Q: When will America elect a female president?

A: When American women vote for a female candidate. *rim-shot*

Typical lefty: "America isn't ready for a woman to be President"

Me: "No, America doesn't want THAT woman to be President."

Yeah? Well, check out this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7jmkAvtukM

Maybe there's a viable candidate after all. With a vagina, without one, I don't care as long as they have the country's best interests at heart, and not their own. YMMV

Oh and Brian, I'm with you on that buddy!

Did anyone out there got their Bull**** detector going on red when they read this line?

"...Despite the fact that I voted for Obama in February..."

So, she voted for Obama yet she talks about sexism? I try to bend my mind around this one. She got the chance of voting for a woman and yet she voted for a man. Then, she exhorts us to believe that asking Clinton to leave is sexist? By voting against Clinton, she in fact asked her to step down! She ask us to give a chance to a runner she don't even support!

Hypocrisy or stupidity, I can't really tell.

Silly. The one rule I've had for myself this year is that I'll vote for Clinton's opponent in every contest I can. That's because she's Hillary, not because she's a woman. I'd vote for someone like Janet Napolitano or Sarah Palin in a heartbeat if I could.

Does Edelstein think that only men know when they should quit?

I was reading a feminist blog a few weeks ago that got all up in arms because the media drew a parallel between what is going on in this democratic primary and the Tanya harding incident. Where the second place team menber went out of their way to destroy the first place team member, and thus destroyed the hopes of an entire nation. Frankly, I think it was a perfect parallel. Tanya Harding was rutheless and unpricipaled, and I think Hillary Clinton is the same.

(Besides, I can't deal with 4-8 years of "her husband got a BJ in the oval office" jokes.)

That doesn't make me sexist, or a bad feminist. I mean, don't get me wrong I do think there are some people who are sexist and wont vote for HRC. My little sister actually believes that women CAN'T be good presidents and that is sexist.

But not wanting to vote for logic like this:
http://coudal.com/logic.php

that is just logical.

What might be good for the Democrats at this point - having one candidate to stump for against the increasingly smug and confident McCain - would be seriously undermining to feminism.

What a stupid argument. Yes, it is better for feminism (a group that seems to claim to be liberal) to cause Democrats to lose in November than it is for feminism to have Democrats win in November.

As a male, I admit to too often thinking with my little head. But she appears to be thinking with her littler head.

At the moment, I actually lean towards Clinton, but like most thinking Democrats, I would prefer the contest be decided earlier rather than later, just so we have the time to beat McCain.

(I think all three major candidates are pretty bad choices.)

Jerry: At the moment, I actually lean towards Clinton, but like most thinking Democrats [...]

I don't think the three of you are enough to sway the election.

As a Canuck, I tend to avoid commenting on what I can only watch with interest but this seems more like a shot against women, despite claiming to be for the good of women everywhere (which is a ridiculous idea in itself). She was smart enough to vote for the person she thought best, but she expected other women to vote for Hillary just because she's a woman? Doesn't really suggest that she has a very high regard for the intellect of women in general. She claims one thing, but her support for that claim suggests another.

I think whoever can pull you guys out of this economic mess you're in is your best bet...so from what I've seen so far...you're screwed (with us trailing behind you) for another 4 years.

". . .the collective American affection for simple symbolism means that . . . "

I love it when Dems reveal their contempt for the American public.

I love it even more when talking heads reveal their lack of integrity. "I voted for Obama, but I feel bad for Hillary now. Maybe I'll vote for her!"

Where I live (the real world), the housing markets, the dollar's decline, the war in Iraq, health care, crime, and civil liberties, provide fertile grounds for healthy debate and an informed opinion. We don't have to create an imaginary conspiracy to rally around a candidate.

I'm with you, Amy - I'm against Hillary because she's a socialist. (And unfortunately, Obama doesn't sound a whole lot better, and McCain is nothing more than a big-government neoconservative like the Shrub.)

It seems to me that most people who embrace socialism, big government, wealth redistribution schemes, etc. are just really, really, really ignorant about economics. They have dumb ideas about how wealth is created, how rich people get rich and poor people get poor, they don't understand how the laws of supply and demand determine prices, and so on. They also have a completely irrational trust in the ability of government to act responsibly and in good faith. If only they applied the same skepticism to government that they do to corporations. But mostly they are well-meaning people who just don't know any better.

