Blogs and Stories
Hillary Finally Doffs Her Burqa
Mansoor Ahmed / AP Photo
Why we like seeing our strong women get tough.
Hooray! Hillary Clinton has taken her gloves off! The blue headscarf she wore in Pakistan was becoming (great look, solves the hair problem), but she has finally doffed her metaphorical burqa.
Her sharp words on Thursday when she told a bunch of Pakistani journalists that she found it "hard to believe that nobody in your government knows where they [al Qaeda] are and couldn't get them if they really wanted to” was a burst of candor that we’d like to hear more of.
"There is a perennial frustration in our reactions to women of power: we want them to do more, get tougher, fight harder on behalf of their own gender."
Or think we’d like to hear more of. There is a perennial frustration in our reactions to women of power: we want them to do more, get tougher, fight harder on behalf of their own gender. Allison Samuels’ article about Michelle Obama in this week’s Newsweek picks at the first lady for risking “failure” by “playing it safe,” and concludes that “some of the first lady's reticence may stem from a desire to avoid the missteps of her predecessors, especially Hillary Clinton.”
On Thursday night I found myself pitted against Samuels on Campbell Brown’s CNN show, with me cast as the nice one defending all those photo ops of Michelle wielding her scissors at recalcitrant parsnips in the White House vegetable garden. I argued—out of sisterly wish fulfillment, I now realize—that the first lady was just biding her time before a power surge next year. She has, after all, always been good at pacing herself. “Not my plan” is a recurring Michelle phrase in interviews when she reflects on how her husband’s political stardom had intruded on her own conception of what constituted a true partnership. But she is such a big, red-blooded star herself that we yearn for her to take center stage.
• Fatima Bhutto: Hillary’s Visit to Pakistan Is a CharadeNow we’re told that next year she will be the White House point person on childhood obesity. That’s nice. Plus, she visits the veterans a lot. So far, so traditional. But that power surge of frank speaking we hunger for is hardly realistic in a media culture where a flying sound bite can impale your agenda for the next six months. When Michelle showed her kick-ass side on the campaign trail ("For the first time in my adult lifetime, I'm really proud of my country") it caused so much flak for her husband that she was pretty much sent into hiding for two months. Do we really expect her to stick her neck out again and start sounding off on all the things Samuels wants her to raise hell about, like condoms and AIDS prevention as part of the already-contentious healthcare debate, or a full-scale attack on the junk food lobby? After all, if a first lady whose approval ratings are higher than the president’s raises an issue as a big national problem, isn’t she implicitly demanding that he do something about it? Is he going to thank her for that as he spends his long, grueling days shoveling out his predecessor’s economic Augean stable?
Hillary is more of a quandary to the still-devoted sisterhood. It’s a constant irritant to them not just that she lost the primaries to Obama, but that she was then denied the vice presidency because, again, of a man. In his new book The Audacity to Win, Obama’s campaign manager David Plouffe describes his boss’s musings about whom to tap for the second spot on the ticket. “I think Bill may be too big a complication,” Plouffe quotes his boss as saying. “If I picked her, my concern is that there would be more than two of us in the relationship.” Now that she’s in the third-biggest job, at the State Department, there remains an insidious carping vibe that she’s boxed in by boys who steal her thunder—not just the jostling high-profile envoys she helped to choose, but by preening grandstanders like Senator John Kerry, recently dispatched to Kabul to broker the election rerun with Karzai.
But those who long for Hillary’s big, rebellious moment forget that she is by nature a cautious politician, more like this president than the one she is married to. There is nothing radical about Obama except the fact of who he is. The same could be said of Hillary, who is by nature judicious and incremental and very pro-military, at times a little too dazzled by the medals and broad chests who come to give her briefings. Let's not forget it took an ugly Pakistani reception and a car bomb to rattle her from her smiling script.
Tina Brown is the founder and editor-in-chief of The Daily Beast. She is the author of the 2007 New York Times best seller The Diana Chronicles. Brown is the former editor of Tatler, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, and Talk magazines and host of CNBC's Topic A with Tina Brown.
For More of The Daily Beast, become a fan on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.
John Talks Joe
Lloyd Grove is editor at large for The Daily Beast. He is also a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.
