For "anti-war" women does Hillary's gender trump her hawkishness?

And for "pro-universal health care" women does her gender trump her strong
pharmaceutical industry corporate connections (funding etc.) and her
strong health care insurance corporate connections (funding etc.)?

These questions are currently tearing apart many Democrat and
liberal discussion boards.

I would like to hear some of your positions on these subjects.

It was during just these sorts of debates that I was recently (for the
first time in my life) accused of being a misogynist.

Hell even my grandmother said "you keep lying about her"

(For the record, I never told a lie about her, and I (*)(*)(*)(*) sure never repeated any of the outrageous right wing lies about her and Bill that have been circulating for years.)

Then she said "just because she takes a little money from defense contractors doesn't mean she would keep our boys in a war" and then she said ""you just hate her because she is a girl."

So who is Hillary lying to when she suddenly and belatedly (once the polls told her she had to, to get nominated) changed her message to an anti-war one?

Is she lying to the corporations when she promises then more war or is she lying to the peace-nicks when she promises to end this war quickly?

Apparently I am a misogynist if I dare to point out the massive
funding Hillary has received from defense contractors (the most by any
political candidate in history)

Apparently I am a misogynist if I likewise point out how she has
received massive funding from health care insurers and pharmaceutical
corporations (more than any candidate in history.)

Apparently I am a misogynist when I point out that she has not once
failed to vote for the war.

Or not once failed to vote to continue funding the war

Or point out that she has made numerous speeches that can fairly be
called saber rattling towards Iran and even a couple of bellicose
shots directed at Venezuela.

Despite all that and much more we are supposed to believe her 11th
hour conversion to being an "anti-war candidate."

So no matter how much I protest that I like that she is a woman and
that I would love for there to be a female president and that I think
she will do pretty good for alternative energy and the environment I
will still be labeled as a misogynist if I dare to not vote for her
for any of the other reasons that make her distasteful to me.

__________________
It must be troubling to those for whom authority is the only truth when confronted by those for whom truth is the only authority.

From what I understand a lot of feminists actually support other candidates and aren't all that thrilled with Hillary...
until all the hype starts up attacking Hillary, especially when it's the kinds of attacks that would not usually be so prevalent against men.
This gets them pissed and they vote for Hillary out of spite.

It's similar to how Coulter and Limbaugh complaining about McCain almost makes me want to vote for him.

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III

you know how some people have those crazy grandmas? the ones that will talk for hours, smell like cats, have a twitch, smiles a lot, always talks about her religion, and tells you that you're not eating enough? That could be our president!

__________________
It doesn't matter who we elect, it doesn't matter what they've done or who they've done, what is important is what they actually do. Too many politicians are politicians - they like to talk about useless issues and keep people in the dark about the real issue: money. I will always care more about what the government tells me I have to spend my money on, opposed to some unborn assassination. Freedom is the right to chose, on everything.

have a system that allows , no depends upon, corporations to buy the candidates of their choice. I would like the system to change but since Hillary is not a billionaire, I can't blame her for taking corporate $$.

Two points stand out for me: I like her health care plan better than Obama's. On the other hand I think she is tremendously unpopular with a huge swath of the population and less likely than Obama to be elected. I don't think her foreign policy is vastly different from Obama's. She has never been my preferred candidate. Race and gender does not enter into my calculation.

I can't say I understand why. The mandate just makes the issue more contentious. Being that the program is already an exercise in compromising to the point where nobody likes it (see the failed immigration bill of 2007), I don't see where the mandate really adds anything. Are we actually to believe there is a large number of people who will not take insurance eeven if it is affordable and available?
Of course I'm not all that fond of either plan.
It amounts to corporate welfare more than public welfare. It's a big boost for the insurance companies... and I really don't see how it will make anything more efficient or less costly.
A single-payer system makes more sense. If we're going to do it, we should do it right.
Of course that is anathema to the right...
But if e're not going to do a single-payer system, it's probably better to leave it to the states like Romney suggests. Perhaps funding for states to initiate programs, but no particular mandated form... so we can experiment.

Frankly I think this UH thing is getting pretty stinky. Part of the reason I voted fo Kucinich.

Not a deciding factor for me, since even the Hillary-Obama plan can't be worse than the current system... but come on! There's a reason they're getting funding from the insurance company.

Only Dennis had the guts to propose a real plan.

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III

Almost all feminists will vote for Hillary - where else are they going to go? And if Hillary wins, they would literally succeed in their goal of decades - overturning the "patriarchy".

__________________
Blade: "more educated and literate people than Justabubba"

Justabubba: "that would include everyone"

http://politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=27847

iunno, i think she's doing a disservice to women.

__________________
It doesn't matter who we elect, it doesn't matter what they've done or who they've done, what is important is what they actually do. Too many politicians are politicians - they like to talk about useless issues and keep people in the dark about the real issue: money. I will always care more about what the government tells me I have to spend my money on, opposed to some unborn assassination. Freedom is the right to chose, on everything.

Depends. While feminists are for the ability of women to be able to do as men and men as women... there are many ywho also value the importance of balance of traditional "feminine" and "masculine" traits.
While Clinton is a feminist model in that she dominates in a "man's game", she's also a problem in that her personality and the roots of her success come from her complete submission of feminine traits in favor of masculine ambition and competative pragmatism... which makes her in many ways a reaffirmation of the primary traits of the patriarchy.

But feminists do become united when agents of the patriarchy attack Clinton on grounds they see as anti-woman.
Clinton's best bet is to hire some "conservative" pundits to say extremely misogynistic things about her.

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III