If Hillary Clinton becomes president of the United States, this will be a defeat, not a victory for American women. The triumph of Mrs. Clinton will signal to the young ladies in this nation that victory--or achievement of whatever kind--is more important than integrity. Hillary will be yet another woman--quite typical of the high-profile women of 2007--for whom being famous and having the passing esteem of one’s contemporaries is more vital than being a person who stands on principle and upholds eternal verities.

Let us reflect upon the women who captured national attention in 2007; we notice a long list of famous yet unworthy females: Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, Anna Nicole Smith, Nicole Ritchie, Britney Spears and Jamie Lynn Spears. 2007 will be remembered as a landmark year in which the national news media was engrossed in celebrity gossip to a greater degree than ever before. The line between entertainment and news has become almost entirely blurred. And in this haze, it is mostly the scandalous behavior of women which grabs the public’s interest

It is no coincidence then that in 2007, it was also another scandal-ridden woman who dominated the headlines in the political arena. A USA Today-Gallup poll revealed that 18% of Americans chose Mrs. Clinton “as the most admired woman in America.” Granted, 18% is a very low figure. Yet, she nonetheless topped the list. Is there a significant difference between Mrs. Clinton and the other women who fascinated the public in 2007?

Mrs. Clinton, like the other ladies, is a celebrity. She has fame out of all proportion to any lasting or valuable public achievement. Since 1992, when she stepped into the national limelight on 60 Minutes and lied about Bill’s affair with Gennifer Flowers, Hillary’s life has been distinguished by scandal and celebrity rather than brilliant public policy. She is more scandal-ridden than any of the women listed above--recall Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate, Chinagate, Lincoln-Bedroomgate, Monica Lewinsky and Pardongate. Most of her reign as First Lady was spent in a whirlwind of turmoil and ignominy. Does the average American know of any specific Hillary achievement during those years?  There was much sound and fury culminating in very little public good.  During her subsequent years as senator, she spent more time promoting her book, Living History, and raising funds for her presidential bid than in any other worthy enterprise. Mrs. Clinton’s career has consisted of climbing the ladder, grappling for power, fame and wealth without much social purpose.

This is thinly obscured by the left-wing rhetoric she occasionally uses to camouflage the ruthless pursuit of her self-interest. Yet the speeches have worn thin: her actions demonstrate that she does not uphold liberal ideals when political winds blow in an adverse direction. She has triangulated too many times for either the left to see her as their champion or for the right to accord her the grudging respect of a committed opponent. Hillary is neither on the right, nor the left, nor the center. She is, at any given moment, anything you want her to be.

In this way, she typifies the ethos which is corroding our women: do anything, say anything, be anything society wants you to be in order to achieve wealth and fame. The internet is rife with women who will bear it all, contort themselves into any position in order to please their audience. College campuses are replete with women who are willing to achieve at all cost and to prostrate themselves for no cost. They stand for nothing. These are the degraded women we are breeding in our so-called “progressive” age. Mrs. Clinton is merely the political reflection of this decaying sense of womanhood.

Mrs. Clinton emphasizes that it will be remarkable if at last we elect the first female president. Yet, will any female do? Can we be proud of this landmark when, if she is chosen, the first female president is one with a long history of deceit and corruption? What does it matter if she wins the presidency and has sold her soul in the process? And as a nation, what will it mean for us--except that we too are partaking of this Faustian bargain?

A genuine female leader and role model must project ideals and values which lead females to their highest selves. Mrs. Clinton is therefore not a female leader: she is simply another charlatan in a crowded field of dishonorable women. If she becomes president of the United States, rather than lifting women to a higher ground, ladies will understand that it is fine to have no values as long as your peers applaud you in your degradation.

-Grace Vuoto is Executive Director of The Edmund Burke Institute for American Renewal. The opinions expressed are her own.