Thirty Ways of Looking at Hillary: Before Super Tuesday

If you're feeling jittery at not having had your fill of her for the last five minutes, you've come to the right place. Welcome to the first meeting of Hillaholics Anonymous, a recovery program for those of us obsessed with Her. And who isn't?

We admit that we are powerless over our addiction and that our lives have become unmanageable. We admit that we spend too much time thinking about Hillary's likeability, her marriage, the origins of her ambition, the depth of her sangfroid, and whether she should have turned down the Vogue photo shoot because the pictures would make her look "too feminine." We admit that we cannot let it slide that she was one of 77 senators who gave Bush the authority to invade Iraq, that she went along with the Iranian terrorism vote, and that nothing she says to weasel out of these decisions can ever make up for them. But nearly all of us admit that she is super smart, Superwoman competent, way more human than the criminally insane gang now plundering the country, and that she has the kishkes for just about any kind of battle.

As a new 12-step program, our recovery textbook -- Thirty Ways of Looking at Hillary (Harper $23.95) -- has not stood the test of time. But like AA's Big Book, ours too is a collection of stories, essays in this case, by 30 wicked smart women as obsessed with Hillary as I and thou. The writers, assembled by New Yorker editor Susan Morrison, are, like Hillary herself, so ruthlessly ambitious that they have broken their anonymity and attached their names, first and last, to their pieces. This will not be held against them -- though it may impede their recovery -- but others may introduce themselves using first names only.

To get the ball rolling - not that any of us is shy, you, me, the 30 smarties in the book, and certainly not Hill -- I thought I'd begin.

Hard as it is to admit in this crowd, I don't hate her. But even kinkier, I never thought it was important that I like her to want her to be president. I like my friends, my sister, my boyfriend, even my shrink. I don't need to like my senator, my president, or my car mechanic. I have no desire to talk girl talk, or even health care policy, with Hillary (I also never wanted to have a beer with Bush, and not only because he's an allegedly recovering drunk). I have wondered about Hill's and Bill's marriage as often as the next sentient being, but more about Laura's and George's, whose every crisis I follow in the National Inquirer. I don't even hold it against Hillary that she isn't Elizabeth Edwards, who is very likable indeed. I don't wish Hill would talk more about her feelings on TV, and, unlike one of the writers in our recovery textbook, I could care less that she has no "hobbies" or, like another, that she doesn't seem to be "sensuous." Imagine the drubbing she'd get if we had pictures of that!

I admit that I opened Thirty Ways of Looking at Hillary with more curiosity than fixed ideas, and, having read Michiko Katutani's review in The Times, with the expectation that it would be "uneven," the curse of the anthology genre. As much as I wanted to skip around -- from Mimi Sheraton's piece on Hill's hunger to Roz Chast's cartoon to Daphne Merkin's "Ballad of Hill and Bill" and Deborah Tannen's "Double Bind"-- I took a page from Hill's straight-A Wellesley student handbook and read this one straight through, with a pencil and a clump of Post-Its.

*****

Far from being uneven, for me the collection gathers strength as the variety and ferocity of opinions, insights, disappointments, and projections unfolds, often revealing more about the writers than about Hillary, and more about our warring notions of power, politics, and sex roles than it seems possible to hold in any brain at one time. Such is Hillary's burden: that she inspires and provokes this level of emotion, admiration, animosity, sometimes hysteria -- and that she presses on regardless.

As much as many of the writers identify with Hillary (prominent professional women, mothers, wives) and hold it against her that they can't identify more (too ambitious, too buttoned up, the yellow pantsuit made her look like a Republican), what comes through, as the insights and accusations pile up, is that Hillary is different from you and me. If she weren't, she would not have been the first student at Wellesley to give the commencement speech. She would probably have ditched Bill long before the indignities of Monica. She would not be running for president, even with her husband's help. And yes, if she had not been married to a popular two-term president (which puts her, all on its own, in a category by herself), she would not have made it as far as she has. As Lara Vapnyar notes in her essay, with the clear eyes of a very recent immigrant to the U.S., "I would prefer a woman who rose to prominence all on her own. But let's be realistic. We are not there yet, and we are not even firmly on the way to getting there."

Another way that Hillary is not like the rest of us is that she has long been the object of maniacal obsession by the left, right and center, and that will not end anytime soon, win or lose. She is different from the smart, accomplished writers who make up the provocative, glittering mosaic that is Thirty Ways of Looking at Hillary, and she is different from every man who is running or has ever run for President: no one has been dissected the way she's been, no one has been subjected to relentless and catty condemnation of his hair, his wardrobe, his popcorn-eating habits in college, his cooking, his cookie recipes, his invented sexual proclivities, or his marriage -- even the faithless Giuliani or McCain, with the trophy wife for whom he ditched his previous wife -- the way Hillary has been.

We should be grateful she isn't inclined to share her feelings with Barbara Walters. If she weren't such a heartless policy wonk, she'd let us have it twice a day over our petty cruelties toward her, our appetite for going through her garbage, our odious double standards, and our ignorance about what it takes to prevail in national politics.