The puzzling thing is, Hillary isn't stupid or ignorant. She's educated and bright. How she can keep spouting Marxist claptrap when she's had the benefit of so much education is beyond me. She must truly be evil, power-hungry, or deep in denial about the workings of free markets.

Our economy is facing some serious problems, and I shudder to think of how those would accelerate under Czar Hillary.

"I think whoever can pull you guys out of this economic mess you're in is your best bet..."

Want to hear my prediction on Social Security? Yay, I knew you did!

I predict it won't produce so much as a ripple. It will be a total non-issue just like Y2K. Seriously - Social Security is expected to go bankrupt in the year 2030, the year I turn 60. I don't think anything will be done to "fix" SSI before then. Politicians will continue to not risk political suicide by talking about it, and it would be a waste of time anyway because no one votes against getting a check for themselves, and those getting checks are in the majority. The way things are will just continue on and on, until the money dries up in 2030, and then the checks will simply stop going out the door.

But no one (like me) who is around by then will expect anything different. No one my age expects to get benefits. We are already know we have an ass-reaming coming, and we've known this for about two decades already. So when the program finally dries up, we will just yawn and get out of bed to go to work, like usual. This acceptance is precisely what the politicians are counting on, and they are correct to do so. I only wish the program would reach its demise sooner.

Pirate Jo -

The answer to your puzzle is this:

All socialists believe that the reason that socialism or communism have failed in the past is because they weren't pure enough.

In other words, the new socialist elites believe that they can finally get it right. Because they BELIEVE. And because they are purer than we are. And they aren't tainted by the naughty thoughts of Stalin et. al.

Which is, of course, absolute bullshit.

Socialism doesn't work because it requires people to go against their own best interest. That doesn't happen in the real world. There is no evidence anywhere in history that socialism has ever worked. Everywhere it has been tried, it has either failed, or is in the process of failing.

Humans really have two possibilities to choose from: freedom or slavery. Most humans are afraid of freedom, and therefore opt for slavery (which is usually dressed up as tribalism).

The "smug and confident" McCain? Look, I'm not McCain's biggest fan, to say the least, but of COURSE he's acting confident. So is Obama. Clinton is trying to do so as well. Politicians HAVE to be confident or they're toast. Does this woman think that McCain should be cringing at every question he receives to demonstrate his humility? I think someone who survived several years as a POW under the Viet Cong is going to tend to treat all other difficulties as indignities rather than as crises, but maybe that's just me.

I'm a feminist if you define feminism as equal pay for truly equal work and equal rights. I'm not a feminist if being one means that I must always vote for a female candidate if one is available.

"All socialists believe that the reason that socialism or communism have failed in the past is because they weren't pure enough."

Well maybe that's true of the socialist "intellectuals" - Keynes and his crowd, etc. But I'm talking more about your average fat American who thinks "the government ought to do something!" every time he perceives a problem, whether that's with education, health care, the poor - whatever. I don't think these people know or care anything about the history of socialism or communism - they just want the government to provide. How can they be so ignorant of the fact that the government is responsible for most of the problems faced by education, health care, the poor, etc., in the first place?

I think you may have nailed it here:

"Most humans are afraid of freedom."

"Most humans are afraid of freedom."

Ayn Rand must be shrugging in her grave on that one...

How can they be so ignorant of the fact that the government is responsible for most of the problems faced by education, health care, the poor, etc., in the first place?

Unfortunately, most of the people forget the fact that the government is elected by *gasp* THEM! The people are the ones who vote the government into office and the people are the ones who aren't exercising their right to scrutinize any and all candidates. All of us. You and me. Everyone else who votes (or doesn't). WE are the ones to blame, and WE are the only ones who can fix it. And we have to do that by first, demanding accountability from any and ALL politicians who are in local, state and national government positions, and second, voting the worst offenders of their oaths the hell out of office. And then prosecute the shit out of them. THEN, we get rid of corporate lobbyists. Then, we kill all the lawyers (sorry, Will!). YMMV

Pirate,
Think SS is a mess? I agree with you cause I will start helping to drain it in about 5 years. Have you looked at the impending costs of Medicare? I hear it will be 10 times higher than SS. And if I am still able to vote in 2030 you can bet I, like most my fellow geezers, will be voting for your money to be moved to our pockets.
Keep working hard to cover our asses and thank you!

