Lois & Clark Forums Forums General Discussion Off Topic First Woman President - When?

I agree with you. I hope that everyone will vote for the candidate they honestly believe will be the best President.

Ann

"Separate but equal," huh? Now where have I heard that before...

Careful, C_A. You're implicitly equating the role of women with the Jim Crow laws of the Old South and the Brown v. Board of Education case in 1954. That's close to an unfair cheap shot.

I would point out that while the Bible does not assign women to the position of pastor or elder in the church, the Bible records women leaders of state (the Queen of Sheba who visited Solomon, Deborah the prophetess, Priscilla - who was always mentioned prior to her husband Aquilla in the Book of Acts - and others), at least one named female deacon in the New Testament, and female leaders in the Christian movements in their respective communities. Remember also that the first people to see and report the empty tomb were women, and this was in a culture which required that two women testify to the same thing in court to equal the testimony of one man. (This was in Jewish culture of Jesus' day, and is not a Biblical tenet in either Testament.)

Christianity does not treat women as second-class citizens or lesser beings. That's the province of people who either ignore the Bible altogether or who claim to follow the teachings but don't.

Ann wrote:

That's interesting. Are we all assuming that President Obama will be a one-term guy? Barring a health-related situation involving himself or a member of his family, I would anticipate that he would run for re-election in 2012, at least in the Democratic primary. And the last sitting President to drop out of a primary race was Lyndon Johnson in 1968, largely due to the escalation of the conflict in Vietnam and the media-driven public perception of his role in America's increased involvement. Obama is a better communicator than Johnson was, so I would not expect him to be trapped in a similar situation.

Well, Terry, I was really only commenting on Pam's post....

I still think that it will take longer than four years for the first female President of the United States to be elected. Someone said something interesting on a Swedish radio show, and I'm going to sort-of-quote it, just to make it easier to see:

And the person who said this went on to make a list of all the 'movie-verse' black Presidents of the United States. The list was actually somewhat impressive. I think Morgan Freeman may have played the President of the United States at least twice. But how often have we seen a movie where the President of the United States has been a woman? Has it happened yet?

Movies made America used to the idea of a black President. Moviemakers have their work cut out for them if they want to make America used to the idea of a female President.

So get going, willya, Hollywood?

Ann

In 'AirForce One', Glenn Close played a very strong VP while Harrison Ford was out of touch.

There was a TV show... 2 years ago? with a Hillary-type female [and the talk then was that they were doing just that - paving the way for Hillary this year]. IIRC, it flopped pretty quickly.

IMO, that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the idea that there was a female president, but rather that - from everything I heard - the show stunk.

Carol

Was that Commander-in-Chief, with Geena Davis as the President? It ran for two seasons, I think.

Female Presidents have actually been seen in movies and TV for a very long time. The oldest that I can recall seeing was in 1986 in Whoops, Apocolypse - the movie version of a UK TV series from 1982. President Barbara Adams was played by Loretta Swit, of MASH fame.

I'm sure there are others.

LabRat

Commander-in-Chief was barely 1 season. I started watching it, but it couldn't keep my interest. Guess I wasn't the only one.

The new season of 24 looks like it'll have a female president. I can't name any others off-hand, though.

That was the first one I thought of with an African-American president, Karen, and wondered if they might have a female this year, but I wasn't sure why I thought that.

Carol [who is looking forward to the movie this month]

Yeah, I saw most of Commander-in-Chief; we never got around to finishing the DVDs. I think a big part of its problem is that it was made so close to The West Wing coming to an end; maybe it was trying to match the success of that series and just couldn't come close, or maybe it felt too similar. I think, actually, there were many scenes in which it did remind me of TWW. Also, the fundamental premise - the way in which Davis's character became president - felt so implausible (ie the fact that, as a complete independent and non-politician, she was selected as VP to a president not in the best of health). Anyway, I would certainly like to see another film or drama with a female present, but with better scripts

As for 2012, I'm guessing that if there's a woman candidate then she won't be a Democrat

cp33, I get your point completely about electing candidates for what they stand for and not their race and gender; unfortunately, before that will happen (or before people and the media will actually stop commenting on race and gender and making them an issue in elections) you have to normalise the idea of a woman or a black person in the Oval Office. Look at senators and governors: who comments on the gender of candidates for election to those offices now? But they will to the presidency, because it hasn't happened before.

