I deliberated long and hard about posting these, and they are not the only examples bouncing around on the web. In the end, they are Hillary news, so I suppose they merit some attention.
The first one, by Maureen Dowd, appeared days ago. I first saw it in the New York Times. This particular publication came from The Seattle Times. Alluding to remarks HRC delivered last week at the Women in the World Summit, Dowd postulates thus.
Originally published Wednesday, March 14, 2012 at 3:30 PM
A riled Hillary is a formidable foe
The attempt by Republican men to wrestle American women back into chastity belts has not only breathed life into President Obama, writes Maureen Dowd, it has roused and riled Hillary Rodham Clinton — not a wise thing to do.
By Maureen Dowd
Syndicated columnist
Hillary Clinton has fought for women’s rights around the world. But who would have dreamed that she would have to fight for them at home?
“Why extremists always focus on women remains a mystery to me,” she told an adoring crowd at the Women in the World Summit at Lincoln Center on Saturday. “But they all seem to. It doesn’t matter what country they’re in or what religion they claim. They want to control women. They want to control how we dress. They want to control how we act. They even want to control the decisions we make about our own health and bodies.
The war on women in this country is genuine. We need our women leaders, and I am sure most American women see Hillary Clinton as the most powerful and vocal of these, particularly on women’s issues, but Hillary cannot do it alone. She needs her army behind her. Women need to recognize the level of threat to their personal freedom, get mad, and get active.
Men, even those on our side of the aisle, do not share the sense of urgency Dowd telegraphs. They put forth her name but… not now.
From The Gothamist.
Hillary Clinton 2016: Pundit Put Likelihood At 99.4%
Secretary Clinton at the 2012 Global Chiefs of Mission Conference yesterday (AP)Will the Sisterhood of the Traveling Pantsuits come back in four years? Game Change authors John Heilemann and Mark “Obama is a dick” Halperin were on Morning Joe this morning predicting that Secretary of State is interested in running for President again.
Heilemann, who covers politics for New York magazine said the chances were “99.4. I think very high,” while Halperin, an editor at Time, said, “A little lower. I think that if Joe Biden wins re-election and runs, she’s much less likely to run.”
Then there is Ed Koch, former Mayor of New York, who sometimes pals around with Republicans. As Politico reports.
Ed Koch pushes Clinton on 2016 run
By BYRON TAU |
3/15/12 5:21 PM EDT
(AP Photo)
Former New York City mayor and Hillary Clinton booster Ed Koch wants to see a Clinton 2016 run, and he made his feelings clear to the Secretary of State at Wednesday’s state dinner, according to the New York Times:
Mr. Koch also said he spoke with the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, and encouraged her to run for president in 2016.
“I said, ‘Everybody’s running you for president again — count me in!’” he said. “And there were other people there who applauded.”
I have been addressing the issue of the war on women primarily at The Department of Homegirl Security , which is a defense blog, and not in the context of Hillary making another presidential run. But in this particular post, Falling Short, I did state a position similar to what Dowd said. Women leaders, acting as surrogates for Obama on this issue inspire far more confidence in me than he who prefers to lead from behind. Dowd’s questions mirror my own thinking. She ends her op-ed thus:
Women who assumed that electing Obama would lift all minority boats are beginning to think: Maybe he’s not enough.
If the desire of all these conservative male leaders to yoke women is this close to the surface, if they are perversely driven to debase women even though it could lead to their own political demise, then women may require more than Obama.
If women are so vulnerable, they may need one of their own.
Is she inevitable?
It is possible that she is, but generals do not win wars without troops. She needs her army. I know you are all still here. We have been together for almost five years now and never left her side. Join Americans Elect. Be a delegate for Hillary because, no, Obama will not be or do enough and we cannot afford to lose this war.
Still4Hill 
When Hillary talks about women’s issues, she means what she says and she has a 40-year record to back it up. Obama and the religious wingnuts are just using women as political footballs to shore up points with their base. If this War On Women was really about birth control and women’s health, then they would have fought it back in 2009, before the health care bill was passed. But no, they waited until 2012 and we all know why. It’s pure Alinskyism on both sides. I refuse to let them manipulate me like that.
