Last Tuesday the first female president took office, courtesy of ABC's
latest series, Commander in Chief. In the first show, vice president
Mackenzie Allen takes over the Oval Office when the president suddenly
dies from an aneurysm - but not before confiding to Allen that she had
been put on the ticket as a political stunt to get him elected.
While TV viewers were treated to the fantasy of a female president on
Tuesday night, American voters saw the reality of female politicians
when they woke up the next morning. That's when Louisiana governor
Kathleen Blanco appeared before a Senate panel investigating the Katrina
disaster.
The day before, former FEMA head Michael Brown, in his appearance before
the panel, charged that Blanco had failed to order a mandatory
evacuation of New Orleans, contributing to the overall breakdown of law
and order.
But when Blanco waltzed into town on Wednesday, she requested chivalrous
lawmakers to not ask any embarrassing questions. Instead of being
treated like any other accountable public official, she was feted like
royalty. That's a double standard in my book.
It turns out the sharpest critics of female politicians are women
themselves.
Columnist Carol
Platt Liebau recently hit on governor Blanco's
lachrymose response to Katrina, acknowledging "a visceral concern on the
part of many voters about the way that a female President would act
under pressure or in a crisis."
Then Liebau took senator Dianne Feinstein to task for her outrageous
conduct during the hearings for Supreme Court candidate John Roberts.
Before casting her vote, she applauded Roberts for his "brilliant legal
mind." But Feinstein ended up voting against Roberts because when she
asked him talk to her "as a son, a husband, a father," he "gave a very
detached response."
So let me get this right: here's the preening third-term senator from
California who is dinging the future Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
for an answer she deemed was too logical and thoughtful. To paraphrase
Brad Paisley's current hit song, "What was she thinking?"
Next is the problem of female politicians being out of step with the
electorate. During last week's final vote on Judge Roberts, only 22% of
the Senators voted "nay." But six of the 14 female senators - nearly
half -- opposed his nomination: Barbara Boxer, Maria Cantwell, Dianne
Feinstein, Hillary Clinton, Barbara Mikulski, and Debbie Stabenow.
Appears the female senators far more liberal than the overall Senate.
Then there's the truth-in-packaging issue. Some female politicians
project an altar-girl image of enlightened centrism, all the while
lobbying behind the scenes for radical leftist legislation.
Take Michigan's Debbie Stabenow. Widely viewed as a political moderate,
it turns out her voting record ranks her up there with leftist die-hards
like Edward Kennedy, Hillary Clinton, and John Kerry.
Americans have other doubts about female politicians, concerns that have
nothing to do with sexism.
Many female politicians view issues through the rose-colored lens of
personal relationships and gender. Carol Platt Liebau describes the
concern as "the stereotype that women's decision-making is more often
based on personal experience than on rational analysis," a perception
that Dianne Feinstein's recent grandstanding did little to dispel.
Another example: men lag behind women on almost every indicator of
health status. But this past week senator Barbara Mikulski of Maryland
issued a press
release that proudly announced, "Mikulski Fights for
Women's Health Care with Federal Funding for Research, Treatment."
Why isn't Mikulski also fighting for men's health? Are men political
lepers whose health is simply unworthy of mention?
The rap on female politicians actually runs much deeper than their
stance on specific pieces of legislation. Hold on to your hat while you
read this scorching blast from
Devvy
Kidd: "The feminization of Congress
and our state legislatures is destroying constitutional government,
running America into oceans of unpayable debt and breeding generations
of helpless women, whining for mother government to take care of them
and their every need."
Now how's that for political incorrectness?
Finally there's the Hillary question. Well, on second thought, that one
will have to wait for later.
There's no inherent reason why a woman can't serve as our chief of
state. Indeed, Margaret Thatcher comes to mind as a courageous woman who
turned around a failing British economy.
But look at the current top tier of American female politicians. There
isn't a single one in the bunch who comes close to qualifying for the US
presidency by virtue of her experience, temperament, and proven
commitment to serving the needs of all Americans.
That's the sad reality.