In 40 years' time, I'm guessing, a female or black president or candidate will be nothing at all remarkable.


Wendy

Commander-in-Chief was okay for a while, but then it started going hard left. One of the appealing things about the latter seasons of the West Wing was that it tried to present both sides of the matter despite the fact that the administration was Democratic. The Republicans were human after-all and were good people with different beliefs.

On CIC, it started off reasonably well and then fell into the Hollywood trap of writing to only what they know. Any interest in watching went completely out the window when it became a Democratic campaign commercial.

I'm surprised Kay Baily Hutchinson's name has not been mentioned...

Currently, she is a United States Senator from Texas (Republican). In 2001, she was named one of "The 30 most powerful women in America" by Ladies Home Journal. She is the first woman to represent Texas in the U.S. Senate, the first Republican woman to win election to the Senate by defeating an incumbent, and is currently the most senior Republican woman in the Senate. In 2000, she became the first U.S. Senate candidate in Texas history (male or female) to poll more than four million votes.

She is planning to leave the Senate and very likely will be elected Texas governor in 2010.

I think she may want to stay closer to home as governor, but there's been speculation...

http://www.texansforkay.com/

All that said, I was very impressed with Palin. I think the left-wing media (branch of the democratic party) would not have made such fools of themselves attacking her if they did not see her as a real threat.

She's young, sharp, personable and has a common sense conservative approach and appeal. I don't know if she could get elected President, but I hope we have not heard the last of her.

I dreaded and feared a Hillary presidency... and if you had told me a year ago that someone would be elected president that I feared MORE than Hillary, I would not have believed it. She must have been very frustrated... to watch this guy come along, who dared to run for president while having LITTLE to NO experience (arrogant), and then to watch him attain rock star status... I almost felt sorry for her.

Captivated2, I have already asked you privately to tone down your rhetoric. This was explicitly started as a non-partisan thread, and yet you write:

and

Thank you for your addition of Kay Bailey Hutchinson to the list, but again I am asking you to remember that this is a message-board for Lois and Clark fanfic, not a right-wing blog site where anything goes in terms of rhetoric (and I have said the same, from the other end of the political spectrum, to commenters from left of centre who have also overstepped the line, so don't imagine that you're getting picked on because of your political stance).


Wendy
Boards Administration Team

Right-wing blog?! Wow... I'm at a loss. I guess you can direct the discussion any way you like as you ARE the "opinion police" around here. But, I'm sorry, people are likely to keep crossing this "line" of yours because it's subjective and mercurial.

All I can do, Captivated2, is ask you whether you would view a post as non-partisan and respectful if it used the same language about Sarah Palin, for example, as you used in your post. That's the measure we're using. No-one else in this thread has used any kind of pejorative language about any candidate they've mentioned, whether or not the person comes from their side of the spectrum: see Roger's mention of several Democratic candidates, including Hillary Clinton, for example.

I'm sorry that you don't like being held to these standards, but that's just the way it is - and the vast majority of people posting in these threads are able to remain on the positive side of the line without difficulty.

ETA: it's also worth pointing out that on other threads specifically established for debate from both sides of the political spectrum contributors make an effort to support their arguments with evidence. For instance, the issue of media bias has been debated extensively on at least one thread, and examples are given to show evidence of bias. That's very different from simply making an assertion without evidence, which is what you've done here.


Wendy
Boards Administration Team

Ack! You're right. She is foreign-born. I remember now. When she was being mentioned as being a potential presidential candidate, it was in terms of running like Arnold Schwarzenegger, requiring a change in the Constitution for her to run.

Thanks for the correction.