I'm with you, Amy - I'm against Hillary because she's a socialist. (And unfortunately, Obama doesn't sound a whole lot better, and McCain is nothing more than a big-government neoconservative like the Shrub.) (Pirate Joe)

With freedom comes responsibility. Some people prefer what they see as the comfort of being led by the nose and told what to do. (Amy)

To men, the evil genius of democratic socialism is what Jose Ortega y Gasset calls affirming the "mass man," each man telling each and every other man what to do, and then convincing the mass man that he's the one in charge. It let's the ignorant feel apart from the unwashed masses.

heh, Flynne, I am always cajoling people not to think of the government as "the other". It is us. If you look at it this way, you have to take ownership of it...

I don't want to go occam's razor all the time, but seriously...

If you want to make gender irrelevant, you have to make it irrelevant.

You can't have it both ways. You want people to vote for you? You have to be the better candidate, you have to CONVINCE them. Not guilt them into it.

Want your candidacy to be relevant? THEN YOU HAVE TO WIN. You have to keep your eyes on the winning prize. If that means taking one for the team now to get your party into power, then you may have to do that.

Regardless of gender.

If you want to make gender irrelevant, you have to make it irrelevant (SwisArmyD).

If gender and sex matter so much in the small social contexts of dating, relationships, and family, then why not in larger social relationships like the government?

If a woman can't handle picking up the check on a date, how can she handle command of the Marine Corps?

"Where are the small government conservatives?"

Well there aren't very many in existence, which is why, as Flynne and SwissArmyD have so aptly pointed out, the situation is what it is. You may believe in small government and so may I, but there are several hundred million mouth-breathing dullards sitting next to you who aren't really interested. They want government-run healthcare, and they will get it.

Face it, we're outnumbered. You might as well just go outside and enjoy the day. Keep an eye on Ireland, Australia, and a handful of Latin American countries that are moving in the right direction. America may have forgotten what made it great, but a few others have been quietly taking notes the whole time.

Keep an eye on Ireland, Australia, and a handful of Latin American countries that are moving in the right direction. America may have forgotten what made it great, but a few others have been quietly taking notes the whole time (Pirate Jo).

Emigration is a real possibility for me, and I've considered it thoroughly. Australia looks good.

Heh. I like that image, "quietly taking notes." That's just right.

"They want government-run healthcare, and they will get it." Yeah but only for a short time. The money has to come from somewhere. The more screwed the upper middle class and the wealthy get the more likely they are to leave, and take the funds with them. Or they are going to get government health care and realize it sucks while private insurance will continue to exist for those of us who can afford it.

I think it all depends on how the bleed them (those with jobs and money) to support us (those who have little or none of either) conflict goes.

"If a woman can't handle picking up the check on a date, how can she handle command of the Marine Corps?" Jeff

It's easy, actually. If the expectation is there for something to be done, most people step up and do it. Dating isn't really comparable to being CinC, in that way. A process of establishing compatibility of two individuals, has a lot of subtlety. Having the Job of guarding the United States? Shouldn't have to do with gender. It's a job with well known actions and reactions. The approach of it will be different for every different person, anyway. But we have to demand that it not be different for gender, and the person asking for the job has to step up, as if it ISN'T different.

As long as we make the distinction, we are allowing the difference to exist. "What will she do if we are attacked?" The same thing any CinC would do. Kick. A$$. If you don't expect that, then you will never get it.

Amy, great call on this typical feminist BS.

I think that America needs a woman President. That woman will likely be a more conservative candidate who can bring people to the middle. Hillary is a polarizer.

The reason that America needs a woman President is so that feminists can then SHUT THE F*CK UP! (But I bet they still won't, will they....)

> Keep an eye on Ireland, Australia,
> and a handful of Latin American
> countries that are moving in the
> right direction.

I think this is completely wrong. We loves the Irish and the Aussies, but essentially every nation you'd want to move to is one that lives under the American military, nuclear, and perhaps financial umbrellas anyway.

When people say they're so disgusted with George Bush (or whatever) that they're ready to move to Canada, they come off like unemployed teenagers. "I can no longer stand the primitive thinking that happens in this household! I'm MOVING!!!!.... to the garage.

"The money has to come from somewhere."

Our government's philosophy is that when it needs money it just prints more.

Puh-leeze Crid. We're the room above the garage...thank you very much!!!

For you, Crid -

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/2008/02/24/75-threatening-to-move-to-canada/

SeanH I agree with you. Janet Napolitano would make a great president.

