THE SPINE MAY 5, 2008
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Everybody knows that Hillary plays rough, and this morning's New York Times tells you now that she is also ruthless. Down in the body of the story there's a little riff from one Max Brantley, "an old friend of the Clintons from Arkansas," in which he contrasts Hill and Bill. "He never stops trying to convert people. She's much more clear-eyed, recognizing the imperfectability of people." So that's her calculation: if you disagree with her you are a sinner.
This ruthlessness is also a promise about how she'd behave in office. She doesn't sign her autograph on red boxing gloves for nothing. It is apparently she, not the vindicative James Carville (he who called Bill Richardson Judas), who coined the phrase "war room" to fit the concept. But, as George Bush has shown, you can perform many deceitful acts and still lose in the body politic.
The leader also inspires followers. How's this for civilized political discourse? "She makes Rocky Balboa look like a pansy," said one of her endorsers, Governor Michael F. Easley. I thought we Democrats don't talk like that any more. Or another revealing citation, this one from a labor leader also endorsing Hillary, praising her "testicular fortitude." My God, and I had just about stopped using the word "seminal."
This degradation of discourse and behavior is part and parcel of her attempt at appearing like what she thinks of as common. Is this the learning she envisions in "It Takes a Village"? It certainly isn't what she called eons ago "the politics of meaning."
Of course, the common is for Mrs. Clinton a complete sham. I'd bet the only people she dines with in New York (and she does dine, not munch) are folk who have at least $50 million bucks. And her designer pants suits are not bought at Target or, let alone, Wal-Mart, although she did serve on its board when no one on the payroll had health insurance.
But it's not only that she wants to project humble origins and vulgate speech (had you ever witnessed her do that before?). It's also that she wants the voters of Indiana (and North Carolina) to grasp that she is not impressed by professional economists. No, not she. An article on the front page of Monday's Boston Globe reports that she has now made the summer suspension of the gasoline tax the cornerstone of her campaign. Forget about the fact that the president won't hear from it (so it's a moot question), even though it might help John McCain. The truth is that, as George Stephanopolous pointed out, no credible economist backed her plan to lift the 18.5 cent federal tax on gas. She got huffy: "I'm not going to put my lot with economists, because I know if we did it right...it would be implemented effectively." And then more and more arrogant: "We've got to get out of this mind-set where somehow elite (ah, yes, that terrible elite again) opinion is always on the side of doing things that really disadvantage the vast majority of Americans." Why doesn't she say outright that she wants to instill paranoia in the American people? Another Rosa Luxemburg, perhaps?
The one strength that Hillary might have carried with her is that her husband's administration had competent, no, brilliant and inventive people in its stewardship of the economy. Larry Summers, for instance, and Robert Rubin. But she is now a populist, a vulgar populist. Maybe we'll be hearing from William Jennings Bryan about the "cross of gold" one century after.
So Mrs. Clinton like panaceas, which are almost always fibs. Obama has been criticized for being a bit vague in he economic program, and perhaps he has been. But he doesn't tell lies.
32 comments
Great post. I am daily becoming more disgusted with Hillary. But Mr. Peretz - correct me if I am wrong - didn't Obama lie about not hearing any of Jeremiah Wright's incendiary comments while sitting in his church for a generation or so? Moreover, I think Obama has been disingenuous in general - where he hasn't been outright dishonest - on l'affair Wright. I think that Charles Krauthammer's recent column on Obama was deliciously on the mark.
- liberal reformer
May 5, 2008 at 6:10pm
HRC's ruthlessness wouldn't now be resonating if it weren't for Obama's obvious inability to make tough political decisions involving cutting ties to people who wish to harm him and his candidacy.She's occupying a vacuum. Pity Obama didn't have the savvy and, uh, Spine to fill that vacuum it first.
- teplukhin2you
May 5, 2008 at 6:38pm
liberal,
Obama could not have been expected to hear everything Wright was saying what with all the sniper fire in the church. He and his family had to keep their heads down until they could run to safety. That is not conducive to hearing the sermon.
- roidubouloi
May 5, 2008 at 6:40pm
peretz,
I do have to agree with you on this. Her "populism" seems so forced, right down to the "workin" and "fightin" argot. It does seem so phony and transitory. God, I hate it when I agree with you...especially on the Clintons...
