Try the following thought experiment: Chris Christie, or Sarah Palin, or Andrew Cuomo is asked by a friend about sexual harassment allegations against a powerful Senator. Christie, or Palin, or Cuomo responds that he or she is tired of all these whiny women. Now imagine the friend's records are released. What would be the reaction in the media and among feminist organizations? It is inconceivable that there would not be an uproar, a forced apology, and some articles about how this will hurt the prospective candidate with women, and endanger his or her presidential hopes.
In the midst of the Anthony Weiner scandal last year, there was a predictable discussion about Wiener's treatment of his wife, Huma Abedin. I wrote at the time that cheating on your spouse may prove that you are an ass, but it does not mean you are necessarily a bad Congressman or president or leader. (MLK Jr. and Mandela cheated on their respective wives; Gandhi barely took his wife's opinion into account when he decided to be celibate.)
Amy Chozick's big cover story in The New York Times Magazine, which is unfortunately accompanied by the weirdest and worst cover art in magazine history (I exaggerate only a little), is yet another piece about the people in the Clintons's orbit, and what they will mean when Hillary decides should Hillary decide to run in 2016.
Bill Clinton endorsed Bill de Blasio's inequality rhetoric yesterday. That's not what Hillary Clinton told Goldman Sachs a few weeks ago.
His focus on inequality is New York-centric. Will it be heard farther afield?
The inaugural festivities on New Year’s Day’s for New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio felt awfully like an event of national import and impact. In one row next to the podium were two prospective presidential candidates, Gov. Andrew Cuomo and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. Ceremonially swearing in de Blasio (who was officially sworn in at midnight the night before) was a former president, Bill Clinton.
Does it matter whether he drew a penis intentionally or unintentionally?
Because of Thanksgiving, readers may have missed The New York Times's Joe Biden story, which ran in the newspaper on Wednesday. It is the saddest short political profile I have ever read. Whether Jackie Calmes, the reporter of the story, was intentionally being condescending, or whether she simply didn't realize how pathetic a picture she was drawing, is a debate for another day.
You could make a good case that the last ten years have been relatively good for liberals. Democrats won two out of three presidential elections and controlled Congress for four years, two of them overlapping with the Obama presidency. It was a too-brief window, but during that time they managed to accomplish an awful lot—passing major of the financial sector, ending the war in Iraq, launching a major regulatory effort to tame climate change, formally allowing gays into the military, and finally passing something that looks like universal health care.
In a big piece for The Washington Post, Paul Farhi has done his best to profile D.C. super-lawyer Lanny Davis. I say "done his best" because trying to keep abreast of Davis's absurdity and dishonesty is a job for a team of professionals rather than a single man (I speak from experience).
And here's how they spent it
*/ In the cover story of the current New Republic, Alec MacGillis reports on the role of Doug Band, Bill Clinton’s “body man,” in the 42nd president's post-White House life. The story of an aide’s business dealings inevitably gets into a thorny subject for any politician: money. The Clintons, as it happens, have raised scads of it.