Why America Must Learn to Bow
Martin Jacques is the cofounder of the UK think tank Demos, writes a regular column for The Guardian, and is a visiting research fellow at the London School of Economics Asia Research Centre. His new book, When China Rules the World, is available now.
Going Rogue: The Index
Christopher Buckley's books include Supreme Courtship, The White House Mess, Thank You for Smoking, Little Green Men, and Florence of Arabia. He was chief speechwriter for Vice President George H.W. Bush, and is editor-at-large of ForbesLife magazine. His new book is Losing Mum and Pup, a memoir. Buckley's Daily Beast column is the winner of an Online Journalism Award in the category of Online Commentary.
Sarah Drops the Act
Tina Brown is the founder and editor-in-chief of The Daily Beast. She is the author of the 2007 New York Times best seller The Diana Chronicles. Brown is the former editor of Tatler, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, and Talk magazines and host of CNBC's Topic A with Tina Brown.
Sarah Palin, the Musical
Tina Brown is the founder and editor-in-chief of The Daily Beast. She is the author of the 2007 New York Times best seller The Diana Chronicles. Brown is the former editor of Tatler, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, and Talk magazines and host of CNBC's Topic A with Tina Brown.
Philip Roth Unbound
Tina Brown is the founder and editor-in-chief of The Daily Beast. She is the author of the 2007 New York Times best seller The Diana Chronicles. Brown is the former editor of Tatler, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, and Talk magazines and host of CNBC's Topic A with Tina Brown.
The Daily Beast Video curates the most essential and entertaining video, and brings you original and exclusive productions from our talented contributors.
Could it be because we want mom to fix the boo-boo?
Well said, Tina. I loved it when Hillary took the gloves off and let the Pakistani students have it. It is so nice to hear a diplomat speak the truth instead of platitudes. And long overdue.
It could be simply because she is the head of the diplomatic side of the US government. The SoS is not supposed to talk too tough nor piss off foreign governments. The role is to get in the good graces of foreign leaders to the extent the US needs. With Pakistan, this compliment/insult/compliment sandwich is as tough as she is allowed in her role. She carried the message, but couched it softly enough to not cause great offense.
Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama should do whatever THEY want and makes THEM happy. With all due respect Tina I hope they continue to ignore advise from you and others in the media who try to live vicariously through them.
This user is no longer registered.
Hillary Rodham Clintstone is the wife of Billy Clintstone. Fugedaboudit.
michaelslevinson.com
No name 'calling', please, if you want us to take you seriously. A lot of us loved Bill, in spite of his problem, and we all admire Hillary.
I nicknamed them "The Clintstones: a long time ago, and stay with it. Satire. A lot of us didn't love Bill because of his prob limbs, and many hold the view Hillary isn't much better.
michaelslevinson.com
Tina Brown, valiant champion of femocracy.
Fortunately for us, and in direct contradistinction to you, Tina, Hilary has the best interests of our entire nation in mind.
Isn't great for a change to have someone like Hillary who puts America first.
I don't know much about Pakistan, but as someone who lives and works in Central America, I am in awe of how well she's been handling the complex and volatile situation in Honduras. She's definitely put the USA first - which I sometimes have mixed feelings about, as Honduras suffered horrifically at the hands of United Fruit and particularly that foul murderer Negroponte. But in this case, she seems to be committed to stabilizing the situation peacefully and democratically, which is also great for a change. I'm glad she wasn't marginalized in the post of Vice President; though she might have preferred it, she's been doing more good as Sec. of State.
Yes, if murder, genocide, destruction, and overall holocausts are in the best interest of the USA, Hillary is doing a fine job.
Hillary finds it hard to believe that nobody knows where Al Qaeda is hiding?? Just how stupid is she? Al Qaeda is only a small part of the equation with its meager 2000 membership. The one I really like about her when she thought it was cowardly to kill innocent civilians. In fact, Hillary voted to kill over 1 million innocent civilians, would over 1 million, displace over 4 million innocent civilians. What planet is Hillary from?? Can a person be more stupid than she; the answer is yes, "the smoking gun lady C. Rice may be more stupid.
you have proven that indeed you can be more stupid than Sec Clinton.
Go here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkS9y5t0tR0
And then get back to us.
I cannot bear American women going to those benighted countries and donning their headgear. For what purpose? Are their women allowed to come here re policy? Would they doff their headgear to accommodate modernism? Total medieval bilge.