- thejauntyboulevardier
May 5, 2008 at 6:58pm
Hillary had Obama on the ropes (or Wright did) but Hillary couldn't resist sabotaging her own effort by this latest run. All she had to do was go positive and let everyone pound Obama, instead she ginned up a ridiculous gas tax issue and is pretending that she can match Bubba's down home appeal. Absolutely inexplicable. That plus the fact she derides Democratic elitists (ie college educated Dems.) on shows that are watched primarily by college educated people....Marty asked before if Bill wanted her to lose, now I wonder if she wants to lose.
- blackton
May 5, 2008 at 7:00pm
"Everybody knows that Hillary plays rough..."
She does, thank goodness. Let the Mullahs quake in their moccasins at the prospect of a President Hillary.
After meeting Hillary, Ahmadinejad will be happy to move on to his virgins in the paradise of his imagination.
What if got there and all his virgins will be Hillaries?
This is soooo sweet to contemplate.
- jacksondyer
May 5, 2008 at 7:01pm
liberal, the service at Trinity is not just one, there is a family service where all of the down and dirty rhetoric is way toned down. Certainly it is expected that as a father of two young girls he has been attending those services, so it is very likely he didn't hear what was said. In addition, we have no way of knowing his attendance. what with his Senate run and before that state Senator position, it is possible his attendance was spotty at best. It is a shame he can't admit this.
- blackton
May 5, 2008 at 7:04pm
"What if got there and all his virgins will be Hillaries?" Do you want to put me off women?
- blackton
May 5, 2008 at 7:13pm
"... so it is very likely he didn't hear what was said. In addition, we have no way of knowing his attendance. what with his Senate run and before that state Senator position, it is possible his attendance was spotty at best. It is a shame he can't admit this."
Yes, but do we know what other services he attended and what meetings he had with the Reverend? Besides, is it likely that in 20 years no one member of the congregation told Obama about Wrights "other beliefs?"
I agree that it's a shame that "he can't admit this." Had he admitted it I might have given him a second look.
- jacksondyer
May 5, 2008 at 7:24pm
Point taken, blackton. But he did belatedly acknowledge that he had misled us by previously denying that he knew about any incendiary remarks. I don't think that a sentient being, even with a 'spotty" attendance record, could fail to know that he was sitting in a black nationalist church where some pretty nutty things were being preached by one Mr. Jeremiah Wright.
- liberal reformer
May 5, 2008 at 7:30pm
Once again Marty presents yesterday's news, today!
- Lymon1
May 5, 2008 at 8:19pm
Tep: True, sad, but true.
As for Ms. Populist: To riff on what Marty was saying about her designer duds, she's been photographed wearing a Burberry coat--that's about 1500 for starters, nice ENGLISH tailoring at that.
And Blackie, you'll love this one. While mom's shopping Brit brands, Chelsea sports Chanel suits-- worth, at this point, upwards of $5,000. Yes, they does love their little people.
- MOLLYSIMON
May 5, 2008 at 9:00pm
Dunno Jackson - Hillary has been ruthless in the service of Hillary, yes. But so transparent as to be embarrassing. Finesse does count if I'm supposed to respect her for it and I just cannot in this case - and I do respect the ability to be ruthless and do wish I'd seen more in Obama so far (even though he is between a rock and hard place, mustn't scare the white folk - but still, wouldn't everyone have agreed she had it coming if Obama has walloped her back hard, even just once?).
With Hillary, all of this ruthlessness has had no real impact except to glorify her.
In the end, her actual voting record has been utterly spineless, among the most cowardly of the infamously cowardly Dems. She's never done a thing for working people in her life, certainly not as an elected official, quite the opposite (Bankrupcy bill).
She's created quite the mythology for herself to justify this vulgar campaign, but its not backed up by what I consider substance.
- Wandreycer1
May 5, 2008 at 9:10pm
.
"With Hillary, all of this ruthlessness has had no real impact except to glorify her."
That's what her detractors say.
If she is ruthless, when it comes to her domestic opponents she is certainly not as ruthless as Robert Kennedy was. And the liberal left worshiped him because they saw in him a winner. I see in Hillary a winner, if she gets a chance to run.
In Obama, otoh, I see an also ran along with some other Democrats I could mention friends of Marty.
- jacksondyer
May 5, 2008 at 9:22pm
Not an unfair characterization Jackson.
