 by Ace14Video Blogs
More Video
TV Shows
Navigation |
Women in the White House: You decideIf you're outside the United States — or living in a news vacuum — you might have missed that today is Iowa caucus day. That means that Iowa Republicans will be casting ballots, Iowa Democrats will be standing in different parts of a room and, by the end of the day, we'll be that much closer to knowing who the next woman in the White House will be. This year is exciting because we usually don't get to vote for the woman in the White House. The closest we've gotten so far is Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who's two heartbeats away from the Presidency. Of course, as Sarah pointed out last summer, we do have celluloid depictions of women who rule. And we all know that fictional leaders are often more appealing than the real deal. (President Bartlett, anyone?) So, let's see how the real prospects stand up against the fictional. In true Iowa-caucus fashion, pick a candidate, stand in her corner and see if you can convince others to join you. Madame President 1. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
Why you should stand in her corner: She's the first female Presidential candidate to have an actual chance of winning. At the Visible Vote forum, she told us, “I'm your girl.” She supports the repeal of “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” and is in favor of civil unions. She is a real-life person. Why you should stand elsewhere: She doesn't support same-sex marriage “yet.” Lots of people hate her, and some believe that makes her unelectable. 2. President Julia Mansfield (Patty Duke), Hail to the Chief (1985)
Why you should stand in her corner: She was groundbreaking as the first female President on TV. The show was written by the creators of Soap, so she probably had some great lines. Why you should not vote for her: The show was canceled after seven episodes, which suggests that she was not compelling — or perhaps the country just wasn't ready for her. She's not a real person. 3. President Mackenzie Allen (Geena Davis), Commander in Chief (2005)
Why you should stand in her corner: I never saw the show, so I don't really know. But according to Sarah, “Mac” was brilliant. And Geena Davis is really tall, and being tall might make people feel that a woman is really in control. Why you should stand elsewhere: Again, I never saw the show, so my best argument is that it didn't last very long. As she was not a real person. 4. President Allison Taylor (Cherry Jones), 24 (2008)
Why you should stand in her corner: Well, I don't know what type of President she'll be on 24, but she's Cherry Jones! Why you should stand elsewhere: I cannot think of a reason. She's Cherry Jones! First Lady Technically, we don't vote for First Lady. But we all know she's part of the picture. And this is my caucus, so I get to pick who runs. 1. Elizabeth Edwards
Why you should stand in her corner: She's cool. She supports same-sex marriage. She's valiantly fought all sorts of cancer. She's not skinny, and that's refreshing. Why you should stand elsewhere: Her husband's a dweeb when it comes to same-sex marriage. 2. Michelle Obama
Why you should stand in her corner: She's brilliant, and you know she'd be a West Wing First Lady. Why you should stand elsewhere: Her husband got a little testy when his stance on LGBT issues was challenged at the Visible Vote forum. 3. Dr. Abby Bartlett (Stockard Channing), The West Wing (1999–2006)
Why you should stand in her corner: I didn't actually watch much West Wing, but I believe with all my heart that any First Lady played by Stockard Channing had to be the Best. First. Lady. Ever. Why you should stand elsewhere: No reason that I can think of. 4. Jeri Thompson
Why you should stand in her corner: I dunno ... it could be a refreshing change of pace to have a trophy wife in the White House, I suppose. Why you should stand elsewhere: Because that would mean that Fred Thompson was president. And you cannot be a character on Roseanne and be President. 5. Ann Romney
Why you should stand in her corner: She gave money to Planned Parenthood in 1994. She's a rare potential Republican First Lady who's a first wife. Why you should stand elsewhere: She claims not to remember giving money to Planned Parenthood in 1994. 6. Sherry Palmer (Penny Johnson) 24 (2001–2002)
Why you should stand in her corner: She was a woman who could get things done — even if they were illegal or unethical or driven by a need for vengeance. Why you should stand elsewhere: She was evil. And she died. I know I've left a few folks out but again — my caucus, my candidates. In the Presidential race, I think I have to go with Hillary Clinton. When it comes down to it, I like her, respect her most of the time and ultimately am not going to choose a fake woman President when I can choose a real one. Although Cherry Jones is tempting. And on the First Lady front, I'm going with Dr. Abby Bartlett. Because she's Stockard Channing. The floor is open to you now. Who would you choose? Submitted by on January 3, 2008 - 2:39pm. |
User login
Recent blog posts
Recent comments
|
News, Reviews & Commentary on Lesbian and Bisexual women in Entertainment and the Media
Michelle Obama
I have heard this woman speak several times, including with Oprah when they came to my school's football stadium in South Carolina. She is passionate, educated, charismatic and beautiful.
Need another reason? Watch her husband, Barack, dance with Ellen. Effing adorable.