This country needs a real leader and her name is Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton!
LikeLike
Let’s not wait until 2016–let’s do it in 2012!
LikeLike
I know, I hate when all the pundits talk about Hillary 2016, if we don’t fight and BO is reelected the unDem party and our country will be destroyed and Hill 2016 will be impossible.If is not 2012 then make Romney or other defeat BO and Hillary will have more chances to win in 2016.We need her now.HILLARY 2012!
LikeLike
We need her now – and she is talking to us now. It’s time!
LikeLike
Yes, now is the time! Don’t get me wrong, I am 100 percent in favor of Hillary 2016– as her SECOND term.
LikeLike
Yes!
LikeLike
We sure need her now, we can not wait, she can not wait either.
LikeLike
There’s no question that HRC is still the best qualified person to be POTUS. The main problem I see is that the DNC is still on Obama’s side; he’s now the incumbent President, and that carries a lot of weight; he also (I hate to admit it) has become a competent POTUS, though not a slouch on what HRC would’ve been from her first day in office (Day One, as she always said).
My question is whether or not she’d want to run as a third-party candidate. She didn’t in ’08; I know I raised the possibility with one of her good friends (I won’t say which one, but I had a dialogue for a while going) and she just couldn’t do it; the feeling was that it would tarnish Bill Clinton’s legacy and as his loving wife, there was _no way_ she was about to do that. (Which made me sad. Here she is, a vibrant, wonderful woman, who has to be concerned about her husband — something every good wife is, of course — and that’s why she had to back off.)
Now, she’s had 4 years of being an exceptionally visible, articulate, incredible Secretary of State; she’s raised her status, if anything, over ’08, and has shown that she commands tremendous respect around the world. She also can work with the Republican hotheads that BHO can’t.
If BHO, even now, said he was stepping aside for her, I’d rejoice; she’s truly the best choice for the country. But that’s hard for any POTUS to do, much less a young man like BHO — LBJ was much older when _he_ stepped aside to give someone else a chance in 1968. And then there’s Joe Biden in the mix, too — I’ve always seen him as two men: a buffoon in public, a hard-nosed, shrewd deal-maker in private. Biden likes HRC, but of course Biden wants to be POTUS; he ran _twice_, for crying out loud; Biden _has_ to believe that if BHO gets elected in 2012, it’s Biden’s turn in 2016. He’d be likely to put HRC on the ballot as his VP, yes, but he’d not step aside for her, I don’t think — he has way too much ego for that.
I keep hoping the way will open that will allow her to run for — and win — the Presidency this year. But all of the same problems from ’08 exist; Bill Clinton is still alive, he surely is still worried about his legacy, and she still loves him and doesn’t want to tarnish his legacy. So I see her as stuck.
I truly wish it were otherwise because we need _her_. No one else will do.
LikeLike
I really think the game has changed with this war on women. It is huge and serious and, like MoDo, I do not see Obama stepping up to the plate on this. We need Joltiin’ Hill for this fight. Things can turn on a dime and this one is OUR dime.
For the record: I would prefer no comparisons to Hitler or other ruthless dictators on this blog except as they might be raised by the SOS herself in her published remarks. For the record, I deleted all the posts referring and replying.
LikeLike
I’ll agree that this current political scene is practically made for her, but barring the third party run that was mentioned above – a move that would strip her of a lot of financial and logistical campaign support to say the least – it looks like she is politically irrelevant for the first time in something like twenty years. You can tell that she’d probably like to be involved when you listen to her speech at the 2012 Women in the World summit and she’s made a couple of quasi-political statements in some interviews, but it doesn’t seem possible.
LikeLike
As I said. Things can turn on a dime. Nothing is certain.
LikeLike
All week, the right wing have been attacking Hillary for her remarks about women and extremism. Earlier, the Romney Superpac included Hillary in not one but TWO of their anti-Santorum ads. None of this would be happening if she were politically relevant. The Republicans definitely see her as a threat.
LikeLike
You meant if she were politically irrelevant, right? I don’t see how the most powerful and popular woman in government is politically irrelevant.
LikeLike
She can’t endorse. She can’t campaign. She can’t run for office.
