Because I know everyone is interested in my opinion on Hillary Clinton (cough)....(And that's the newish World War II memorial at left.)
A local columnist, unfortunately unavailable online--one who ostensibly writes about TV but who is also interested in politics--recently opined that Hillary Clinton is a humo(u)rless robot. He's entitled to his opinion and likely cares little about mine. Nevertheless, I can't just LET IT GO.
I think he's mistaken, for at least three reasons.
First, Senator Clinton's perceived warmth factor suffers primarily because she spends a lot of time with one of the most gregarious politicians ever. A pack of golden retrievers in the middle of a patch of doggy treats would look cold next to President Clinton. A regular person doesn't stand a chance.
Second, Senator Clinton is busy inhaling and processing information. Even today, in 2007, she has to meet a higher standard of knowledge than the men she is running against. The bar is still set higher for women, and women face challenges that men don't. (For example--has President Bush given British Prime Minister Gordon Brown a shoulder rub, the way he did Angela Merkel? Why do powerful women still have to even think about that kind of crap?) If Senator Clinton's campaign for U.S. President is successful, perhaps that situation will change, but today, it's still true. She's so busy that she has no time to deliver a stand-up routine.
Finally, Senator Clinton is serious. Not humo(u)rless--serious. It's easy to forget what serious looks like, eight years into the Frat Boy Presidency. Even if the standard of seriousness hadn't plummeted through the floor during Bush's terms in office, Senator Clinton might still be considered "too serious." It's hard to tell. Even if she were, she has plenty of reason to err on the side of serious instead of har-de-har-har. Remember Howard Dean? One misperceived, unfortunate "yee-haw" that played poorly on television, and he's toast. In the U.S. Presidential campaign, there's very little room for mistakes, and the Senator has less room than the men she's running against (see point above).
I am not an FOH, particularly. In fact, I'm somewhat more irked than usual at Senator Clinton because she keeps implying (wrongly) that the Canadian border is leaking terrorists into the U.S. And what's more, she's (wait for it) overall not liberal enough for me.
However, Senator Clinton is by far the most intelligent person I've met. To date. (I'm still hoping to have a conversation with former U.N. Ambassador Stephen Lewis someday.) I think she's even more intelligent than her husband, and that's saying something.
No, I'm not buddies with either Clinton. My "professional" path crossed in small ways with both of theirs (independently) when I lived in Arkansas. No big deal--it's a small state; it happened to lots of flunkies like me.
Senator Clinton has the potential to be a reasonable President. Of course, other candidates would bring other strengths to the Oval Office.
But I hope that whoever wins that office next year brings to it the seriousness of purpose that the office deserves to have--the seriousness it's lacked for seven years. Because God help us all if s/he doesn't.