"Whatever people consider to be normal, it never is." -Ashley Davies
Hillary is my girl!
Mine, too!
Absolutely.
Michelle or Hillary?
hillary
I'm from austria, but I've been following the presidential race, because the whole system just interests me. I have to say that I really hope hillary clinton wins in iowa, because if she doesn't, I fear she might not get the nomination. and I have to say that I think that no other democratic candidate has chances to actually become elected president, which means that a republican might win. so I really hope she wins and gets the nomination. but thats just my point of few...
for the tv-persons, I would definitly go for stockard channing. I haven't seen any of the shows, but she's stockard channing!!
"Normal is not something to aspire to, it's something to get away from." ~ Jodie Foster
Actually
To be equitable, polls of head-to-head match-ups between Republican and Democratic candidates have all the Democrats coming out ahead in virtually all match-ups.
Actually, the only one in which Democrats are losing is Hillary vs. Sen. John McCain.
Women Prez
Edwards, McKenzie, Laura Roslin.
Not in that order.
blech
President Hilary Clinton because she's female?
Let me start off by saying this is the first presidential election that I will actually get to vote in so I'm actually paying close attention to it. I'm a libertarian at heart, which is the best of both wings. Liberals tend to value personal freedom and Conservatives economic freedom, but Libertarians value both. Ron Paul is the only United States candidate that stands for both freedoms and he has my vote 100%.
Now for my point: I'm not a feminist but I am a gay teenager and I really hope Hilary doesn't end up in office. When it comes to the future leader of my country I couldn't care less if they were male or female, I'm just going to vote for who I think is the best person for the job. I don't see why her being "the first female Presidential candidate to have an actual chance of winning" matters, even on a lesbian website, and more importantly why she should get our vote for it. Someone please explain this to me, thanks.
Finally someone that shares my opinion!
Other then stuffy old white men who continue to confuse me for being Chinese instead of Korean... I think your the only person i have come into contact with that shares my opinion on Hilary.
Male or female, black or white doesn't matter to me I believe the person most suited for the job should get presidency and I don't believe that person is Madam Clinton.
Feminism
1. the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men.
How are you not a feminist exactly? The only reason why you get to actually vote today is due to feminists. Don't be so quick to disassociate with a philosophy that has the power, if harnessed correctly, to make change for the better for all of womankind.
My constant internal facial expression...
Feminism in the new era
Where your right about what feminism truly is , I believe I can answer your question as to why some women choose to not associate themselves with the feminist movement.
There is a stigma associated with the word feminism which came about from radical feminist throughout the 1960's to the 80's. This stigma in some minds conjures the image of very angry men-haters which had a need to critique patriarchal institutions which actually took center stage as if this small radical part was the entire movement. Valerie Solanas a radical feminist who was aggressive and violent and her activies actually in my opinion hindered the feminist movement.
She was best known for trying to kill Andy Worhol and making a anarchistic type movement in which men would be killed. This radical feminist really undermined the progress of a movement which was advocating for nondiscrimination based on gender by being discriminators of gender. Sadly this radical aspect to the 2nd wave of feminism is what people remember, so its no wonder that most people are either misinformed or reluctant to say, " Hey i'm a feminist" due to the stigma.
Geeez... did i just write out a mini essay? I'm sorry...
My two cents
It seems to me that movements like feminism, the civil rights movement and the lgbt movement must have a radical element to get noticed and propel their agenda.
I don't see feminism as Valerie Solanas or bra burning men-haters. I think the 1970s radical feminsts paved the way for women's rights.
Agreed
I think your absolutely correct, it seems that a movement needs to have a radical element to get noticed. However sadly with the feminist movement that radical side is all most people remember- they don't remember the women such as Catharine Mackinnon. The 2nd wave of feminism , in my opinion took it a bit far, maybe it was needed maybe it was not- i'm not a historian nor is this my area of study.
I don't see feminism as bra burning men- haters, one of the most wonderful feminist i ever had the pleasure of meeting was actually a man. To some that is shocking, to me not so shocking when you look at the movement for what it really was for.
^.^ I can go on and on, but i'll stop here since i'm pretty much agreeing then adding aditional comments.
Feminism
Ok, you got me. I, along with most of the USA, believe in gender equality. But I don't call myself a feminist because this equality is something I see as very natural and straightforward. Today in the states gender equality is generally something people automatically believe in unless they declare otherwise. I don't know enough about the feminist movement to "join" it nor do I particularly care to know more about it.
But my question was not about feminism but rather why we (as women) should endorse Hilary because she is a woman. Which I think is a little sexist against men but more to the point; shouldn't every individual just vote for the candidate they think is best? Why should Hilary being female earn her my vote or that of anyone else? A response would be appreciated, thank you.
