Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Politics | 05/09/2008 9:06 am

Everything I Hate About Myself I See in Hillary, by Judy Bachrach

EDITOR’S NOTE: Judy Bachrach writes for Vanity Fair, and is the creator of thecheckoutline.org, an online advice column for friends and relatives of the terminally ill.

When I was 25 (okay, 32), I got dumped by my first untrue love. He’d fallen, six years into our relationship, for his next-door neighbor, a really pretty actress with the IQ of an asparagus and the ability to fill many a conversational lull with tributes to liposuction. But I digress.

The point is what happened after I got dumped. There was no stopping me. I wrote the guy letters. Long ones. I wrote articles, nominally on other topics, but really about him and the way he dumped me. These, unfortunately, got published. I phoned him in the pathetic hope of raising my stock by trashing his new girlfriend, along with the caliber of the movies in which she very, very briefly appeared. This was, as you will likely surmise, amazingly easy to do and also totally ineffective. I didn’t – couldn’t — let go of a guy who exchanged me for a moron, and I can’t believe these many years later that I’m telling you all this because the memory of my mortifying, excruciating almost erotic attachment to stone-cold failure haunts me to this day.

I was, in other words, simply a younger version of Hillary Rodham Clinton. I simply could not get out of the race, even though, let’s face it, the race was over.

What can I say? Everything I hate about myself I see in Hillary. It’s not the stuff you might suspect, either. Hillary’s self-absorption; her sense that the election is not about Iraq or defaulted mortgages or Wall Street piggery, or her; her Bosnian strolls down memory lane; her long and eventful relationship with Bill — this is why much of the press dislikes her, maybe with reason. But not me.

I don’t even hate Hillary because she screwed up health care. Frankly, anyone can screw up health care. It’s the other aspects of Hillary that make me squirm. To put it bluntly: they are uncomfortably familiar.

What kills me is the way Hillary deals with men other than her husband, especially powerful men. Whenever Hillary thinks Obama is onto something – a phrase, say, or even a piece of rhetoric, however tedious – she doesn’t do what most politicians do: which is to, say, challenge it. No, what Hillary does is fiddle with a syllable or two and then appropriate the last thing that pops out of her rival’s mouth as though it were her own (Yes we WILL!!).

Whenever Hillary hears a new idea, however stupid – ‘Let’s suspend the federal gas tax for the entire summer, and to hell with the laws of supply and demand! Let’s authorize Bush to take military action in Iraq and sit back and see what happens!’ – she grabs it, devours it, and calls it her own.

Then, if some new powerful guy comes along and disputes the very strategy she’s adopted from a previous powerful guy – like, oh, let’s say, maybe Obama might come along and dispute the wisdom of our military presence in Iraq — Hillary will turn around and repudiate every previous position in order to espouse that one too. In fact she’ll say she completely regrets “the way the president used the authority.” Like she never gave it up, panting and groaning.

I know I’m not supposed to talk about her that way, as though she were a groupie groveling before a rock star. I’m supposed to, as a close friend recently suggested, “understand that Hillary has to pander.” But you know what? One of the wonderful things about getting older is that you can actually stop pandering, and make your decisions clear-eyed, without reference to gender.

I’m voting for a guy.