"When people say they're so disgusted with George Bush (or whatever) that they're ready to move to Canada, they come off like unemployed teenagers."

Yet Crid, it is undeniable that the entitlement programs here in the U.S. are totally screwing us. The value of our currency continues to drop and there is no end in sight to the Iraq war or the spending on it. It is not "acting like an unemployed teenager" to see the writing on the wall. The prescription drug bill is yet another new thing, added on top of a bunch of things we already can't afford.

For life to remain good here in the USA, this cycle has to stop, yet there is no indication that a slowdown in government spending is even being considered. The government is spending more and more all the time, not less, and based on the three main contenders for president and a Congress full of Democrats, we only have more of the same to look forward to.

If we keep moving in the wrong direction and other countries keep moving in the right one, the simple fact will be that some other country will eventually become a better place to live, especially for the people here who are footing the bill. The brightest and wealthiest (who are the most mobile) will be the first to take advantage of this. I don't see the equivalent of Galt's Gulch yet, but Chile of all places has at least managed to privatize its social security-type program. Global competition, Crid. The United States is acting like General Motors, ignoring Honda and Toyota at its own risk.

Note: My cpmparison between dating and commanding the USMC was intentionally hyperbolic.

If the expectation is there for something to be done, most people step up and do it (SwissArmyD).

Dating isn't really comparable to being CinC, in that way. A process of establishing compatibility of two individuals, has a lot of subtlety (SwissArmyD).

Having the Job of guarding the United States? Shouldn't have to do with gender. It's a job with well known actions and reactions (SwissArmyD).

But we have to demand that it not be different for gender, and the person asking for the job has to step up, as if it ISN'T different..."What will she do if we are attacked?" The same thing any CinC would do. Kick. A$$. If you don't expect that, then you will never get it (SwissArmyD).

For decades, women have been telling us that things will be run differently with women in charge. Yet, when I take them at their word, people begin to claim that things won't be different. It has every appearance of faulty ad hoc reasoning.

If we keep moving in the wrong direction and other countries keep moving in the right one, the simple fact will be that some other country will eventually become a better place to live, especially for the people here who are footing the bill. The brightest and wealthiest (who are the most mobile) will be the first to take advantage of this. I don't see the equivalent of Galt's Gulch yet, but Chile of all places has at least managed to privatize its social security-type program. Global competition, Crid. The United States is acting like General Motors, ignoring Honda and Toyota at its own risk (Pirate Jo).

Sure, other places may be more fun to live. But when you move there, you'll still be counting on the beneficence of the voters, taxpayers and soldiers of the United States to keep your buns pink, chubby, and safe. Don't kid yourself. They don't do things better in Canada, they just have more things already done for them by happenstance.

"For decades, women have been telling us that things will be run differently with women in charge."

Oh come on. Wouldn't it be worth it just to see the Arab reaction?

"They don't do things better in Canada, they just have more things already done for them by happenstance."

Well Canada may not be spending trillions on a war in Iraq, but they're not exactly a laissez-faire paradise either. I wasn't thinking of them. The rest of what you said is true, but only for now. The situation we are in, if it continues, will weaken the U.S. I really don't see other countries as being necessarily more "fun" to live in than the USA, although at least they don't all waste a fortune throwing pot smokers in jail. I am thinking more along the lines that another country may emerge that doesn't work quite so hard to pillage its most productive citizens. Maybe it would rather ATTRACT them. Ask Amy what it's like to pay double on Social Security, just because she had the initiative and courage to be self-employed.

Oh come on. Wouldn't it be worth it just to see the Arab reaction (Pirate Jo)?Yes! LOL Good point.

I'm actually in favor of a woman president. I think we'd have the rhetorical credibility to get some things fixed, like having women register for Selective Service.

I just wish it was someone with an intellect and temperament like Margret Thatcher's and a body like Ségolène Royal's. Am I setting my standards too high?

I just discovered over at reason.com that Bob Barr is expected to announce his bid for the Libertarian Party. Well! I may not agree with him completely about everything, but at least I could vote for him and not feel dirty. Given the Republocrat options, I must admit I'd probably vote for whoever the Libertarian Party stuck in front of me.