Still with you
Sorry for my little rants or mini essays earlier- i spent a whole 3 days in a conference on violence on women in the last couple months and the topic of feminist stigma came up.
And where i believe that gender equality should be the norm in the US i don't believe it is quite yet. There is still a glass ceiling for many women and there are still many other issues. I think people automaticly believe in equality or say they do, like you said, but i don't always see this play out in action.
But when i compare the US with places like South Korea, where my mother is from, America has so much more equality.
About Hilary, i still 100% agree with you. Hilary being a woman does not automaticly earn my vote- and I will vote for who i think is best for the country not who is the same gender as i am.
President Hilary Clinton
I don't actually think that the writer is suggesting that we should all vote for Hilary but making a valid point about her being the first female candidate with substantial numbers. She hasn't been the only female nominee, in fact if i remember correctly in the 70s there was an African American who was a nominee. Obviously she didn't have the numbers. I'm sure Hilary won't be the last female to be nominated and others may have greater support but the writer was talking of the present situation. As the article talks about real fictional and non fictional female presidents obviously Hilary will be mentioned prominently. No other presidential candidate is mentioned as they're male and this article focuses soley on the historical landmark of the US having a female president (of whatever stripe.) It's meant to be a light hearted take on the elections rather than serious political analysis. The article isn't even democrat specific as the writer mentions Mrs Romney and Mrs. Thompson. So I note no bias at all. I'm sure if Ron Paul had a higher percentage vote his wife would be mentioned too.
The politics thread provide separate forums for discussion for Democrat and Republican candidates. It's probably for more serious discussion for the type your suggesting.
Ron Paul may be more gay friendly than other Republicans but is no friend to the gay community. In fact he has voted to prohibit federal funding for the joint adoption of a child between individuals who are not related by blood or marriage. Something the Democrat candidates have not done. He also voted against funding to help hurricane Katrina victims. Being an economic conservative is fine, but there are times when a government needs to help its people. Relying on charity and the goodwill of others is not enough. Even third world countries supported their people better when the tsunami struck. But the wealthiest nation in the world left its citizens stranded and were slow to the rescue. Even some developing countries who refused our tsunami aid offered money for our Katrina disaster.
I'm a gay male and a proud feminist/pro feminist. Feminism is a philosophy which is beneficial to both males and females as it breaks down traditional gender stereotypes and roles. Radical elements are a fringe group in most communities but they have an important role as well. If it weren't for radical gay activists who protested against police oppression in stonewall years ago we may not have the basic civil rights we enjoy today. The basic right to walk around without living in fear of being jailed for our sexual orientation. Most of the population would shudder at such thought but it was a reality back then.
President Hilary Clinton
I don't actually think that the writer is suggesting that we should all vote for Hilary but making a valid point about her being the first female candidate with substantial numbers. She hasn't been the only female nominee, in fact if i remember correctly in the 70s there was an African American who was a nominee. Obviously she didn't have the numbers. I'm sure Hilary won't be the last female to be nominated and others may have greater support but the writer was talking of the present situation. As the article talks about real fictional and non fictional female presidents obviously Hilary will be mentioned prominently. No other presidential candidate is mentioned as they're male and this article focuses soley on the historical landmark of the US having a female president (of whatever stripe.) It's meant to be a light hearted take on the elections rather than serious political analysis. The article isn't even democrat specific as the writer mentions Mrs Romney and Mrs. Thompson. So I note no bias at all. I'm sure if Ron Paul had a higher percentage vote his wife would be mentioned too.
The politics thread provide separate forums for discussion for Democrat and Republican candidates. It's probably for more serious discussion for the type your suggesting.
Ron Paul may be more gay friendly than other Republicans but is no friend to the gay community. In fact he has voted to prohibit federal funding for the joint adoption of a child between individuals who are not related by blood or marriage. Something the Democrat candidates have not done. He also voted against funding to help hurricane Katrina victims. Being an economic conservative is fine, but there are times when a government needs to help its people. Relying on charity and the goodwill of others is not enough. Even third world countries supported their people better when the tsunami struck. But the wealthiest nation in the world left its citizens stranded and were slow to the rescue. Even some developing countries who refused our tsunami aid offered money for our Katrina disaster.
I'm a gay male and a proud feminist/pro feminist. Feminism is a philosophy which is beneficial to both males and females as it breaks down traditional gender stereotypes and roles. Radical elements are a fringe group in most communities but they have an important role as well. If it weren't for radical gay activists who protested against police oppression in stonewall years ago we may not have the basic civil rights we enjoy today. The basic right to walk around without living in fear of being jailed for our sexual orientation. Most of the population would shudder at such thought but it was a reality back then.
Quite telling.
