First Principles

I didn’t watch all of last night’s Democratic debate, but it’s been fun to see the reaction to Hillary Clinton’s performance – and first big stumble. (Watch it – it’s too funny.)  She was for drivers licenses for illegals before she was against them, she both will and won’t privatize social security, and she’s not some Tammy Wynette standing by her man when he cheats on her, but somehow she can’t convince her husband to release her White House documents when she was the first lady. It would be laughable if she weren’t such a real possibility as our next president.

But what really gets me is her reaction to it all:

In a new memo, Clinton’s campaign rejected the “politics of pile-on” it said were perpetrated by Obama and Edwards, and claimed the debate merely served to show she was tough enough to withstand all manner of attacks.

“The American people are looking for a president who can stand strong and come out ahead under any circumstances, last night, once again, that person was Hillary Clinton.

“One strong woman.”

That appeared to be a pitch to female voters, who polls show are powering Clinton’s White House drive, and may chafe at the spectacle of her being ganged up upon by six male candidates.

Sooo…. She shows us how tough she is by whining about those Big Mean Men asking her hard questions? Does she think Ahmadinejad will be so dainty with her wittle feewings? Are the “women aren’t wilting damsels that need the protection of men” feminists seriously not puking right now? And I thought she was into “speaking truth to power” – since when do all the 60s radical retreads so enamored by her think a probing question by a reporter is “unfair”?

You have to hand it to her – her ability to avoid any kind of serious scrutiny by playing the wounded woman and getting pity support is impressive. But a person who seeks attention via pity instead of respect is simply unworthy and unqualified to be the leader of the free world. In a word, it’s pathetic.

If Hillary is elected, I hope she can keep that in mind that cowering behind two X chromosomes isn’t exactly the best way to effectuate “vigorous diplomacy” – or serious leadership in general – no matter how many votes it might squeeze from your culture-of-victimhood base.