Yes, I too was greatly bothered by her wearing headgear to appease the local government. Though we respect the Queen of England I wouldn't want a President to bow and I don't want the secretary of state to wear a burqa.
Respecting culture is pretty high on the list of expectations for our #1 diplomat. Not wearing the burqa would be the equivalent of not wearing pants in our country; at a minimum, it would be like meeting the president of Pakistan wearing hot pants and a midriff-top. To you and me, the burqa looks and feels like a glorified hat. But in countries where women do not show their hair, showing the hair is the same as exposing private parts. On beaches in France, women go topless. Your post translates to Carla Bruni saying screw America and going topless on one of our beaches next time she and Sarkozy are in town. Why should she bow to our puritanical modesty?
I find it really annoying too, but not offending others has its place.
The Muslim world has had at least two women presidents run countries wearing head coverings (if you count the Muslims in India). So it's not about a lack of respect for women or the idea women are weak.
It's more about the notion Muslim men can't control themselves sexually w/o literally seeing a barrier around a woman that denotes she belongs to someone who will beat the pulp out of the guy who attempts to violate her. You think Muslim men would be embarrassed to admit such weakness.
Agree with Jhub, not wearing a burqa would be like showing up topless here. And why don't we allow breasts to be seen? We don't trust the body or sexuality either. Breasts are milk organs. It sounds just as stupid as covering hair. And if hair wasn't about being attractive, there wouldn't be a huge industry to style it.
When the Shah of Iran banned them in the 1930s *women* took to the streets fighting mad to have them reinstated, they were harassed so badly without them.
How about this Tina:
"It's not about ME".
Her and Joe the only two Obama picks who are doing anything.
Joe who?
Yooooo Tina girl, you call this is a piece about Hillary.... you're joking, right ??? Our Sec of State needs to sit your ass down and have a real mano y mano chat with you... and if that don't work, maybe a bitch slap from the ole gal will ... know what I'm saying girl friend ???
** she found it "hard to believe that nobody in your government knows where they [al Qaeda] are and couldn't get them if they really wanted to" **
The U.S. has been at it for more than 10 years and has also failed to "get them". If that's Clinton's best shot, it is a dud.
Hillary is right. The ISI, Pakistan's CIA, has been in cahoots with Al Quaida in Wazirastan for years. They know where they are hiding and probably know where Osama is, too. So don't blame Clinton for not 'getting them'. What we have to do is stop paying Pakistan millions of dollars when they are undercutting us every chance they get. Forget Osama and get the hell out of this quagmire. I don't care what the Reps say.
nope.. under bush the US stopped looking and instead went to Iraq to build a US base in the ME.
It's heartening to hear Tina Brown, a powerful woman in her own right, use the term, power surge, when she speaks of other powerful women. Formerly the term, power surge, was used to redefine the pejoritave(sic?) term, hot flash, & applied to post menapausal women. Ms Brown has added a useful, new definiton for power surge. Thank you for enriching the English language, Ms Brown. Your devoted sychophant,
larry278
Tina: See this article (generals-cant-be-trusted ) and seriously consider firing half of your correspondents/contributors. Truely one of the worst articles I've read in years.
The burqa reference is grotesque, inappropriate and an insult to women who are forced because of cultural and/or religious reasons to wear one. And enough already with Tina Brown's snarky observations about Hillary Clinton's appearance. "Solves the hair problem?" What is your f***ing problem? How about focusing on what a bang up job she's been doing instead of the size of her ass or whether she needs to deep condition?
I think Tina is trying for Mo Do's job.
Forget the burqa stuff and the rest of it. It's just refreshing to hear a little straight talk from someone. I'm more impressed that she's taken off the kid gloves than I am that she took off a head scarf.
I think Clinton's speech in Pakistan is her fnest hour in politics o far----amazing----
"But she (Michelle Obama) is such a big, red-blooded star herself that we yearn for her to take center stage."
Oh please! An undistinguished academic and business career, topped off by an over-paid sinecure as a payoff to her politician husband. That makes her a star? Only in the crazed world of
feminist solidarity.
I think an anti-obesity project - after all it is a huge problem among minorities - is a good use of her rather limited talents.