WHat I meant was, I wish Hillary would have been ruthless against the Bankrpucy Bill and Alberto Gonzales - things that really mattered NOW.
- Wandreycer1
May 5, 2008 at 9:35pm
"WHat I meant was, I wish Hillary would have been ruthless against the Bankrpucy Bill and Alberto Gonzales - things that really mattered NOW."
Yea, I wish she would have hit Gonzales on the head with a spiked heel. But then she would have been defending herself in court and not in a position to run for Prez, me thinks.
- jacksondyer
May 5, 2008 at 9:55pm
"and she does dine, not munch"
What does this mean? Is Peretz calling her fat? Even he wouldn't fall to those depths, would he? Or am I giving him too much credit?
- achester99
May 6, 2008 at 12:15am
LR, I thought he said that he'd seen some "controversial" stuff in church, but not the specific stuff that the youtubes were on, and that he did not agree with the youtube stuff. In his Philly speech he tried to disagree without repudiating the person - who is a mixed bag, apparently, and the church does really great stuff for the people in the neighborhood - by viewing Wright as someone who was too attached to the times he grew up in and the hurts he received then. But then, this recent thing - the refusal of Wright to be disagreed with, I think - kind of forced the issue to a place where Obama had to pretty much repudiate the guy. Which must have been tough.
I just don't think that he felt the issue to be forced enough when he was attending church there. As for his campaign, he could hardly be expected to say, "you should all know that this preacher - whose sermons I have respected in the main - has said some things I disagree with, and let me point those out now for you." Pre-emptive distancing, that is. I don't think that was called for. How he feels about this stuff - apart from whether or not Wright said it - is very clear from his speeches and particularly his autobiography, "Dreams From My Father". He just does not agree with that Wright bag of tricks, at all.
- psantillana
May 6, 2008 at 12:40am
this is very good on Obama and Wright:
www.washingtonpost.com/.../AR2008050401600.html
- psantillana
May 6, 2008 at 4:54am
achester, Hillary does have a huge ass. Sorry, but it is true. I certainly don't hold it against her, for a woman of her age it is to be expected, but still in all it wouldn't hurt if she had a Nancy Pelosi type level of fitness.
- blackton
May 6, 2008 at 10:43am
Blackton, this is really beneath you. No matter how hard I work out, I will never have an Ann Pelosi skinny-white-bitch butt. It's called genes. Furthermore, the bottom line is we never hear about male politicians' weight. Dick Cheney is now fat as a house, but I haven't heard anyone disparage is whale of a middle. He's grotesque in appearance. And I swear I saw the outline of a colostomy bag going down his pant-leg in a photo. (No, it wasn't his male member.)
For me, looks are off limits. I just hate that my daughter will grow up in a world where they count this much.
- MOLLYSIMON
May 6, 2008 at 11:42am
blackie,
retract matie. That butt thing was off limits. I agree with molly on this one. There are lots of reasons to dislike HC but her body shape should not be on that list.
- thejauntyboulevardier
May 6, 2008 at 12:25pm
Obama has always seemed to me pompous, humorless, autocratic. A fine technocrat, but a bit scary as a prospective Commander in Chief.
The gas tax holiday is a case in point. I don't _mind_ being pandered to. I actually like it that Hillary is trying to please the normal person in the here and now.
The dry emphasis on the particular numbers that Obama calls up is revealing. Thirty bucks for the summer per person is much the same as what Hillary says, but as she says it, it's seventy bucks per family.
And that's just the average. There are many people who make their living with their trucks and cars -- cab-drivers, shops with delivery vans, truckers. For them the difference is very significant.
Truckers have been organizing mass protests on the East Coast recently.
It's more than a gesture. But even if it were only a gesture, it's a sign the government is paying attention. That's a good thing.
And that recent letter signed by economists ignores the established belief, among economists, that morale is a concrete factor in the economy. Includes what is sometimes quantified as "consumer confidence."
Further, per the Stamaty cartoon on my college advisor's door, economists generally never agree on anything.
And what's up with this letter, anyway? It recalls those multi-author letters from retired diplomats, or retired generals, asking the government to do one thing or another, in recent years.