I’m not doubting that she is powerful or popular. What I’m saying is that, as far as actually mechanics of this presidential cycle, she can’t participate and if you cannot participate in the process then you are irrelevant to the process. To be fair, she isn’t entirely irrelevant, but for all her might and influence, she is only as relevant as your average, ordinary citizen.
LikeLike
She managed to talk about the war on women, however, didn’t she?
LikeLike
Through her force of influence, not her short-term political prospects.
LikeLike
Whatever gets the job done.
LikeLike
Yeah, I meant irrelevant. I might have even typed it correctly– sometimes my cursor freezes and I end up with word fragments. It only happens when I’m online, not when I am using my word processor. And of course, there’s no edit button here.
LikeLike
It’s been strange seeing her in those ads, actually, but I guess she’s there because Nancy Pelosi is losing her effectiveness as the ODSL (Official Democrat Scary Lady). As long as Hillary Clinton draws breath, the GOP will see her as a threat, but I stand by my claim regarding political (ir)relevancy and here’s why.
*She can’t run a primary against Obama.
*Biden just gave a great speech in Ohio, so I think the Obama/Biden ticket is secure. (Obama would look really bad ditching him, anyway.)
*There is little to no chance of her running as a third party candidate.
*Her husband is putting himself out there as an Obama surrogate.
*I don’t think she’d just run out on the State Department. Yes, we can hear the hints of transition in her words, but if she were to make a serious surprise bid for the Presidency, she would literally have to be there one day and be gone the next. It would be a mess and I don’t think she could leave it like that.
Bottom line, she has a lot of clout. She has since the nineties and she will be the closest thing we have to royalty in this country for a long time to come, but that doesn’t make her relevant in any strategic way. She can’t endorse. She can’t campaign. As mighty a force as she is (I’m not questioning that for a minute), the fact that she can’t take an active role in the process makes her no more relevant to this year’s election (theoretically) than you or me. If she leaves the State Department before the election, that calculus changes, but for now she’s a spectator like the rest of us.
LikeLike
This would probably be more at home on the other blog, but i found it interesting regarding the attacks on women’s health in the past few years.
http://news.yahoo.com/this-campaign-needs-more-women-and-less-gynecology.html
LikeLike
Given the MoDo article, it is perfectly appropriate here at this point. The SOS has spoken out on this – I think it fits.
Edited to add: Now I see why she included the U.S. in the human rights report!
LikeLike
This and all the hardline immigration stuff.
LikeLike
Well, I take offense that the author of that article thinks Playboy is just for men. Ah, hah! ;D But I digress, these issues *shouldn’t* be political, but they’re “wedge issues,” just like… dear G-d… gay marriage, and as long as wedges are cut out of watermelons…… Well, I don’t see an end to the circus.
LikeLike
Everything is such a mess. I despair for the country. Alas, I don’t see Hillary running in 2012. She’s far too loyal to the party.
LikeLike
I don’t know, Bea. My bones are telling me something, and it has to do with the Republicans and women. Obama is not doing so well with women either.
LikeLike
The Republicans are idiots not to go back to 2008 and use the Obama campaign’s misogyny against him. Bros before hos, anyone? How about playing “99 Problems but a Btch Ain’t One of Them” at campaign rallies? Or the “periodically” remark? I know the PUMAs remember all of this and more. It’s all out there– the GOP ad wizards could find it with just a few clicks on the Internet. But no, they don’t use it. And why not? Because they’re afraid of Hillary.
LikeLike
Yeah, I just saw a clip where Jay-Z edited his song to be “99 Problems but a Bush ain’t one.” Just an all around bad choice. The double entendre with the word “bush” is as bad as the rest of it. I’m not defending it at all. I just don’t think he was too intelligent thinking about that one.
LikeLike
Maybe so, but the Democratic party is not going to dump Obama. He’s the first biracial president and they would never want to offend AA. Obama is the incumbent and, win or lose, he’ll be their candidate.
LikeLike
And, historically, parties have hung on to worse incumbents. Nixon, anyone? And it gets crazier when you look at state politics.
LikeLike
That’s why I said somewhere else here – all these really bad things are going to the states. Scary stuff.
