Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

amborin

(16,631 posts)
Sat May 14, 2016, 12:08 PM May 2016

Hillary’s Hawkishness Out of Sync With Women’s Concerns

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ambassador-faith-whittlesey/hillarys-hawkishness-out_b_9932732.html?utm_hp_ref=politics&ir=Politics

Hillary’s Hawkishness Out of Sync With Women’s Concerns

illary Clinton’s “woman’s card” campaign strategy is demeaning to women. She exploits grievance and group-think identity politics to serve her personal and political agendas and sometimes to shield herself from appropriate scrutiny. Not even Nancy Pelosi or Dianne Feinstein focuses on “gender” as cynically as she does.

She seems to assume she speaks for all women. But women, like men, hold diverse opinions. In fact, the views of many of us are completely at odds with hers.

For example, most women yearn for peace and stability. They are not enamored of costly wars that put loved ones at risk while doing nothing to enhance security. For all of our recent military involvements abroad, we do not regard ourselves as more secure.

snip
7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hillary’s Hawkishness Out of Sync With Women’s Concerns (Original Post) amborin May 2016 OP
This message was self-deleted by its author rjsquirrel May 2016 #1
Message auto-removed Name removed May 2016 #6
Message auto-removed Name removed May 2016 #7
It's a matter of maintaining the economy of high profit margin military production Baobab May 2016 #2
I have something to say that is liberal and pro Democrat, but as this is Democratic Jackie Wilson Said May 2016 #3
Says a writer who is attempting to speak for all women. MineralMan May 2016 #4
So a member of the Reagan admin spins and 'speaks for all women'? emulatorloo May 2016 #5

Response to amborin (Original post)

Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #1)

Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #1)

Baobab

(4,667 posts)
2. It's a matter of maintaining the economy of high profit margin military production
Sat May 14, 2016, 12:13 PM
May 2016

Corporations invested in producing armaments, call them "swords" - If swords were turned into "plowshares" those investors would be very unhappy.

The same thing applies to health insurance. The whole nation's health must be held hostage to investors, especially international investors.

Jackie Wilson Said

(4,176 posts)
3. I have something to say that is liberal and pro Democrat, but as this is Democratic
Sat May 14, 2016, 12:16 PM
May 2016

Underground, I dont dare say it or I will be censored.

MineralMan

(146,317 posts)
4. Says a writer who is attempting to speak for all women.
Sat May 14, 2016, 12:16 PM
May 2016

No doubt, many women disagree with her, just as many women disagree with Hillary Clinton.

There's a missing modifier in the article's and in several places in the body of the article.

When we attempt to speak for others in a general, all-inclusive way, we always fail.

Women, in large numbers, appear to be supporting Hillary Clinton's candidacy. Are they stupid? Are they confused? That's what this author appears to be saying.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Hillary’s Hawkishness Out...