I entered this book with an open mind and closed it feeling more sympathy and admiration for Hillary than I had thought possible, not because I can now forgive The Vote -- I can't -- or the other smarmy tradeoffs she's made at home and at work, but because too many of these 30 wonderful writers treat Hillary with what ends up sounding like small-minded contempt. No one forgets that we've come a long way, baby, but let's also not forget that Hillary is still the only person who has ever run for president of the United States -- much less had a shot at a party's nomination -- who does not have a penis. And that there isn't another woman with anything that approaches her power on the national political stage. Her association with her husband has clearly been necessary for some of this -- but not sufficient for all of it.

For better and worse, Hillary Clinton is, in her bones, a politician. And even in the age of Oprah -- and especially in the land of Rush, Rove, Drudge, and Bush vs. Gore -- politicians are ruthless, hard-nosed compromisers, not purists, not idealists. If Hillary were the candidate we want her to be, she'd be Dennis Kucinich: perfect voting record, completely unelectable.

All of that said, come Super Tuesday, I'll probably vote for John Edwards, because whoever wins needs to be reminded of his message: that corporate greed and malfeasance are our worst enemies, next to the Republicans, who are planning, even as we speak, to steal this election too (watch for the Indiana Voter ID case in the Supreme Court).

But if Hillary wins the nomination, I'm her girl. I'll sign up and go to work.

Now that I think of it, election season is no time to promote the serenity prayer, the usual mantra of the 12-step franchise. For myself, for the time being, at difficult moments I'll repeat Lorrie Moore's cool-headed remark from her Thirty Ways essay, which sums up the bind that Hillary's in and that so many of us are in as we contemplate her: "She may not be a thrilling person to vote for. Still, it would be a thrill to see her win."

Elizabeth Benedict is the author of many books, including the novels Almost, The Practice of Deceit, and Slow Dancing, and The Joy of Writing Sex: A Guide for Fiction Writers. For a copy of her essay, "What I Learned About Sex on the Internet," please click here.

Comments

[Tankan]

The passive experience, hair styling, makeup, botox injections, crocodile tears, don't cut the mustard!

Merely flattering to deceive!

[olderdem]

If being a politician means voting for the unnecessary war in Iraq that has cost 4,000 U.S. soldiers lives and over a trillion dollars borrowed from the Chinese, then that is one politician we don't need as the President.

If being a politician means you are a former President that was "always opposed" to the war in Iraq, yet failed to speak out against it, because it meant hurting his wife's chances of someday becoming President, then we don't need that former President back in the White House.

What other political compromises to the future of the U.S. will these two be willing to make in order to further their political ambitions?

How many more lies told by this couple before people understand that its not the future of the country that Hillary was crying about, but her and her husband's future.

[NoFactsJustTruth]

Perhaps the dems should work on getting huckleberry nominated, in the same manner the repukes are TRYING HARD to get Hillary nominated,...


because that's the ONLY way this ol' Indy would EVER vote for her.

[WarrenPeace]

Kucinich has a perfect voting record and is completely unelectable, I agree. But Hillary Clinton has a deeply flawed neocon voting record and is completely unelectable. Seems to me there are other choices out there.

[NABNYC]

Read the history. Bill and Hillary learned early on that if they sucked up to Republican right-wingers, they would get money to win elections. And they decided they would do that. They would claim to be Democrats, but mostly be moderate Republicans in their policies and positions.

Everything they have done has been designed to get more money and power for themselves. They are not liberals. They are big fans of the Big Lie: say something enough times and people will believe it.

For example, Hillary says: I have 35 years of experience and am ready to be president on day 1. Truth: she's been the wife of a politician for 35 years. She worked in a law firm representing S&L and real estate developer con men. She's served 1 term in the Senate during which she mostly sucked up to Republicans including Rupert Murdoch.

Hillary says: I have spent my life fighting for women and children. Truth: zero, nada, zilch. She shows up at fundraisers sometimes. that's it.

Hillary says: she and Bill are strong supporters of the black civil rights movement. Truth: neither she nor her husband have ever done one single thing to help black people in this country. Nothing. In fact, Bill supported various programs to throw black single moms off of welfare and force them to work even though they had no child care.

Big Lie: they are friends of labor. Truth: Both of them support free trade which has sent millions of American jobs to China.

Hillary Clinton is a Republican. Her husband is a vicious liar and a political hack who will destroy anyone who tries to keep him from re-taking the white house.

Vote Edwards. Or Obama. Anyone but Hillary.

[larry278]

If her Hillaryship is the Democrat candidate for POTUS in '08, even if she doesn't win it in Nov '08, it will boost the multi-party system in the USA way past just a 3rd party, even if Mike Bloomberg runs as a 3rd party candidate for POTUS in '08 & wins to become POTUS. In the USA it is 2 parties but only 1 policy which favors 1 ruling elite. The USA's elite has owned both parties for over a century. All candidates in '08 chant change but don't mean it. The candidates are owned by the establishment which won't tolerate change.
There will be no changes in the USA till a multi-party diversity replaces the 2 party but 1 policy rip off.

