Is Hillary Rodham Clinton's hair out of bounds as an issue in the presidential campaign? How about her voice? Or her marriage, namely, whether she got where she is because she married Bill?
Finally, there's the complaint that the media are overanalyzing how Clinton balances a soft side with the toughness needed in a commander in chief.
"The assumption that tough and feminine are mutually exclusive is a sexist preconception," wrote Ramona Oliver of the group Emily's List, which raises money for Democratic women who support abortion rights - and which has endorsed Clinton.
For example, Oliver said, one recent New York Times analysis "relegates the embracing of our roles as mothers to a cynical calculus of political assets and liabilities. Does anybody question the ability of a man to simultaneously be a caring father and a strong leader?"
I tend to agree. What's more, it might be better for the country to ask how well a politician would treat other people's children rather than his - or her - own.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
"Are Clinton's hair, voice and marriage vital to her campaign?"
Steven Thommas, McClatchy Newspapers: