NY Times sexist re Hillary Clinton?

Pretty remarkable that the morning after Hillary Clinton, the U.S. secretary of state, gave a major foreign policy speech at the influential Council on Foreign Relations yesterday, the New York Times sole coverage of it is a piece focusing on rehashing the supposed personal Clinton-Obama rivalry theme. All about whether or not she is being shunted to the sidelines and whether she is trying to re-grab position. Cat-fight overtones here? Hardly a mention of the substantive foreign policy issues Clinton discussed, not even her interesting comments on reasserting State Department's role in foreign policy, i.e., demilitarizing it back from Pentagon.

And this is the take the Times chooses to put on page 1? You have to wonder, if it had been a similar speech by a male would they have handled it this way?