Commentary by Kay B. Day
Does Hillary Clinton often come off as disingenuous?
Are we being sexist if we view Mrs. Clinton as insincere, in light of her testimony on the Benghazi controversy as well as her reaction to criticism of her use of private email when she served as President Barack Obama’s secretary of state?
Clinton’s supporters, calculating odds for their likely 2016 candidate, are already warning legacy media about “coded sexism.”
Hypersensitivity about sexism is an inevitable turn of events as the former First Lady positions her campaign firmly in the gender card camp. NPR noted Clinton’s remarks at an event for a “pro-choice” group of Democrats. “Pro-choice” is usually interpreted by political observers as no-limits-abortion. NPR said:
“’Don’t you someday want to see a woman president of the United States of America?’ Clinton asked earlier this month with a glimmer in her eye at a gala for EMILY’s List, an organization that works to elect Democratic women.”
NPR, incidentally, omitted the “pro-choice” descriptive even though it is top of the fold at the organization’s mission page: “We elect pro-choice Democratic women to office.”
Amy Chozick, a political writer for The New York Times, tweeted [@amychozick] about an email message she received from the “HRC Super Volunteers” group. Chozick said the group warned her, “We will be watching, reading, listening, and protesting coded sexism.”
Chozick followed up that tweet with this:
“Sexist words, they say, include “polarizing, calculating, disingenuous, insincere, ambitious, inevitable, entitled, over confident…”
Few politicians are as ambitious as Mrs. Clinton who is perhaps intent on not only becoming the first female to take the Oval Office but also the first First Lady to officially do so. When Clinton answers questions from media, it is impossible to watch without feeling believes she is entitled to the presidency.
Democrats and media seem to think Clinton will definitely be the Democrats’ nominee, and Clinton’s behavior lacking even a smidgen of humility suggests she may be a bit over-confident about her chances. Other potential candidates are downplaying their interests right now, but they are certainly mindful that a single news cycle can change even the most likely candidate’s prospects.
Will leftist voters line up in historic numbers to elect the first female president as they did in the successful effort to elect the first person of color when Barack Obama sought the presidency? The Ready for Hillary Facebook page is filled with memes aimed at a single topic—women. There’s even a photo of Clinton with Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Ginsburg, by the way, told media during a trip she took to Egypt, “I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012.”
Will Americans, tired of the polarizing politics of Democrats, opt for a Republican in 2016?
Chozick also listed the word ‘secretive’ as an untouchable.
That’s a difficult word to avoid when you are writing about either of the Clintons whose management practices regarding their foundation and their government tenure have left gaping holes in data documenting habits and practices in their various offices and positions.
Freedom Watch has filed a racketeering lawsuit against the Clintons’ foundation, “for failing to produce documents under the Freedom of Information Act.” Another political watchdog group has also filed lawsuits.
Secretive seems the perfect word for Mrs. Clinton. As a matter of fact, every word on the “coded sexism” list fits her perfectly.
Featured Image: Mrs. Clinton responded to questions from media about her email habits as secretary of state. No new information was disclosed by the former First Lady. (snip: CSPAN video)
Please help us continue to keep our site online by donating a small amount via the PayPal link in the right column. We don’t run ads from major search engines on this site. Follow us on Twitter @DayontheDay