Can Hillary Clinton win in 2016 on women’s rights? She seems to think so
You may have been encouraged to forget this small fact during her run for president in 2008, when her critics portrayed her as a crybaby, a ball-buster, a man-hating shrew and not man enough, somehow all at once. Facing that, she all but banished the W-word from her campaign, focusing instead on her experience and know-how. Well, we know how well that worked out.
With public office behind her (for the moment), she’s changed her tack. Two months after leaving her post as Secretary of State and two weeks after I uprooted from London to New York, she spoke at the Women in the World Summit. She called women’s rights ‘unfinished business’, and has made it her main topic for nearly every public speech since.
Why the change in direction? It’s obvious (despite, as the New York Times claimed this week, the Clinton Foundation being threatened by conflicts of interest) she’s returning to a cause she’s always felt passionately about.
Also, this from the Washington Post:
Here’s a thought: She can save the world.
Yes, all right, perhaps that’s a trifle hyperbolic, but hear me out. And keep in mind that this works only as a long game. We may not live to see salvation but one has to start somewhere. Thus far invasions, bunker-busting mega-bombs and killer drones seem not to be having the desired effect.
Let’s begin with a working (and provable) premise: Women, if allowed to be fully equal to men, will bring peace to the planet. This is not so far-fetched a notion. One, men have been at it for thousands of years, resulting in millions and millions of corpses. Two, countries where women are most oppressed and abused are also the least stable.
Link: Washington Post.