Phil, a longtime reader, sees pro-female sexism in the controversy over Bill Clinton's recent role in Hillary's campaign. He writes:

"Hillary has been using her husband as an attack dog against Obama, but escapes criticism because of her gender. While the former President is widely condemned, Hillary is even portrayed sympathetically for 'putting up with Bill's antics yet again.' In contrast, when Elizabeth Edwards criticized Ann Coulter for Ann's distorted criticisms of her husband, John was ridiculed as hiding behind Elizabeth's skirts."

I think he has a point. From the beginning I figured it would play out like this. Bill and Hillary work to get Hillary elected. If Hillary wins, it's Hillary's win. If she loses, it's Bill's fault, at least partly. I don't know how far this will go, but I think the post-South Carolina events Phil mentions support this theory.

On a related note, during the recent California Democratic debate the following exchange occurred:

Moderator: Senator Clinton, your husband has set off several firestorms in the last few weeks in early primary states with the way that he has criticized Senator Obama. Greg Craig, who was one of your husband's top lawyers campaign can't control the former president now, what will it be like when you're in the White House?

CLINTON: Well, one thing I think is fair to say, both Barack and I have very passionate spouses...

OBAMA: We do, no doubt.

CLINTON: ... who promote and defend us at every turn. You know, but the fact is that I'm running for president, and this is my campaign. And I have made it very clear that I want the campaign to stay focused on the issues that I'm concerned about, the kind of future that I want for our country, the work that I have done for all of these years. And that is what the campaign is about. And of course, I'm thrilled to have my husband and my daughter, who is here tonight, you know, representing me and traveling around the country speaking with people, but at the end of the day, it's my name that is on the ballot, and it will be my responsibility as president and commander in chief, after consulting broadly with a lot of people who have something to contribute to difficult decisions, I will have to make the call. And I am fully prepared to do that.

CLINTON: And I know that as we go forward in this campaign, it's a choice between the two of us. And we are proud of our spouses, we're proud of our families, we're proud of everybody supporting us. But at the end of the day, it's a lonely job in the White House, and it is the president of the United States who has to make the decisions. And that is what I'm asking to be entrusted to do.

What Hillary said was OK, I guess, but I thought it was a little underwhelming. I would have been more impressed if she defended her husband more directly.

Phil also writes:

"It was particularly evident in the Nevada debate that Hillary's sex afforded her the special privilege to preempt her male opponents, and the moderator, if she chose to speak out-of- turn. There are numerous examples, but consider that she was permitted to ask two debate questions of the other candidates although the moderator enforced a limit of only one to the male opponents."

I didn't see the Nevada debate, but I did see the last New Hampshire one and then the California one this past week, and I didn't see Hillary preempting her opponents or being treated with any extra deference. If readers have seen this during the debates, feel free to chime in.

This entry was posted on Saturday, February 2nd, 2008 at 1:50 pm and is filed under Sexism, Political Parties/Presidential Election/Major Elections. You can trackback from your own site.