*and by "hater" I don't mean rabid-dog-foaming-at-the-mouth Rush-Limbaugh levels of hatred (I am female and a diehard Democrat), just an unwillingness to roll over for her candidacy just yet, but the media can't seem to tell the difference.

For the record, I never was enamored of Bill either. I never saw the so-called charisma. He just struck me as mealymouthed and slippery, and the only good thing he ever did was raise taxes in 1993. Other than that, he gutted the welfare system (for this we needed a Democrat?) and... and... let's see... talked about school uniforms? Then, fully aware that Republicans were on a witch hunt for him, he gave them a gift-wrapped excuse to trump up impeachment proceedings by getting special pizza from an intern. The end.

To me, Hillary is no more principled than Bill, just a lot less charismatic.

Now, Obama? There's a charismatic politician, with a moral compass too.

I resent the implication that as a woman I have to support Hillary just because the two of us have the same reproductive equipment. The road that starts with my having to vote for Hillary is the one that ends with African-Americans having to defend OJ Simpson and Michael Vick. Not that Hillary is as scummy as OJ or Vick, but the principle is the same.

i enjoyed your post.

here's the question almost no one dares to ask:

why on earth did hillary and bill ever get married. i can't imagine him wanting to be tied down to one person, and i can't imagine her believing that bill was her one and only soulmate. were they ever in love? or was this all a marriage of convenience from the start, to fuel their separate ambitions?

I agree. If you're any kind of progressive, even a casual one, the whole Clinton mystique falls apart pretty quickly. The whole free market friendly, centrist Democrat thing got old seven years ago when it helped put W office. I agree with their some of their views on principle of the fact that they are, at base, center left and support things like minimum wage and health care reform and SS and all that social welfare goodness. But whether I could ever see HRC as being strong enough, under extreme pressure, to vote her true principles is questionable -- her vote on Iraq being the prime example. (NOT a comment on her being a woman BTW -- being from CA I have Barbara Boxer who voted no on the Iraq resolution in 2002, and then Barbara Lee, R-Oakland who was the only person in Congress who voted no for an attack on Afghanistan directly after 9/11 -- strong, strong politicians who also happen to be women.) In any case, her willingness to dive into bland campaign speak is repellent to me. It only serves to confirm my suspicions that she cannot get beyond the campaign trail to get to what might be her real principles when she refuses to get specific about policy.

Sorry that should be D-Oakland.

I think the media has it wrong. People say they "hate" Hillary, but I really think they mean they have no respect for her. And no matter how progressive we believe we have become, the reason for that is Bill. We cant have any respect for someone who has allowed herself to be mistreated her entire adult life. If she was our daughter, friend, mother, etc, we would tell her to get therapy to find out why she has no self esteem.

Paula26:

But whether I could ever see HRC as being strong enough, under extreme pressure, to vote her true principles is questionable -- her vote on Iraq being the prime example. (NOT a comment on her being a woman BTW -- being from CA I have Barbara Boxer who voted no on the Iraq resolution in 2002, and then Barbara Lee, R-Oakland who was the only person in Congress who voted no for an attack on Afghanistan directly after 9/11 -- strong, strong politicians who also happen to be women.) In any case, her willingness to dive into bland campaign speak is repellent to me. It only serves to confirm my suspicions that she cannot get beyond the campaign trail to get to what might be her real principles when she refuses to get specific about policy.

Exactly. I was on the fence about Hillary until she refused to apologize for her vote on Iraq or even say whether it was a mistake. She can talk all she wants about how the Bushies lied to her. I can't believe she actually believed the administration back in 2002, she just didn't want to stick her neck out and say they were dead-wrong when that wasn't the popular thing to say.

elgie:

I think the media has it wrong. People say they "hate" Hillary, but I really think they mean they have no respect for her. And no matter how progressive we believe we have become, the reason for that is Bill. We cant have any respect for someone who has allowed herself to be mistreated her entire adult life. If she was our daughter, friend, mother, etc, we would tell her to get therapy to find out why she has no self esteem.

Aw, come on! You must have read the posts on other Slate forums calling Sen. Clinton ugly, arrogant, flat chested, fat, etc. That's not just a lack of respect, that's hatred.

When was the last time you heard a remark in the press about John McCain's balls or the size of Fred Thompson's male member? Or even being called a "bitch" by someone at a rally. The person who asked John McCain about Clinton didn't call her a horrible liberal or terrible Senator, they called her a bitch. Tell me when someone stood up and asked how we are going to beat that "dick" Giuliani.

As for being mistreated, that's in the eye of the beholder. I know plenty of women who have successfully stayed in relationships where the spouse cheated. They worked it through. I wonder why,too, and I agree it may have some bearing on how she approaches issues, but we can't know all that goes on inside a marriage. Frankly, we don't know what goes on in George Bush's marriage. For all you know he mistreats Laura daily, they just cover it up better.

Elgie, to me Hillary's personal life has nothing to do with it. I didn't want to know about it back during the impeachment and I don't want to know about it now. I have enough political reasons not to want Hillary to win without getting into her personal life at all.

For all we know, the Clintons could have an open marriage. Falling off the monogamy bandwagon isn't the same thing as "abuse", in my opinion.

For that matter, open marriage or not, a spouse having extra-marital sex hardly counts as "abuse."

For that matter, open marriage or not, a spouse having extra-marital sex hardly counts as "abuse."

It is if one spouse unwittingly gets herpes (or whatever) from the other.

As far as it being an open marriage. Well I think if you're always looking for tail you should be a garage mechanic not a doctor or a president. Mostly, because I want my doctor's spare time looking at medical journals and my president's securing world peace; neither which is going to happen if they constantly have their dick on their mind.

Of course I'm hoping changing out my brakes is a little more of a rote exercise. :0)

On the other hand, doctors and presidents probably don't have to spend the amount of time looking for outside tail as do garage mechanics.

In any case, I think the evidence shows that a high percentage of both catagories do regularly find it!

I think I have read studies that show that highly successful people of both genders tend to have more sexual partners than the general public -- in part because they are more attractive, and in part because the sort of ego drive that makes them successful probably makes them more likely to seek more partners.

For all the stats. Men and women in this country practice serial monogamy more than anything else and cheating isn't that rampant. It exists but far from everybody is doing it.

If rampant cheating/swinging/open is true, despite the use of condoms, many more people are infected with HIV than is estimated. I don't think that is the case.

High HIV rates would only be suggested if those having affairs were highly promiscuous and/or were having sex with partners in particularly high risk groups, such as IV drug users. Having the occasional affair with someone in your own socio-economic group is much less risky that say picking up a hooker on the street.

And, all reports I have read suggest that condoms ARE highly effective in halting the spread of HIV.

Mind you, I am not endorsing extra-marital sex. I am just suggesting that there is a long-established pattern of successful men having mistresses or frequent affairs. And, for better or worse (depends on your point of view, I imagine), the rise in the number of women in professional and managerial roles has made that an option for them as well.

I wonder what this says about the promiscuity of blacks in Africa, Haiti, and as a matter of fact here in the States.