Politics Of Personal Destruction
Richard Cohen writes about the missed moment of Hillary! Clinton and her fellow Democratic contenders for the Presidential nomination. Very few Democrats - and none of the candidates other than Joe Biden - denounced the MoveOn ad smearing General David Petraeus. Clinton is singled out here because she is the leader of the pack.
It may seem unfair to single out Clinton in this matter when the bunker in which she took shelter was crowded with her fellow quivering candidates. But Clinton is the front-runner, quite possibly the next president of the United States, and so it is reasonable to focus on her and wonder if, as some allege, she indeed does have a spine. In this instance, it was nowhere to be found.
It is an odd standard Clinton has when it comes to smears. When the entertainment mogul David Geffen, once a Clinton supporter, called both Bill and Hillary liars, Hillary not only decried the remark as a particularly vivid example of the "politics of personal destruction," but she demanded that Barack Obama do the same — and return a $2,300 donation Geffen had given him. Yet when Clinton herself was asked to repudiate the abuse of Petraeus, she either saw no reason to do so or, much more likely, was afraid to alienate an important constituency, the 3.3 million members of MoveOn.org, who stand symbolically at the frontiers of New Hampshire and Iowa. She would, it seems, rather be president than right.
This week Hillary Clinton announced her health care plan. Good for her. But you never had any doubt, did you, that she was going to have one — and a plan for everything else. The issue with Hillary Clinton is not whether she's smart or experienced but whether she has — how do we say this? — the character to be president. Behind her, after all, trails the lingering vapor of all those gates: Travel, File, Whitewater, and other scandals to which she was a part only through marriage. In a hatless society, she is always wearing a question mark.
In missing her moment, she may have avoided a barrage of vitriolic hate from the far left - who are not at all liberal when it comes to dissenting opinions, but she also added to questions the public already has about her. In the end will this be a major factor? No, not by itself. But a lot of small things begin to build into major doubts. Clinton already has high negatives - higher than any other candidate. She can't afford too many more missed moments.
By FedUp, Tuesday, 18 September , 2007 @ 7:25 am
Every candidate has baggage, but this woman brought extra! I don’t want someone running the country that just doesn’t GET IT! The past months have shown that she is more interested in pandering to her base than showing intestinal fortitude to stand up for what is best for the country. She scares me!
By daveinboca, Tuesday, 18 September , 2007 @ 10:36 am
On a liberal blog, Ezra Klein claims Hillary was “exonerated” on the three major gates: Travel, Futures, Whitewater. Maybe Ezra & his ultra-liberal ilk don’t realize that she never was completely exonerated. Indeed, the constant sweeping under the rug of the Clinton Inc shenanigans is what led to MonicaGate—even the pliant, Clinton-loving, no-fault-on-the-left MSM had had enough.
Oh yeah, and “Whitewater exonerated” meant that Billy Jeff fired the State Attorney investigating him and his mendacious wife.
With nary a peep from the “investigative journalists” who so diligently sleuth Republicans with fine-tooth combs.
One by one, the barnacles accumulate on the Clinton Inc ocean liner and pretty soon it will start to resemble a sewage barge if she doesn’t step up.
Even Elizabeth Edwards has more balls than Dodd, Richardson, Hillarious, and the rest of the dwarfs.
At least Biden showed a tiny bit of spine, which makes him unique among the no-fight, all-flight Democrats.