[radmul]

Hillbilly is not the first woman to run for president although she is the first with any realistic possibility of success. The sleazy manner with which she conducts herself makes it tough to vote for her. She is as you say an intelligent woman so why does she insist on deliberately misinterpreting statements?

[rwilliams1961]

This is intended for Clinton supporters only. Unlike Bill who was the right candidate at the right time, Hillary is the wrong candidate at the wrong time. The math:

The majority of my circle of friends are white, college educated and range in age from 35 up. Approximately half support Hillary and half Obama. The Hillary supporters say they will vote for Obama if he is the nominee. Of the Obama supporters, around half say they will either sit out the general election or vote Republican if Hillary is the nominee.

This group of people is mostly liberal Democrat, with a few moderate Democrats in the mix. It"s a random sample, I know. But this says something about Hillary"s negatives among Democrats. In addition, if this high a percentage of Democrats are disenchanted with Hillary, what sort of hellishly bad statistics can be extrapolated regarding Independents? Further, what about the young African-American vote that she is negatively impacting when she lies about their first viable candidate? And then there is the issue of Republican turnout. Do you think they"re going to stay at home if Hillary is the candidate? My God, she"s the Republican Party"s ticket to a big turnout.

When you compare that to Obama"s reach into the Independent and even Republican ranks, is there even an issue here about who the Democrats need to nominate?

The math is simple. This is not Hillary"s year. And if we support her, we will experience the heartbreak of 2004 all over again. In some regards, she is a hell of a senator. But the Clinton era has passed.

[esaid]

Hillary's tactics match those of Karl Rove.

[stlrfan]

It's going to take a rough and tumble politician with a lot of smarts to beat the republi-cons. Take all the bullshit out of the equation and that person is undoubtedly Hillary Clinton.

[dairyair]

What did I do to get on your banned list??

[dairyair]

Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton - I hope not. It's time to end the dictatorship of 2 families running the country with their lobbyist friends and corporate buddies.

[KathySammons]

According to Obama's own website, when Michelle was offered a job, she would not take it until Obama had met the new boss.

I guess that means we want yet another misogynist in the White House?

[cblcar]

Dear Godless1,

If Hillary is the nominee at least have the balls to vote Republican since that is who you will be handing our country to for 4 - 8 more years of Bush-type rule.

[HowdyDoody]

As a lifelong feminist, I am thoroughly disgusted at Hillary's exploitation of and dependence on her husband to stand up to her opponents for her. I'm also a marriage therapist and find it discomfiting to be triangulated in Hillary's and Bill's marriage drama playing out on the world stage while the rest of us are forced to mutely look on as Bill's penis takes center stage.

Haven't we had enough of dysfunctional families after Lewinsky and the Oedipal Bush clan?

[LeeFromVA]

Hillary would be a NIGHTMARE President. We can do so much better. We cannot afford to give her a pass because she lacks a penis. There are plenty of smart, intelligent, capable women out their, and if we don't say no to the Clintonian tactics those women will never have a chance. A vote against her nonsense may open doors for future women who actually deserve it. A vote for Hillary says women need to copy the negative attack approach to campaigning if they ever expect to win. We can't reward this behavior.

[CannaWupass]

"Down the Memory Hole"...It's disheartening to see and hear how willing some Democrats are to present convoluted excuses for supporting Hillary given what we know, even if we don't want to admit it in front of (whisper) "Republicans." What makes a Clinton supporter any better than a neo-con ditto head if their candidate is using Rove/Delay tactics to advance "their" agenda?

No...though I supported and liked Bill in the 90's I also recognize the errors of that time as well...I won't support Hillary as the nominee. The Clintons are the Gatzby of our time and those who believe that "they'll get it right this time" need to remember that attempting a "do-over" is folly.

[ChristopherLib]

It's funny Hillary is the first woman running for President with a chance to win (all things concidered she's probably our most likely next President) and she's called overly ambitious. Tell me what guy who has run for President hasn't had ambition. Is Obama not after power to some extent? Is John Edwards running only for the people or does he get a tingle up his spine when he things what it would be like to be leader of the free world? This is the ultimate sexism.

You know I'm a 24 year old guy and I'm supporting Hillary on her merits: her experience, her intelligence, her plans for making our future better. And you know what I do like her, and I respect her toughness. The obsession some people have with every little things she does is indeed a sickness.

[AskAWomanWhoKnows]

My question is would a male candidate inspire a "30 Ways to Look at" book? Probably not. No one questions a man's ambition to lead, but unfortunately, a woman's ambition to lead is still suspect.

[jrterrier]

YES, it would be a thrill to see her win. And not just because she's a woman but because she is one of the smartest people with chance to lead this country. And she is driven not by power but by a drive to try to do the right thing.

[godless1]

I am a white male independent voter. Since the two most qualified candidates ( Bill Richardson and Chris Dodd )have dropped out, I am supporting Obama. If Hillary receives the nomination I will support a third party candidate.