People don't dislike Hillery because she's a woman, they dislike her because she's a sneaky lying bitch. She was born an ex-wife. After eight years of her, America would resemble one of those tiny countries where they paint everything in pretty bright colors to take your mind off the smell of sewage. A country doesn't need mothering, it needs leadership. She only wants to become president because nothing pleases her more than the feel of warm fuzzy nuts in her clenched fist. I will give her credit for one thing though, she scores better looking babes than her husband!

McCain doesn't exactly send a charge up my leg either. Have you seen that goiter on the side of his head lately? I think it's time he came clean with the medical records. Hes starting to look like that guy in the old movie, "How to get ahead in advertising." I swear I saw that thing wink at me!

> Maybe it would rather
> ATTRACT them

That border fence, the one for which environmental waivers are sought, is designed to keep decent Mexican neighbors out... People known the world over for working like Hell for pennies.

The United States. Whatta con-try!

Seriously, almost everything good on this planet happens here the best. Schools, corporations, all of it. And one needn't be a button-busting jingoist to be, um, surprised as people discuss their patriotism in terms of such twitching, hair-trigger "loyalty" as to make children's cereal marketer shiver with shame.

I'm not a fan of the border fence either - was just reading some articles that compared the free trade of manufactured goods to the free trade of labor. It is a good comparison - people tout free trade when it comes to importing clothing made in China, but why does our interest in free trade stop when it comes to labor?

You may be right (for now) that almost everything good on this planet happens here the best, but please do not include schools in that list.

I would feel a lot more loyal to the USA if it was loyal to itself - as in, respecting its own Constitution and not letting big government programs screw people. I actually LIKE that you compare it to a consumer switching brands. Private markets have always done a better job of meeting the needs of people than government because they face competition. Once you put the government in charge of something (like, oh, those schools you mentioned) we are hosed, because then you have to go through a constipated political process to get anything changed. But even the monolithic U.S. government is faced with competition.

Two hundred years ago, people came to this country in droves because it was better than the countries they came from. Were they being "disloyal" or "unpatriotic?" What is wrong with people seeking a better life elsewhere? And people still come here in droves in search of a better life - the USA still attracts some of the world's best and brightest. But will that still be the case in 15 years? I can easily imagine the tide turning, and the US become a country people emigrate FROM.

First of all, this wasn't meant to be particularly critical of you. You certainly weren't indulging in the kind of entitled whining that I brought about as the topic here.

> please do not include
> schools in that list.

I meant colleges and Universities. I'm not sure I could even name another university elsewhere in the world, except by dropping a city name in front. Exceptions: (Oxford, Sorbonne, um, er....) There's probably a Bujumbura University. Would you send your daughter there? Can you name a world-famous-&-respected Japanese, Korean, or East European university? Me neither. After growing up in a college town, that's what comes to mind when you say "school". K-12 education is completely uninteresting because I never had kids (and did so poorly then myself that it's best not to think about it at all.) Readin' writin' and 'rithmetic are someone else's problem.

> as in, respecting its
> own Constitution

Look, the Constitution comes up almost every week here on this blog. It gets all sorts of attention. Everybody has an opinion about what it means. Ask Raddy... He's wrong, but he'll happily explain it all for you.

> Private markets have always
> done a better job of meeting
> the needs

Only when they're lawful, well- (if maybe not tightly-) regulated and played by honest contestants. Most of the worlds market's aren't like that. They're run by the Village Big Man, and he's not taking prisoners. (Hello, Mr. Putin!)

> people came to this
> country in droves

First, they're still coming.

Second, they didn't leave because of petty complaints. If, after buying Crest toothpaste for decades, you bought a tube that was spoiled or something, no one would care or be surprised if you moved over to Colgate. But people don't leave their countries with that same casualness.

Consider the Irish and Italians and other Europeans who came over in the middle and late 19th. They dropped their languages and the rest of the culture pretty quickly (Boston excepted.) For a long time, immigrants gave up the whole ball of wax to embrace America, because that ball of wax wasn't so big or useful anyway. Of course there's always ethnic pride, but it's not like your average second generation immigrant is yearning to get back to Ulster or Parma or Shanghai... And most of the customs of their parent's origin have been happily sacrificed. It's like changing brands of toothpaste and having to grow a new mouth full of teeth... For them, it was worth it.

> I can easily imagine the
> tide turning, and the US
> become a country people
> emigrate FROM.

If that happens, it won't come "easily". And you'd miss it like HELL. There's so much automatic stuff here, so much righteousness that's built-in, that people don't even see it. They won't miss it until they go somewhere else and need it.