294 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Dr. Wendy  Joy
One socialist , Hillary , being less dangerous than the other, and Mrs. Obama being worst of all , I am amused at both candidates’s obvious lack of qualifications for the High Office . There is no real choice , regardless of what Party affiliation one has chosen . And it is neither of the socialists .
By Dr. Wendy Joy on 05/09/2008 11:41 am
Myrna n
Keep drinking the Kool-Aid. Obama will fast track us to the third world country of which he dreams and of which Michelle (“me & Barack”) could finally be proud. I too will vote for a man but it surely won’t be Barack.
By Myrna n on 05/09/2008 11:48 am
Aredee Badger
bob mirabile wrote: “barack will try and redistribute what s left of the wealth of the middle class.” I’m afraid Bush has beaten him to it. He’s distributed the middle class wealth to the rich. David Letterman was right: both Hillary and Bush need exit strategies.
By Aredee Badger on 05/09/2008 11:50 am
bob mirabile
Ardee, all i need to hear from barack or Michelle is ‘peace .bread and land ‘then i know that trotsky has reappeared from the grave . our countries backbone is the middle class and we are diminmishing in our returns. I cannot see how my children can ‘do better than me’ as I did better than my wwII veteran father. Our immigrant drive from my grandfather that each of us owes the ‘next generation’ to be better is being destroyed . Bush as kept us safe by utilizing the military tactic of ‘supression fire’ but gave away ‘our treasure’ by prolonging the tactic.. we need a man/woman to be honest and ask the question’ how do we stay safe and build the economy. these are not mutually exclusive principals the plain fear about obama is that we will become the ‘welfare nation state’ pandering to every special interest than raises an issue .. we as a people can not afford obama
By bob mirabile on 05/09/2008 12:07 pm
R W
Hate to admit being a conservative Republican but a dose of old fashioned liberalism and New Deal style economic regulation are what we need now. Nice try Dr. Klein. No one could ever believe you were a conservative, since no conservative could possibly vote for Obama who is a died-in-the-wool big gubmint socialist if there ever was one. John McCain is a liberal democrat running as a Republican, but unlike Obama he actually thinks there are one or two things that the government should stay out of.
By R W on 05/09/2008 11:51 am
Crispin Stuart
In her February 2nd piece in the Washington Post, Susan Eisenhower opened the door for conservatives to support Obama. Like Dr. Klein, I am of conseravtive bent, and will support Obama - by default. Youth, energy, passion and demeanor all in his favor. But that’s it. He’s quite the socialist. Let’s admit it folks, we are offered a menu of extremely meagre pickings this cycle - each candidate being unattractive in their own unique way. No matter how it is sliced or diced, America faces at least four upcoming years of continuous descent into third-world status. Go China!
By Crispin Stuart on 05/09/2008 12:36 pm
Best Man
When I read that David Geffen said something along the lines that, ‘the amazing thing about the Clintons isn’t that they lie…but rather how comfortable they are lying right to your face,’ I was finally comfortable saying I’m no longer a Clinton fan…but here’s the thing: Obama talks to me like I’m an adult…he speaks frankly and doesn’t seem to be ‘gaming’. I think he’s got something deeply genuine that will help this country hit the refresh button on our reputation and relationships across the shrinking world. Put another way… Hillary sucks…dug your article. Did we date? :-)
By Best Man on 05/09/2008 11:52 am
beth willis
Yes, I find myself making all my critical decisions after referencing David Geffen with whom I have nothing in common and whose agenda for America looks nothing like mine, whose billion dollar status leaves us in such a wide divide that were he to visit my neighborhood, he might require an interpreter and vice versa…..your middle school attack of Hillary is cute, although Obama may be negligent in talking to you “like an adult”. No offense intended.
By beth willis on 05/09/2008 12:23 pm
Ms. Dee
No, Mr. Man. That was me.
By Ms. Dee on 05/09/2008 6:55 pm
J.C. Gricious
Throughout their lives, the Clinton’s have been “partners in crime” setting out with desires to attain power, money and place in history. They have acted in ways that have put themselves ‘above any laws’ and hence, gotten away with so many things that others may have gone to jail over. Look at her history, and one can see that she has been aggressive, hostile and divisive—all the while she has hung onto her “politcally saavy, charismatic, opportunistic husband?” These two lusted from Arkansas beginnings to gain the Whitehouse, and once there, they acted more like ROYALTY, than “serving the people, in whose home(Whitehouse) they resided”, as it HAS, and ALWAYS was, about amassing: POWER, MONEY and the PRESTIGE/FAME. They were immediately accepted by the Holly-woodheads, who got entree into the Whitehouse, as if it were a Motel 6. What these types didn’t know about the Clinton’s charm, was how easily the Clintons made them feel “impressed with their own sense of importance” but all the while, they were using the Hollywoodheads to help amass money for their own personal