Is Everyone Playing Fair?

For a second-grader, PunditGirl is pretty tuned in to when others are getting picked on unfairly.

I guess that's the upside to all the time spent on the playground at school "dealing" with the boys. As you might guess, PunditGirl can hold her own with those seven-year-old alpha males!

So I wasn't surprised when she caught me listening to a re-cap of the recent Democratic debates and wondered why the "boys" were being so hard on Hillary.

The question of whether the Democratic guys were too tough on Hillary at the debate last week in Philadelphia is still getting a lot of media attention, which sort of surprises me. She is the purported front-runner, after all. Isn't it S.O.P. for those who want to take over the lead to play a little hardball?

In the New York Times this week, a front page article quotes former Democratic vice-presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro as saying that the "attacks" on Hillary at the debate were sexist.

Ferraro contends that if the other candidates had railed on Barack Obama in the same way she perceives they did with Hillary Clinton, it would be viewed as racist.

I don't disagree with Ferraro's observation that there's still plenty of sexism and racism in our country -- I practiced law in a male dominant law firm, as well as a federal agency, for almost 15 years, so I am well-acquainted with that experience. But that doesn't mean that every time some lawyer tried to pull a fast one they thought would benefit their client, I thought it was because I was the "girl" lawyer.

There were plenty of times in my careers in broadcasting and the law that I felt I was the recipient of sexist remarks, but I didn't think they all were. When another reporter scooped me on a story, I didn't complain that I didn't get the story because I was a woman. When opposing counsel conducted a harsh cross-examination on a client, I didn't assume he would have gone easier on the witness if they had been defended by a male attorney. Some things just aren't that personal, especially when the stakes are high.

If other candidates, Democratic or Republican, try to pull the 'there, there, little lady' card, I think the voters will get it. But commentators and other politicos who are criticizing the candidates for seriously taking on an opponent on her positions or lack of clarity are missing the point.

This isn't about sexism, it's about changing the direction of the country.

It's a pretty big mission, so I don't think any of the candidates are spending a lot of time worrying about whether they can make Hillary cry.

And, as with PunditGirl, I have a feeling Hillary can take care of herself.

Joanne blogs about all things political at her blog, PunditMom

Comments

[MarkieBee]

Obama was attacked in the Chicago debate for the first 15 minutes and did you see him whine that it was racist? HELL NO! So Hillary has to shut up about being a woman. Who cares? I want to elect the best president, not the best woman president, or the best African-American president, or the best Mormon president...although the country did elect the first double-digit IQ president - twice! Hillary is being "attacked" for her obuscations and half-truths. She's being attacked for not being a leader. For someone with all that "experience," don't you think she would have been the first to come out with a health care plan, an energy plan, etc. She was the last major Democrat candidate to come out with a plan for both issues. WHY? Especially with health care? Doesn't she have so much more experience than Obama and Edwards on this issue? Her policy should have been printed and ready to go the day she announced she was running. Instead she waited for Obama and Edwards to post their plans then ripped off the best points, put her spin on the mix and called it a "bold new plan." She isn't a leader folks and she's being called on her BS - that's all. Being a flawed candidate has nothing to do with her gender - it has everything to do with her as a person.

[leftLibertarian]

To change the direction of the country, 2 things must be done.

1 - impeach the criminals Bush and Cheney.

2 - end the Iraq war

The Democratic Party has failed in both.

[MaxxEliot]

And what about when Chris Matthews and others talk about HRC's pitch...the sound of her voice making them wish instead for finger nails on a chalk board instead? Sexist...you bet and it is meant to convey...Are you people ready to hear this woman running her mouth everyday for the next four years?

[NABNYC]

The other Democratic candidates pointed out in the debate that Hillary Clinton speaks out of both sides of her mouth, is really good at bs, and essentially never says anything at all. You cannot pin her down. This was particularly true when she claimed that she voted for the pro-war Lieberman's resolution saying that Iran was a terrorist nation, but the reason she voted for it was to encourage Bush to negotiate with Iran. Give me an f-ing break. It is so horrible to think that Hillary Clinton and her handlers think they are so clever that no one sees what they're doing. Or they think the public is just stupid.

The whole "they pick on her because she's a girl" issue has been promoted by the Clinton campaign. Surely they won't have the nerve now to complain that people are talking about it. I actually think Hillary has grossly overplayed the girl and boy line in her campaign: she's our girl, the boys are attacking her. Yeah, and we're all still in third grade and all is right in the world.

The only reason Hillary is running for president is became her husband has spent every minute since he left office whoring for corporate money to support her campaign so that he could get back into the white house. Unfortunately he seems to have taken the side of those same people he used to oppose, the right-wing corporate liars who are robbing this country blind and destroying our democracy.

Hillary does not represent change. She is a corporate sponsored candidate. She can afford to buy votes, buy TV time and other advertising, and that's why she's the frontrunner. She's pro-war and supports sending more jobs out of the U.S., and bringing more illegal immigrants in to throw more Americans out of work. Vote for Edwards or Obama.

[LeeFromVA]

We also need to point out that these attacks are nothing compared to what she would face in a general election. You know, the good stuff they're saving for later...

[drblack]

Hillary will definately take care of Hillary and her corperate masters...the American people on the other hand will have to take care of themselves if Hillary is president.
Hillary will be better then Bush(Hell my cat would be) but she isn't a Progressive and will sell out American Freedom and Prosperity like Republicans have done and Bill Clinton as well.
Vote for change..vote for Integrity...vote for Freedom...Kucinich..Edwards..Dodd even Ron Paul are WAYYY better candidates to those American's who want a just, Free and prosperous America.

[runswithscissors]

What would be truly sexist would be if the other candidates didn't attack Hillary while she's in the lead.

[maddogbitesback]

She can and she will. Why would anyone care if the debates were with an unusually bright dog. After Bush the country can do with anything but.