Is there some connection with the developers of that bit? Has rather the veneer of authoritativeness, without actually being authoritative. The retired diplos and generals are no doubt more than matched by those actually on the job. As if, as noted, there can really be anything sure in such areas. The technique, bloodless and technocratic, seems typical of the Obama crowd.
- FBC
May 6, 2008 at 1:41pm
i dont know which i want now. for obama to win and take her down or let the republicans rip her to shreds. they are certainly ready for it. it is a discussion we have often in our household. we are not very fond of the clintons and wish them nothing but ill, especially after the last two weeks of their posturing. so perhaps one could sit back and see all this as a win-win for the clinton haters. the only thing is which would hurt them more.
- check
May 6, 2008 at 3:26pm
@ jacksondyer:
This "Hillary is a winner" meme is one I don't fully understand, given that she is behind in all the metrics, despite having once been the inevitable candidate with the big Democratic brand name. Doesn't all the evidence suggest a contrary assessment?
- odanuki1
May 6, 2008 at 4:10pm
lo siento, sorry, sorry, I truly don't think her body shape should be remotely held against her, for the record I love Barbara Milkulski in Maryland, and Candy Crowley on CNN. And as far as lookism goes, are there any stunning women in Politics (not as wives)? Granholm in Michigan is attractive but she is the only one I can think of. There seems to be a bias against beautiful women, but to be a handsome man is hands down a huge plus. Also tall.
- blackton
May 6, 2008 at 5:18pm
Blackton: I live in Los Angeles, the earth's epicenter of beautiful women. And I've noticed the following: They tend, in too many cases, not to be very nice. Or all that accomplished. The latter of which might explain why we don't see all that many babes in politics (Hillary, in my view, is quite pretty.) For the most obvious of reasons the above is true, but let me spell them out anyway: As a non-beautiful woman, I haven't got the kind of breaks BWs get. No extras at the deli counter, no cops laying off a ticket. I can't smile my way through anything. Nobody will let me cut them in line at the theater. Because I haven't had this amazing gift ( it really is a gift, I'm not being sarcastic) I've had to develop other parts of myself. Like I'm polite to cashiers. I worked hard at my job--and never complained about xeroxing when I started out in my first career. I chat at other moms even when they're assholes. Or boring. Otherwise I'd have no friends, unlike the BWs, who easily attract people--you'd be amazed at how many not-so-lovely ladies want to cozy up to these types (as if somehow the good looks would rub off on them).
Like I said, it's obvious. It also explains why you don't see many beautiful women in politics. They just don't have to work that hard. They ain't interested. Because trust me, when a beautiful woman is also competent, she rules the world. The only good part is that, like the rest of us, these underachieving babes get old. And sometimes discarded. There's nothing more unpleasant than an ugly narcissist.
- MOLLYSIMON
May 6, 2008 at 9:44pm
Molly
"as if somehow the good looks would rub off on them"
Astute point. I never understood that phenomenon either, though I noticed it.
- sleepyavl
May 7, 2008 at 5:28am
Mollysimon: I just wanted to say that your posts are very good and you are often psychologically astute.
- liberal reformer
May 7, 2008 at 10:59am
Blackie - Sarah Palin, Gov. of Alaska, is babe-like for a politician. Barbara Boxer was a looker once.
- butchie b
May 7, 2008 at 1:45pm
I like it that Hillary isn't Cate Blanchett. I worry about political leaders who are too charismatic, too attractive. Undemocratic mobs aren't always the uneducated: the Khmer Rouge and other such were the soi-disant intelligentsia. Obama on the other hand may appear beautiful to people of every gender. Much as he's biracial. All things to all people.
More broadly, I like a politician who isn't exceptionally likeable. It means that their decisions have to be justified to lots of people, not just finessed through by means of charm and political technique. Hugo Chavez is a current example of someone who's really likeable to most of his population. And who also has an activist agenda.
Better King Log than King Stork, I guess I'm saying. Perhaps better even Olmert than Netanyahu.
...re attractive women in politics, Gov. Jean Sebelius of Kansas just made some mag like Vanity Fair; Sen. Mary Lincoln cleans up well; many others of less than national renown.
Obama somehow recalls Ricardo Montalban's "Khan" from Star Trek 2.
- FBC
May 7, 2008 at 2:14pm
FBC: Sen. Mary Lincoln? Do you mean Sen. Blanche Lincoln?
- liberal reformer
May 10, 2008 at 9:24am