so after putting the darling angels to bed at a ridiculously early hour i opened the newsweek. (thank God for Newsweek and NPR otherwise no telling where i would get my information...the weather channel?) Hillary is on the front cover and inside there is a spread from quite a few female writers as to why or why not they would or would not vote for her. i honestly had not made up my mind until this point, i didn't even caucus because i was completely on the fence about who my vote should go to (that and my face was peeling off). i really do like obama and if it is him or mc cain, obama is my guy. since i did not caucus and can't decide in real terms (since super tuesday is long gone) this is who i am supporting. Hillary. and this is why.
I feel that all three are on pretty much even ground when it comes to experience. i don't buy the arguement that one needs to be in washington for an extended period of time to do good or bad. look at the last two presidents both from southern states (okay texas is western too) and one worked out and the other not so much. the three we have running today, all senators. it will either work out or it won't. i am a liberal and i say that word proudly, the policy differences between hillary and obama in my mind are simply not that large. oh sure they may carry out certain reforms (like health care or pulling out of iraq) differently but the end result will most likely be the same.
i like obama and i do get swept into his message of hope, really who can't. but you see, it seems a little too hollywood, well rehearsed, a little to perfect for my taste. he is a beautiful speaker, and we certainly need that. (or do we, seems to me a great many of the population voted for someone who canbarely speak a simple sentence). so let me rephrase, i feel that it is important for one to be eloquent while running for president. i have noticed that the twentysomething group is his largest voter block. i fall into this block for the next year and four months, but i am not the typical twentysomething. i am a stay at home mom of two kids, one of which is four. i had my children young by choice. i am not, however, your young shrinking violet baby maker cookie baker who votes republican and listens to focus on the family. so call me an oddity.
i am rooting for hillary because i am a woman, i have a daughter. i watched my single mother start college when i was five and finish her obgyn residency when i was starting my senior year in high school. i never realized the extent that women are still being shafted until i had my own children. my husband is a good man and this is no reflection on him as a person, but i am fully aware that i would not be able to put in the hours and climb the corporate ladder at the same pace as he is able to while having two small kids. women, working outside the home or not, still do more housework than men, more cooking than men, and still get paid less than their male counterparts. i witnessed this first hand when i was a working stiff, but i didn't keep my mouth shut, i raised holy hell in my office one hot afternoon. when i decided to stay home, it wasn't because i felt my place as a women was only at home, but because i wanted to be home with my kids and i felt that no one else on the planet Earth could care for them like i could. but this was completely my choice and my husband supported me on it, just like i am sure he would if i went back to work, or got my masters, or got another tattoo.
but, that doesn't mean that we have completed our feminist work because woman can work or stay home, or they can be a doctor if they want. look at corporations, are there big gender differences between the pions at the bottom (majority women, higher college grad rates) and the well to do managers/partners at the top. yes. women have to decide, do i want to fight for this job or will i put family first? because you really can't have it all at the same time. are men faced with this quandry? nope.
anna quindlen makes an interesting point in her essay at the end of this week's newsweek when she discusses michelle obama leaving her kids with her mother to go help obama campaign. this is ok in the eyes of the media for she is helping her husband and they are with their grandma. what if she were campaigning for herself? what if chelsea were not 28 but instead 14 like when her father was running, would hillary's mothering skills be called into question? weren't they in 1991? because every working mom's parenting has been questioned while i never hear of dads being taking to task for having a job.
another point that caught my eye while reading, there are 800,000 people who are basically slaves entering this country every year. many of those victims of human trafficking are sold as sex slaves. men decided what these thousands of women were good for, sex and sex alone. what does it say to the world if we elect a woman? oh sure there are many female prime ministers and chancellors around the world. probably the most note worthy being margaret thatcher, but let us not forget that this is the united states. as jingoist as that sounds no other nation or world leader can ignore the u.s. and a female president says change all around the world, not just at home. maybe then female armed service members wouldn't have to cover their arms in 105 degree heat in the middle east but instead could cool off like the male soliders. because i seriously doubt we would have had segregated troops if we had entered apatheid south africa. but those female troops still had to wear an abaya while deployed to saudi arabia and ride in the back seat of a car while off base in 2002, for "cultural sensitivity."
so yeah, i am hoping for change, i am voting for hillary. from one bitch to another. thanks tina fey.
p.s. i love these two quotes:
"It may be the cock that crows, but it is the hen that lays the eggs." Margaret Thatcher
"Whatever women do they must do twice as well as men to be thought of as half as good. Luckily this is not difficult." Charlotte Whitton, Mayor of Ottawa 1963.