Here comes a story! It's pretty long, but at least it's pretty boring, too.

Last night I was talking to a new friend at work. He's going to Cozumel to scuba dive for a week. I used to do a lot of diving, and he's going to enjoy it a lot, and it was neat to talk about all the funny little countries I'd been to. So I'm think about that as I'm driving home on the Santa Monica freeway at about 11:15.

A a car spins out two hundred yards in front of me at about 80 miles an hour (same direction.) It weaves left, weaves right (check my mirrors) weaves LEFT weaves RIGHT, hail of sparks (everyone sees it we're all braking). Then a ton of metal twists towards the stars in that action-movie kind of way: "Hey, that deodorant-shaped thing is his muffler!" And then you hear the noise and realize that someone very near to you, in that same moment, is having bones broken and vital tissues punctured. He'll be landing near the interior guardrail, but he's still moving, and other cars are colliding with him. You can hear it.

So let's count the seconds! Squeeze the stopwatch... Now! (clickclickclick)

- :25 My car is parked well out of traffic with the brake set and the emergency flashers on.

- :35 I'm collecting traffic cones from a nearby construction project to slow the oncoming vehicles.

- :45 I turn back to the freeway to dart across and drop the cones and check on the victim... and see that half-a-dozen other people have done the same thing. I shout at one guy to take out his cell phone to call it in. He silently points to a woman standing near the empty wreckage who's speaking calmly into her Nokia. She wasn't the victim, she's just stopped to help. She's about seven-and-a-half months pregnant. But the guy in the wreck had been drunk and made a run for it.

- 1:25 Construction workers arrive to lay out the cones in a more professional pattern. (Seriously. That really happened.)

- 2:20 Everyone else is OK. The pregnant passerby says she'll wait for the cops to tell them the guy ran.

- 3:10 Firetrucks with college-educated emergency response personnel.

- 3:22 I drive home.

- 3:23 The End.

- 3:24 (Except for that line from Michael Clayton: "Cops like hit and runs. They work 'em hard and they clear 'em fast.")

Now, let's compare and contrast. Go to the travel section of your bookstore, and open a Frommer, Fodor or Lonely Planet. Randomly pick a country, not just a scuba diving destination. Go to the index and read what you're supposed to do if there's an accident. It will probably say:

Do not stop to assist other victims or mingle with villagers. Immediately return to the Big City, go to your hotel, lock the door, and call the guy who sold you the insurance. If it's a weekend, go down to the lounge by the lobby and start drinking. If other patrons see you crying, pretend it's because of a woman.

Sometimes there's an extra paragraph that goes like this:

The Authors understand that you think of yourself as a nice, reasonable person who doesn't want to dodge responsibilities... But that's just not how things are done in the real world.

You can leave the United States if you want to, but don't let your imagination convince you that things will go better in Paradise. You already live in Heaven. And again, most of the places you'd wanna go are peaceful because the United States likes them enough to make it so.

"For decades, women have been telling us that things will be run differently with women in charge. Yet, when I take them at their word, people begin to claim that things won't be different. It has every appearance of faulty ad hoc reasoning." Jeff.

ah, but you see Jeff, I never said or claimed that anything should or will be different with women in charge. I don't believe it to be true. Every president acts or reacts slightly differently to situation. But they still have to have a sense of what lies down each path. They still have advisors, they still have congress to answer to. The answers to the questions are based on precedence, and law. It is true that a president could veer off wildly, and decide to invade Lichtenstein, but I am going to bet that would have nothing to do with gender, as much as going insane. It could be true of either gender. The rules that a president lives under, are not tailored to their gender, and we would not expect them to change.

On your other points, especially the tragedy of the commons, I would invite you to explain your explanation. The thumbnail sketch didn't do much to help me... esp. since it has been an awefully long time since I read the federalist papers...

Ultimately I am failing to see why any exceptions should be made for the presidency based on gender. If no exceptions are made, that would seem to make the gender of the president irrelevant.

Hey Crid, I'm not disagreeing with anything you have said. I think we are talking about two different things: the USA the way it is now, versus the way the USA (and other countries) will be in 15-20 years. My comments have more to do with trends than a snapshot of the current state. Only time will tell.

And of course I would miss home - I'm like a hobbit who's still in love with the Shire.

Given the way Napalitano kisses Joe Arpio's ass I doubt she'd amount to much, hasnt really done that much as a govener either