cause, and getting the Mass Media to cover them, as they are so willing to do with the Stars? of Hollywood. They were used, and didn’t even realize it, by the Clinton’s, as they were feeling such empowerment (which is done with such ease by the Clinton’s when using whomever they need to) As David Geffen came to realize when he was the first to speak out about them: “most politicians lie, but the Clinton’s do it with such ease, it is frightening” He was right, and it is ONLY now that Holly-woodheads that ‘fell for their lies’, are starting to see that they were used by the Clinton’s. It is NO surprise that Hillary used the exposure of Monica, as her “springboard to political office-that she has wanted her whole life”. First, it was Bill’s turn, then she would hang onto him, as it would be her turn. This, was their arrangement from day one, as she used the woman out there to pander to, as the ‘wife who was the last to know, that she was married to a sex addict’….funny, but she has ALWAYS known about Bill(check out the late Barbara Olson’s: “Hell To Pay”) as it was Hillary, who was in charge of “Bimbo Erruptions”…she stood by, as he assaulted women, then set out with her detectives/goons, to find dirt on them, and attacked them a second time. The list is long, and she is the one who concocted the speech(standing off camera) when Bill went before the public, denying that he had “any relations with that woman, Ms.Lewinsky”. As stated, Hillary, stayed with him and was his ‘partner in many, many crimes’, of which “money-laundering through their family fund, and library are just a few, as they took $$$$ from(and STILL ARE) many dubious sources-The Saudis, the Chinese, ANYONE, who needed pardons…You name it- they Collected from anyone in order to amass their personal fortunes and lust for a return to the Wh.House, in their lame attempts to get in, “and rewrite their sordid history. Funny thing about facts though….THEY CANNOT BE ERASED, AND WHEN YOU SPEAK CERTAIN WORDS, YOU OWN THEM.
By J.C. Gricious on 05/09/2008 11:52 am
zut alors
Guys, GUYS? All the rancor, and talk of Saudis. Can we just take a moment and feel the LUV?? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRhDzpJV2TM&feature=related
By zut alors on 05/09/2008 1:34 pm
mary lou s
suzanne, you beat me to it and did it with video. now that’s class! i was about to remind people of the bush-bin laden axis, from neil bush whose father bailed out silverado in about 1988 to george w, who was bailed out by a bin laden (harken energy) to marvin:they use the federal government as their personal atm machine.
By mary lou s on 05/09/2008 10:53 pm
Vinny  Yacko
Bravo, Judy! I always thought defending Bill was a mistake and more harm would come. Kind of like saying marijuana does not hurt anyone. Just all those involved, or connected to those involved. But sorry, in this election I can’t vote for either.
By Vinny Yacko on 05/09/2008 12:02 pm
T S
Liked the article..liked it a lot. I would love to see a woman take a crack at the White House but first one needs to run. What I see before me in Hillary Clinton is a narcissistic, opportunistic, deceitful, phony, underhanded instrumental relativist. Oh…I forgot solipsist. There, now that I’ve let my inner bad girl dump Webster’s on her head, I’ll close with equal arrogance. If Hillary ran as a woman she would have closed down the show. Her “one of the boys” strategy (save of course well-done lipstick and the girlie coif) is what has done her in. She took all of the assets, power and strength of the “yin” side and traded it like a lame Pokemon card for more hyper-reflexive, mighty warrior, unrefined, primitive boy behavior. And no, I’m not a lesbian. Just an observer who thinks. Apology in advance for those who will disagree and spew back on this opinion.
By T S on 05/09/2008 12:04 pm
zut alors
Judy…You go where angles fear to tread. I admire your excellent writing. I wouldn’t vote for Hillary because she allowed uber-nationalism and political expediency to triumph over logic. She voted for the illegal Iraq invasion and against our Constitution and humanity. As one who volunteered 18 hour days trying to save our national reputation, treasury and the over 1M lives now needlessly snuffed out in an avoidable debacle, I remember well the devastating pain I felt on March 18, 2003 as the US rained “Shock and Awe” on a city of 5 million asleep in their beds, 50% innocent children under 15. What I felt then must be akin to what Hillary supporters are feeling today. However she feeds the dysfunction of this nation that must be eradicated to save it. I’m voting for Obama. We are in a global emergency and need a planetary Marshall Plan on the environment. The United States stands ALONE among the 173 nations on Earth in not signing the Kyoto Treaty when an amount equivalent to one week’s worth of dollars dumped into the Tigris Euphrates is all that is needed to start reversing the global crisis. We don’t lack the funds or means to save the world but the informed thinking and the valiant action that is required in the place of distracted, apathetic shoppers SUV-ing through McDonalds and Wal-Mart on the collective road to Hell. This short, undated talk given before the world’s leading-edge thinkers and doers says it all: http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/243
By zut alors on 05/09/2008 12:28 pm