You call going to Princeton University and graduating from Harvard Law school, "undistinguished academics"? Where did YOU go for college-if you even got that far? Grad school, law school, med school?? What exactly are YOUR credentials. What percentage of Americans even make it to Law school?
It's one thing to not like Michelle Obama, it's another to try to marginalize her accomplishments. Accomplishments that are far superior to anything YOU have done.
only Tina would compare Hillary to Michelle, Michelle: first wifey in chief, hula hoop gal friday who likes to garden and tell the world women can not do their jobs if their husbands cheat.
Michelle is strong as in strong backwards movement for women.
And Tina you must be smart enought to know that the public is so far ahead of the media in terms of tolerance to strong women. and you know why. media is male owned and run. women in media must sniff up to males or they won't get their spot at the table.
Link please, when did Michelle Obama say that "women can not do their jobs if their husbands cheat"?
Additionally, if I recall correctly it was HILLARY CLINTON who was the one attacking OTHER women. Claiming that women who slept with her husband were liars. That's what I can a feminist, a woman who attacks other women instead of her own cheating husband!
everyone knows about Michelle's sexist comment re HIllary, but here you go:
http://news.aol.com/elections-blog/2007/08/22/michelle-obama-vs-hillary- clinton/
This quote from the suntimes.com can't be anything other than a direct slam on Hillary Clinton:
At another stop, in Atlantic, Michelle said she travels with her husband in part "to model what it means to have family values," adding "if you can't run your own house, you can't run the White House." She didn't elaborate, but it could be interpreted as a swipe at the Clintons.
next time try google it is a wonder!
And for good measure here is more of MO at her worst:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/04/michelle-obama-ill-think-_n_849 00.html
I don't say God damn American, but I do think if God is a woman she is toing to have a special place in hell for Michelle and her stupid hula hoop!
Amazing that it took a woman to tell those meatheads the truth. That whole culture enables stateless, cowardly fanatics to kill in the name of a so called religion while we pussyfoot around making any offensive remarks.
Keep supporting Michelle and Hillary, Tina. It does my heart good. MIchelle has to walk a fine line and can't talk about issues that might contradict her husband. We know that. And Hillary has a better job as the Sec, of State than being V. Pres. She is a fighter.
Tina, Just for the Record.... she's NOT wearing a "burqah" her headscarf "could" be called a hijab but is merely a sign of RESPECT for the culture one is visiting...just like when one visits the Vatican there are some protocols that must be respected. simple!
The burqa headline is in reference to Clinton's visibility in the administration not to her clothing in the picture. Tina has written multiple articles about Clinton so-call burqa as the S.O.S.
Uh- good article but if Hilary had worn a burqa she would have looked like she had a bin bag over her face. She is wearing a hijab. Both are purely political and not in the Koran, so wearing it is still questionable, although I doubt avoidable in reality, but its hardly a burqa.
She is hearing a head scarf not a hijab. Anyway, Tina uses burqa as a figure of speech, in reference to Clinton's lack of visibility on t.v. in relation to others in the administration. Tina is basically being silly.
"third biggest job"?
Try second biggest.
Hillary's where she needs to be... where we need her to be.
no Hillary Clinton should be in the White House where we would then have real leadership.
if Mr. Obama steals another election and takes over this country we can all watch as Michelle bring Rev. Wright back to the White House. to be sure.
Michelle Obama has a critical role in this first term: making sure her husband, his family, and she all help the country relax about having a nonwhite leader.
But in the second term... that'll be a different story ; ) I mean, the woman was Obama's MENTOR. She's got some smarts.
If Madam Secretary is such a tough cookie, how come she blew healthcare? And the cakewalk to the nomination? And was a, um, "key player" in one of the worst, most corrupt administrations in US history? Huh? Ever read her valedictory drivel at Wellesley? Tina, maybe you've been swimming too long in the celebri-litry cesspool. Snap out of it. Please! George Patton
Good photo op.
Nothing radical about this president? Hard to see how he's going to achieve any transformative change without a little radicalism.
It would be so easy for Michelle to overshadow Obama's administrations work, especially the first years of a rare Democratic admin. The press is hungry for drama. She is showing what a brilliant strategist she is, she's all good graces and support so the attention stays where it should.
And besides when his presidential work is done, she's still in her prime. Look out world!
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.