mat
p=Ft
So yes, momentum is a function of force and time -- or velocity and mass. However you want to measure it. It is just two ways of saying the same thing.
Uh - guess what. Obama gets to pick the VP, not his wife.
Actually, DTL, it's the convention that picks the VP. The P nominee makes his recommendation, but he doesn't have the power to determine the outcome.
So uh yourself.
So uh yourself
A-hahahaha! Leave it to Beaveresque, even.
Awesome, Ann.
Michelle is making nothing but sense here:
1. The Clintons are toxic and Bill is out of control.
2. The Republicans' biggest break in the general election would be for Hillary to be on the ticket.
3. Hillary stated over and over that Obama is not ready while she is -- in Obama's place I wouldn't pee on her if she were on fire.
Hillary's end is near. (Analogy, people; don't take it literally.)
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा