The Vegetables Will Have The Beef
Peggy Noonan opens her column this week with an almost certainly apocryphal story about Margaret Thatcher:
The story as I was told it is that in the early years of her prime ministership, Margaret Thatcher held a meeting with her aides and staff, all of whom were dominated by her, even awed. When it was over she invited her cabinet chiefs to join her at dinner in a nearby restaurant. They went, arrayed themselves around the table, jockeyed for her attention. A young waiter came and asked if they'd like to hear the specials. Mrs. Thatcher said, "I will have beef."
Yes, said the waiter. "And the vegetables?"
"They will have beef too."
Too good to check, as they say. It is certainly apocryphal, but I don't want it to be. It captured her singular leadership style, which might be characterized as "unafraid."
She was a leader.
Noonan then goes on to take a look at how the Clinton campaign – and the candidate herself - handled the small problem she had in the last Democratic debate. It is not a flattering analysis.
When Hillary Clinton suggested that debate criticism of her came under the heading of men bullying a defenseless lass, an interesting thing happened. First Kate Michelman, the former head of NARAL and an Edwards supporter, hit her hard. "When unchallenged, in a comfortable, controlled situation, Sen. Clinton embraces her elevation into the 'boys club.' " But when "legitimate questions" are asked, "she is quick to raise the white flag and look for a change in the rules."
Then Mrs. Clinton changed tack a little and told a group of women in West Burlington, Iowa, that they were going to clean up Washington together: "Bring your vacuum cleaners, bring your brushes, bring your brooms, bring your mops." It was all so incongruous–can anyone imagine the 20th century New Class professional Hillary Clinton picking up a vacuum cleaner? Isn't that what downtrodden pink collar workers abused by the patriarchy are for?
But even better, and more startling, people began to giggle. At Mrs. Clinton, a woman who has never inspired much mirth. Suddenly they were remembering the different accents she has spoken with when in different parts of the country, and the weird laugh she has used on talk shows. A few days ago new poll numbers came out–neck and neck with Barack Obama in Iowa, her lead slipping in New Hampshire. There is a sense that Sen. Obama is rising, a sense for the first time in this election cycle that Mrs. Clinton just may be in a fight, a real one, one she could actually lose.
It's all kind of wonderful, isn't it? Someone indulged in special pleading and America didn't buy it. It's as if the country this week made it official: We now formally declare that the woman who uses the fact of her sex to manipulate circumstances is a jerk.
This is a victory for true feminism, in its old-fashioned sense of a simple assertion of the equality of men and women. We might not have so resoundingly reached this moment without Mrs. Clinton's actions and statements. Thank you, Mrs. Clinton.
The real question is: could Hillary Clinton even figure out how to switch on a vacuum cleaner? I have marveled before at how badly the Clinton campaign handled the debate matter. They are doing much the same thing – overreacting and looking more than a bit foolish – over the waitress in Iowa (previous post). There has been a definite projection by the media of Hillary as 'inevitable'. But things like this make one wonder. Noonan makes one other observation that bears examination.
A word on toughness. Mrs. Clinton is certainly tough, to the point of hard. But toughness should have a purpose.
To an engineer, the words 'toughness' and 'hardness' have distinct meanings. A material can be quite hard yet be very, very brittle, fracturing easily under a small stress. It is beginning to look like there is a certain amount of brittleness in the Clinton campaign.
By Anthony (Los Angeles), November 9, 2007 @ 10:56 am
Britain could use another Thatcher right about now.
By Cernig, November 9, 2007 @ 11:13 am
Gaius,
The story is actually a sketch from the satirical political comedy show “Spitting Image”. The show used latex puppets to poke fun at political events and celebrity figures. The sketch in question, along with others which showed Thatcher domianting her cabinet, was aired shortly before the Conservative party decided not to back Thatcher for a new term of leadership. In the UK, the show was widely credited with making it impossible – at the risk of confirming the show’s allegations of being Thatcher’s lickspittles – for senior party figures to back her.
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/S/htmlS/spittingimag/spittingimag.htm
It was maybe too good to check – but it’s a very easy one to check should someone be inclined to. Just ask any Briton alive now who was aged over 16 in the 80’s.
Regards, C
By Gaius, November 9, 2007 @ 11:32 am
Cernig, aside from your claim that this is so, it appears to have been written in a book:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/10-Downing-Street-Illustrated-History/dp/0004140737
I didn’t spend much time looking, but I did not find a reference to that coming from Spitting Image. It’s beside the point in any case. The anecdote is not central to Noonan’s point – nor to mine.
By Cernig, November 9, 2007 @ 11:54 am
Gauis, I watched the sketch in question. You can too
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33YUALnF3JY
If the anecdote isn’t central to Noonan’s point, why is it her lede?
Regards, C
By Gaius, November 9, 2007 @ 12:12 pm
Ever done any public speaking, Cernig? It’s pretty common to start a talk off with a humorous anecdote – not necessarily dealing directly with the matter being discussed. Sometimes it is used to introduce (as Noonan is) one general point, in this case the idea of Thatcher’s toughness.
But by dwelling on this you do manage to avoid her main points.