Commander in… Chieftess?
Tonight marks the premiere of ABC’s new primetime drama, “Commander in Chief.”
Geena Davis is Mackenzie Allen, vice-president of the United States, until President Bridges unexpectedly dies. Pressured to resign in order to make way for the speaker of the house to assume the presidency, Allen makes a last-second decision to take the oath of office and become the first female president of the United States.
While the first episode has received mixed reviews from critics, many expect the show to be popular with the American public. Earlier this year, a CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll found that over 70 percent of Americans would be likely to vote for a female presidential candidate in 2008. According to a Fox News Poll in January, 56 percent of Americans believe that America is ready to elect a female president, up from 51 percent in 1998.
With oft-mentioned presidential prospect, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, likely to make a run for the White House in 2008, and with speculation swirling around Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice as well, ABC’s new show may well serve to further soften the political ground for a real life female president.
In an echo of a common theme on The Rebelution, Marie Wilson, president and founder of The White House Project, is quoted as saying, “Culture is a powerful tool for moving us to where I think we have to go.” Likewise, Martha Burk, chair of the National Council of Women’s Organizations, hailed the primetime drama as an important political step “because things in the popular culture often do become legitimized in real life.” In other words, as Chicago Sun-Times columnist, Lynn Sweet, writes, “[T]he abnormal becomes the normal.”
The primary agent for this change? As always: Mainstream Media.
It is only a matter of time before a woman presidential candidate becomes a reality. I will be voting in 2008, and so will many of you. Regardless of the outcome, it will undoubtedly be marked as a historic landmark in America’s political history. Unfortunately, a show like “Commander and Chief” only serves to foster a media-saturated culture that will cast their ballot, not for a candidate, but for what they perceive to be the most interesting real “reality TV show.”
September 27th, 2005 at 9:31 pm
Wow. Very insightful article, Alex.
September 27th, 2005 at 9:33 pm
Very, very interesting post Alex. I cannot see myself voting for a woman president in the 2008 electtions, conservative or not. It’s not that I’m against women in government, but I do not beleive they have what it takes to be the commander-in-cheif. How would they handle the war or terrorists? Would they be too compassionate? How would they deal with it?
September 27th, 2005 at 9:50 pm
Very interesting Alex.
As a woman myself, I would never vote for a woman who ran for any office. If I did run (I don’t plan on doing so), I would probably be way to compassionate. That would be a major problem, especially in our world today.
September 27th, 2005 at 10:39 pm
I can’t say across the board that I would not vote for a women president. It really depends on the woman. I think overall, one should be cautious in voting for a woman president because she could be too compassionate. However, if the right woman came along, with a good head on her shoulders, with strength and compassion, and of course with the right stance on politics (pro-life, etc.) then I would consider voting for her.
I do agree with Alex’s post, though, that voters in 2008 might be swayed to vote for a woman by the pop culture.
September 27th, 2005 at 10:55 pm
Yes, I would have to agree that voters will most likely be swayed because of the culture. Most people do things today because of the culture, so I guess they probably wouldn’t change that much to vote.
September 27th, 2005 at 11:38 pm
Hey Alex,
Great post! Would you ever vote for a female president?
September 28th, 2005 at 1:47 am
So what the world needs now is less compassion. Is that what you’re saying?
September 28th, 2005 at 3:07 am
One Salient Oversight: Perhaps I misread you, but I sense an accusatory tone in your question. Let’s allow the others to clarify their meaning.
In general, however, I would like our readers to explain more specifically why they would or would not want a female president. How do you see compassion being a negative characteristic for our nation’s president?
One Salient Oversight, what are your views?
September 28th, 2005 at 5:28 am
I don’t think a female president is likely to show any less or more compassion than a male president.
In their personal life - that might be the case. But when it comes to national security, she will make a decision after listening to her advisors (as all good presidents do).
I don’t think that the voters in 2008 will be swayed to vote for a woman simply because of media pressures. Most people would be asking the same questions that they ask of all candidates, regardless of their gender.
If Hillary Clinton attempts to run for president in 2008, you can be assured that Republican women will not support her. If Condoleeza Rice runs for the presidency, Democrat women will not support her. Gender is nothing - political stance is everything.
September 28th, 2005 at 3:24 pm
As much as I oppose a woman as president, I would be compelled to vote for someone like Rice if it was between her and Clinton (unless Rice was gonna win by like 70%, in which case I would probably vote Constitution Party). Being in the military (I will commission in 2009), I have a personal stake in keeping someone like Hillary out of office!
September 28th, 2005 at 6:25 pm
I think I’d go with SecDef on that one. If it was between Rice and Clinton, go Rice. Still…I do wonder…
September 29th, 2005 at 5:44 am
Of course you’d vote for Rice. You’re young, conservative Republicans.
September 29th, 2005 at 8:13 pm
I have to doubt that a woman could run the country just as well as a man, that has been proved many times over. However, it is a sad reflection on American menhood when a woman has to step up and save the nation. Men are dropping the ball if and when that happens. Example:
Judg 4:5 She used to sit under the palm tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim; and the sons of Israel came up to her for judgment.
Judg 4:6 Now she sent and summoned Barak the son of Abinoam from Kedesh-naphtali, and said to him, “Behold, the LORD, the God of Israel, has commanded, ‘Go and march to Mount Tabor, and take with you ten thousand men from the sons of Naphtali and from the sons of Zebulun.
Judg 4:7 ‘I will draw out to you Sisera, the commander of Jabin’s army, with his chariots and his many {troops} to the river Kishon, and I will give him into your hand.’”
Judg 4:8 Then Barak said to her, “If you will go with me, then I will go; but if you will not go with me, I will not go.”
Judg 4:9 She said, “I will surely go with you; nevertheless, the honor shall not be yours on the journey that you are about to take, for the LORD will sell Sisera into the hands of a woman.” Then Deborah arose and went with Barak to Kedesh.
Barak was dropping the ball. This scripure give advice to men on that count.
Neh 4:14 When I saw {their fear,} I rose and spoke to the nobles, the officials and the rest of the people: “Do not be afraid of them; remember the Lord who is great and awesome, and fight for your brothers, your sons, your daughters, your wives and your houses.”
Notice he is talking to the husbands.
My 2 cents.
Travis
November 26th, 2005 at 9:56 pm
Travis, I loved that. Great stuff.
Christianity is without question a patriarchal religion, and humanity is patriarchal by nature. As big cities and great bodies of people come together, however, much emphasis is placed on the ‘unsual’, the ’strange’, and the ‘queer’.
People are carnal and wicked by nature, and want to see something that pleases their filthy lusts.
This is why the Roman populace was so thrilled to see the Christians raped and eaten by the animals on their televisions. Sorry, I meant the carnival. Circus. Games. The television is a modern invention to bring the circus into the home, for the lazy flesh of today.
I would not vote for a female president. That would, even if the choice was between Clinton and Rice, be directly contrary to God’s will. I couldn’t support that and still have a clear conscience.
I’m sure others feel differently, but this is a personal conviction in my life, that comes straight from the scriptures, as Travis pointed out.
Well put Travis.