The Oprah Presidency?
Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker must hate that she doesn’t have a penis. What else could I infer from her vapid column in today’s Washington Post, “Obama: Our first female president”. The premise of the piece is interesting, take Toni Morrison’s famous analogy that Bill Clinton was our first black president, and turn it on its head by saying Obama is our first female president.
Parker writes:
Generally speaking, men and women communicate differently. Women tend to be coalition builders rather than mavericks (with the occasional rogue exception). While men seek ways to measure themselves against others, for reasons requiring no elaboration, women form circles and talk it out.
Obama is a chatterbox who makes Alan Alda look like Genghis Khan.
I’m still not sure of the Alda-Khan simile, but let’s let that pass. Parker looks at Karlyn Kohrs Campbell’s essay, “Hating Hillary” which Parker writes that the study “details the ways our former first lady was chastised for the sin of talking like a lawyer and, by extension, ‘like a man.’ ” I haven’t read Kohrs Campbell’s work, and cannot comment on whether Parker gets that right or not.
Parker then throws it out there that basically, we could never have a woman in the Oval Office.
I’m not so sure. The masculine-coded context of the Oval Office poses special challenges, further exacerbated by a crisis that demands decisive action. It would appear that Obama tests Campbell’s argument that “nothing prevents” men from appropriating women’s style without negative consequences.
Indeed, negative reaction to Obama’s speech suggests the opposite. Obama may prove to be our first male president who pays a political price for acting too much like a woman.
And, perhaps, next time will be a real woman’s turn.
So feminine styles do not connote leadership? WTF. Parker had so much possiblility with her premise as Obama being our first female president, but she botched it. Her political glasses got in the way of driving to the crux of the matter and maybe enlightening the reader.
Tags: feminism, President Obama
Your liberal media.
The Pulitzer she undeservedly won has put Kathleen Parker under a lot of pressure. She’s about as challenging as a head of iceberg lettuce, but flew mostly under the radar as a third-string syndicated columnist who, unlike a lot of news service columnists, does no original reporting. Now she’ll get much more attention, and so will be forced to produce interesting thoughts — something she’s never shown much talent for.
Obomba more reminds me of the guy who dumps his wife for his medical secretary after his wife put him through medical school.
That comment reminds me of this one time at band camp.
Reminds me of Ann Coulter calling John Edwards a faggot.
Obama has now been called a socialist, a nazi, a terrorist, a crack dealer, and now effeminate.
What pisses them off is that they still have to call him “Mr. President.”
Is this just another way of calling him uppity?
And, f*** Kathleen Parker. The “masculine” style is what has messed up this country so much. It’s strange because I see so many lefties longing for a progressive George Bush. George W. Bush didn’t get much done but he sure made a lot of noise doing it. He also sucked when he did accomplish things.
It is true that Obama’s biggest accomplishments have been achieved by yielding to conservatives (public option, bank tax, CFPA independence, etc). I don’t know if that is especially “feminine” but it sure is weak shit.
If all this yielding to conservatives is some kind of jujitsu that somehow produces a Dem win in November, I’ll be happy to be wrong (“The Reveal!”)
But from my Democratic viewpoint, Obama would have nothing to lose and everything to gain by forcefully putting some energy leftward for a change and running roughshod over a few conservadems and Republicans. It would be downright manly.
Obama negotiates with conservatives because he needs conservatives to pass his agenda. When we have enough progressives to make a majority we’ll have great legislation.
Obama has had more legislative accomplishments than any president since FDR, so that “feminine” style means “get stuff done” I guess.
BTW, I think the criticism should be about what kind of compromises he made and whether they are necessary. If the financial reform bill is watered down more it’s because he had to negotiate for Scott Brown’s vote since Feingold and Cantwell said no.
he needs conservatives to pass his agenda.
Right. The question is, how do you get them to do that?
If my kid stamps his feet and won’t follow my agenda, I don’t offer him ice cream; I explain that I will take away privileges that he wants.
If the financial reform bill is watered down more it’s because he had to negotiate for Scott Brown’s vote since Feingold and Cantwell said no.
It is Obama’s past weakness that inspires these holdouts on both Republican and Democratic sides. They know Obama will reward them for holding out, and there will be no negative consequences; in fact Obama might campaign for them. Obama is feeding the regressive elements of the Senate.
When we have enough progressives to make a majority we’ll have great legislation.
I’ll settle for a majority coalition of regular Democrats plus a handful of liberal Republicans skillfully herded by the White House. Obama missed a chance to forge that coalition over the public option and now he is paying the price.
a majority coalition of regular Democrats plus a handful of liberal Republicans
Yes I am aware there is no such thing as a liberal Republican, not really.
The thing is, moderate Republicans like Snow/Collins/Brown etc all feel they have more to gain with McConnell than with Obama. That is Obama’s fault for allowing them to make that calculation.
And conservadems fear FOX News more than they fear Obama. Also Obama’s fault.
Comment by Unstable Isotope @ 11:15 am:
“Obama negotiates with conservatives because he needs conservatives to pass his agenda.”
Bush didn’t negotiate much, but he always got his agenda passed, even when the GOP lost control of Congress in 2006.
Yes, he did negotiate with Congress.