Is @HillaryClinton ~REALLY~ The First Female Candidate For A Major Political Party?
Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Thursday, June 9, 2016
In a word, no… and yes. But to fully understand, one needs to understand the Clintons’ technical use of the English language.
Tuesday night, June 8, 2016, addressing an audience in Brooklyn, Hillary Clinton said that for the first time in American history “a woman will be a major party’s nominee.”
Earlier, on 7:27 PM – 7 Jun 2016, she Tweeted that “For the first time in our history, a woman will be a major party’s nominee for President of the United States.”So, let’s parse words.
The Clintons – Bill & Hillary – are expert at using the technicalities and nuances of language. During his impeachment trial, then-President Clinton became infamous for his testimony under oath about the experiential scope and nature of his physical relationship with Monica Lewinsky, when he said this during a video-taped deposition which later became Grand Jury testimony:
“It depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the—if he—if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not—that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement.”
So in order to get around this – something the Clintons are expert at doing – the comment she made of herself was that she was (or would be) the first female candidate for a “major” party. That is a very legal, very technical phrasing.
Earlier, Stephen Colbert, host of the CBS television show “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” made mock of Hillary’s legalistic technical phrasing by saying she “has been dogged by questions of trustworthiness,” adding that “even Richard Nixon knew to say ‘I am not a crook’!”
Some say Hillary Clinton is the first female presidential nominee of a “major American party…”
That may – or may not be – correct. But, she is ~NOT~ the 1st female Presidential candidate/nominee.
That dignity belongs to Victoria Claflin Woodhull (née), Victoria Woodhull Martin (September 23, 1838 – June 9, 1927) who was the leader of the American Woman’s Suffrage movement, and who in 1872 became the first Female Candidate for President of the United States.
Later, in 1884, Belva Ann Lockwood became the Presidential nominee of the National Equal Rights Party. Only four years later, in 1888, she was again the party’s nominee.
In 1940, Gracie Allen (comedic sidekick and spouse to George Burns) became the presidential nominee of the Surprise Party.
In 1952, Ellen Linea W. Jensen was the Presidential nominee of the Washington Peace Party. That same year, Mary Kennery was the Presidential nominee of the American Party.
And Agnes Waters was the Presidential nominee of the American Woman’s Party also in 1952.
In 1968, Charlene Mitchell became the Presidential nominee for the Communist Party.
In 1972, Linda Jenness and Evelyn Reed were the Socialist Workers Party Presidential nominees, each carrying 25 states.
In 1976, Margaret White was the People’s Party presidential nominee.
In 1980, Ellen McCormack was the Presidential nominee of the Right to Life Party, while that same year Maureen Smith was the Peace and Freedom Party’s Presidential nominees, and Deirdre Griswold was the Workers World Party’s Presidential nominee.
Since 1980, there have been 22 female Presidential nominees in 16 different political parties.
So I find it disingenuously specious, even cavalier, to assert that Hillary Clinton is the “first” anything… other than former First Lady.
It’s also damaging, I think, to the democratic electoral process itself to promote an either/or Democrat/Republican political mentality.
It is my opinion that type of thinking is precisely the problem which has brought us to the fore of many of our present troubles.