No...I think the phrase you're looking for here is "Wendy's an Admin around here" and, as such, is doing just exactly what she's being unpaid to do. What admins on a million forums do daily on the net. She's ensuring that the policies of this particular forum are adhered to by members.

As I'm sure you are aware there are dozens of partisan websites out there - many of them unmoderated - where you can vent your outrage to your heart's content, using any form of language you wish.

This forum, however, is not one of them. We've worked hard to develop an atmosphere here that is both friendly and welcoming and we do not intend that to be undermined by these political threads. We agreed to host such threads on the clear understanding that the discussion within them stayed within the rules of the forum. That is, that any debate was conducted with respect for those being discussed and other forum members.

I've seen no evidence of Wendy being mercurial in her postings. She's been extremely even-handed.

The bottom line is, Captivated2, that if she - or any other mod or admin - tells you to moderate the tone of your posts in line with forum policy, then you would be advised to pay attention.

You will find in this world that no matter which group, club, society or organisation you join, it will have certain rules. If you disagree with those rules, you find another club that suits you better. But if you stay here, you'll be expected to stick to the rules, just like any other member.

If you think that you can't do that, (and I could understand that - I can only take limited exposure to these threads before my head explodes. But then I understand that about myself and stay out of them as much as possible.) then I'd strongly suggest you take a long step back, take a very deep breath and go post instead on one of those sites that will allow you to vent your frustrations in the way that you'd like.

LabRat
Boards Admin Team

Captivated2, I have to say that as someone who leans a lot more to the right than Wendy, even I thought your remark was over the line. Flaming someone, whether they're a boards member, actor, or political figure, has never been allowed on these boards. Wendy wasn't "directing the discussion" or acting as the "opinion police," she was simply enforcing a long-standing boards policy the same way she and the rest of the boards staff always has.

~Anna

I zeroed in a similar feeling. If I were Hilary, I'd be frustrated to be out-campaigned by Obama in the primaries, just because she had more years of politics under her belt. I tend to keep an eye on her as one of (I'm sure many) female politicians in the boy's club, although I read this really funny quote in an article on FOXNews. They said something like, "We're not the wrinkly, old guy party anymore." They were specifically talking about the fresh GOP faces like Bobby Jindal, et. al, but I think it kind of applies to politics in general, and of course Obama is the prime example that people are looking for new leaders. My point in this discombobulated mess? Heh, I'm not sure I have one right now, but I'm just disappointed that Hilary didn't make it further in the election process. It would have been really cool to have a female primary winner from one of the parties.

JD
A Hard Core Republican Who Thinks Hilary Is Kind of Fascinating.

And this I will agree on, definitely: I know the Clintons believed that the press was giving Obama a lot more air-time and favourable coverage than her campaign - a black candidate being viewed, apparently, as more interesting than a woman? I don't know, but I know the Clintons believed it. There is a fascinating series of articles in Newsweek - link is to the URL for the magazine edition - which chronicles the McCain, Clinton and Obama campaigns from the inside, based on reporters being allowed full access to the campaigns as long as nothing was reported until after the election. There are some really interesting insights - in relation to Clinton, that reveal her and Bill's frustration with the media, with the campaigns and so on, and that also reveal some of the mistakes her campaign (all the campaigns, in fact) undoubtedly made.

I think, all the same, that Clinton has done women candidates a huge favour, as has Palin: between them they have normalised the idea of a woman candidate for president. Unfair media treatment and sexism (which did happen) aside, I hear people talking about a Clinton or a Palin candidacy as if it's nothing unusual. There's no 'oh, my gosh, a woman!' about it.

In the same way, I hear Bobby Jindal's name being mentioned as a possible Republican candidate for 2012, and I Googled him today to learn more about him... I had no idea that he is of Indian heritage. Again, he is discussed as 'a possible candidate', not as 'a minority candidate'. It really seems to me that so many barriers were broken down this year, and that's impressive, whatever else we may have thought about the various campaigns, media coverage and the outcome.


Wendy