LikeLike
I just thought of something. She might not be able to retire from State when she wants to.
If Obama gets re-elected, and if the country remains as sharply divided as it is at the moment, he might not be able to get a new Secretary of State confirmed by the Senate. I don’t think your girl would leave the nation without a Secretary of State, so we’d get to keep her a while longer.
LikeLike
John Kerry. Count on it. Easily confirmed. But it won’t be a hearing where Chris Matthews will be able to say,”I’ve never seen anybody know so much about so much..” Why do you think he was at the Chiefs of Mission luncheon?
That’s IF Obama is reelected. And that’s a BIG IF!
LikeLike
The Senate had no problem with Obama’s choice to head the CFPB, but he still had to be a recess appointment because the Senate refused to even try to confirm him. I don’t see Kerry as an easy confirmation particularly if the race is close and the Republicans are still a little bitter. Also, Democrats keeping hold of the Senate is in no way guaranteed. If it’s a Republican controlled Senate, all bets are off as to how long basic parliamentary procedure will take let alone getting Cabinet officials confirmed.
It will be a close race. Dear god, did you ever think that the country would ever be this close to a Santorum presidency?
LikeLike
IF Obama is elected, Dems will not lose the Senate. Kerry will be an easy in.
It won’t be Santorum and it might not be Romney. A couple of White Knights can ride in. That will change everything. (I have specifics in mind,)
LikeLike
Do I want to know, or will it pain my soul?
LikeLike
Yes, it will and the Dems will need bigger guns than Obama/Biden. Unfortunately neither of them is Christie Whitman with whom, I, strangely, find myself agreeing lately and w.ho would fight for women.
LikeLike
😦 My poor soul.
LikeLike
You should get on you knees and pray that the White Knight is Christie Whitman. That would be a real game changer, but I’m afraid she is not on their radar. If she came in, the jouster on the other horse would have to be the one who could beat her.
But she is neither of the knights I have in mind.
LikeLike
Tell me one of these “Knights” isn’t riding in from Alaska on a caribou!
LikeLike
No.
LikeLike
Well, at least that’s something positive.
LikeLike
Kerry would be ready to take the SOS job now if Hillary were to step aside. He probably even knows which tie he’ll wear for his first day on the job.
LikeLike
If you think Obama/Biden are going to go to the mat for your right to control your body, have at it. Obama will fight just as hard for your health care rights as he did for the single payer option (that would have obviated all of this mess). You might have had reason to hope in 2008, but now there is a record, and it is pitiful.
LikeLike
No, frankly, I don’t see any of the candidates going to any mat for my concerns on anything. Stasis, however painful, is better than regressing back to the fifties, though.
LikeLike
Don’t count on stasis. This is all going back to the states. Obama doesn’t have the guts to fight for big government.
LikeLike
I don’t count on stasis, but it’s all I can hope for based on the options before me.
LikeLike
Alas, I agree with you S4H. Haha, I pushed the “shift” button, and the “4” in your name changed to “$.” Big bucks all around! ;D Seriously, though. A lot of people seemed to forget that Biden didn’t exactly aide Anita Hill when she fought Clarence Thomas. All things considered…….
LikeLike
Agreed, Still. And believe you me, I want *you* to be right, not me. I really do hope there still *is* a way to get a HRC Presidency in 2012 when we need her even more desperately than we needed her in ’08 (and ’08’s need was staggering; I don’t know how to discuss how much we need her now as I’d need at least 10,000 words, all consisting of variations on the world “HELP!”).
At any rate, I think _Biden_ would fight for women. I think Obama will be tepid even though he has a very strong woman for a wife and two daughters; he just isn’t that great at this, sorry (as I said, he’s now _competent_, after nearly four years of trying; that isn’t a compliment).
HRC definitely would be the best choice to be POTUS for this and every other reason you or I could possibly think of — I just don’t see how we get there as of yet.
LikeLike
As I always say, things can turn on a dime. So I do what HRC says to do: Watch and wait.
LikeLike
[…] still get into the race that late. Ironically, that was the day I posted the last in the series Media Reads on a Hillary Run. The central reason why that was the last was the shift of attention from 2012 to […]
LikeLike