I think this topic is useful because it demonstrates, very clearly, how far we have yet to go. The fact that we have more fictional women in the position to run the nation is both eyeopening and troubling. Moreover, when we take a quick glance around the world at so-called developing nations and see women in power there, I think it only exacerbates our country's sad situation. Having Hillary is a good start (of course, Ferraro and Carol Moseley-Braun should not go unmentioned), but we have so much more work to do.
Patient: There's like this longing ... this pull. I mean, does that make me, you know, like, some kind of...?
Maeby: Homosexual.
Tobias: Maeby, please. She's right, though, you probably are a homosexual.I may be playing this wrong but...
...I want Hillary as President and Elizabeth Edwards as First Lady. I'm not sure how we'd manage that but there ya go.
And the day came when the risk it took to remain tight inside the bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom. - Nin
I like Hilary, but...
I think she's a sell-out. And she doesn't take responsibility for her or her husband's past actions (her vote on the war, DOMA).
As much as having a real-life woman president would be awesome, I want a woman president who doesn't completely compromise her values. Go Edwards (and Obama, to a lesser extent)!
Elizabeth Edwards
y'all get whatcha want
you don't believe we are
you don't believe we are there yet? REALLY? i'm not sure if we'll get the chance to see Hillary in the White House, but I certainly don't think it's because we're "not there yet." Many people adore her, but many people hate her. Not because she's a woman. Yes, some of these conservative Republicans disregard her because she's a woman, but it's not enough votes to stop her. A lot of guys I know adore her. They think she's brilliant and a true leader. She may be really into her politics speak, but we need a politician, not a mommy or daddy. A lot of my female friends, on the other hand, are buying into Obama's "hope" and "change" spiel. He's taking a different approach but, to me, it's like watching an episode of Barney or Lamb Chop.
--
“In a letter to Dear Abby a reader complained that a gay couple was moving in across the street and wanted to know what he could do to improve the quality of the neighborhood. Her suggestion - 'You could move.'”
I Disagree (In Part)
I've seen this argument made on blogs and in comments across the Internet and I think it does a disservice to women to pare down the argument in that way.
I think a Democratic caucus that's progressive enough to elevate a "skinny kid with a funny name" to front-runner status is more than willing to embrace a woman...but the way I interpret last night's results is that the electorate--men and women alike--valued change over experience.
In short, I believe that a woman can win. Right now, we've got female governors in Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Michigan, Arizona, Kansas, Washington and Connecticut. Proof positive that a woman with the right message can carry the day. A woman can win but perhaps this woman can't.
But on the defeating Republican right wing bigots part, we wholeheartedly agree! ;)
CJ!
I love Stockard Channing in her role as Abby Bartlett, but the real woman running the country on West Wing was CJ Cregg (Allison Janney), who ascended from White House Press Secretary to Chief of Staff.
I'm encouraged
I'm encouraged this election year with the diversity and depth of the Democratic candidates. I could easily vote for the top 4 or 5. Clearly, Iowa has shown us that "Americans want Change". That has to make every Democrat happy. The best candidate will emerge within the next few weeks. I truly hope for more women in government...all over the world. I believe women have unique perspectives and skills that all goverments need. And yes, we do need men, too...for heavy lifting.
Edwards is not a dweeb
When it comes to marriage. First of all, he has the exact same outward position as all of the other realistic candidates for president (Kucinich and Gravel, obviously, do support it openly, but they have no chance at winning and they know that).
Second, at the LGBT forum he all but said that he'd like to support marriage. It seemed to me like he was saying come on folks, you know if I said that I wouldn't be elected. It's sad but true. But he seemed more comfortable with it than Obama, certainly (he got all testy, as you point out), and at least as comfortable as Clinton.
And Elizabeth, I believe, has actually said she supports same-sex marriage. You know she has some sway over him. Neither Mrs. Obama nor Mr. Clinton seem to be as supportive. Vote for Edwards!
Elizabeth definitely
Elizabeth definitely supports same-sex marriage, as does Edwards' daughter. I'm supporting him because I feel he best represents progressive politics out of the electable field. I'll throw my support to Obama if it comes to that, but for now Edwards is my top choice.
I, too, would love to see a woman in the White House, but I'm distrustful of Hillary Clinton because she's quite the hawk. And I think she's too connected to the "machine." So yes - it's time for a woman in the White House, but Hillary is not the right woman, IMHO.
Barbara Boxer
Barrack Obama reminds me of what Robert Kennedy must have been like in the sixties. He generates great enthusiam and hope and promise. His wife is a plus.
I'd love to see a woman in the white house but not Hillary. She is too establishment and has too much baggage. I think she's dishonest (thought they probably all are) and too divisive. What about Barbara Boxer? I'd vote for her.
The Best TV President of all
senator clinton and rizzo!!
'nuff said...