July 1, 2008
Reindeer Games (A.B. Stoddard)
Like Dick Morris and Brent Budowsky, I find the antics of a certain former president most entertaining. I tend to agree more with Morris that Bill can safely voice what Hillary is feeling, but can never, ever say. He is free to grouse, nurse grudges and cling to the spotlight, whatever he chooses. I also agree with Budowsky, though, that Bill Clinton's job is to make sure Hillary is never on the ticket.
The word of an impending conversation between Bill Clinton and the New Kid on the Block leaked out last week and soon became a media vigil that lasted five days. Bill Clinton must have loved it — why else does he do things that are petty and beneath his dignity? But Barack Obama knew it had to end. He made the call, told Bill Clinton what he wanted to hear, said what needed to be said. Obama took control of the reins and decided the ride was over, issuing a gracious statement complimenting Bill Clinton so he wouldn't have to hear about "burying that hatchet" any longer.
In Obama's statement about their chat, he called Bill Clinton "one of this nation's great leaders and most brilliant minds" and of course included a deftly worded expression of anticipation of "seeing him on the campaign trail" and also of "receiving his counsel."
Bill Clinton's statement said the former president "continues to be impressed by Sen. Obama and the campaign he has run, and looks forward to campaigning for and with him in the months to come."
For now, it appears the reindeer games may be over.
***
SHOULD OBAMA HAVE THROWN WESLEY CLARK UNDER THE BUS? Ask A.B. returns Monday, July 7 — Please join my weekly video Q & A by sending your questions and comments to askab@thehill.com. Thank you.
Permalink TrackBack EMail This Post
Share this post
What's This 5 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
So one pathological liar is out, another one is in? Democracy (or Democratic politics) in action!
Comment by Igor R. — July 1, 2008 @ 5:05 pm
That statement from Obama, "That Bill Clinton is one of the nation's great minds," pretty well sums up the problem in this country. They love big government. They are anti-American. They don't recognize patriotism when they see it. No, secretly they revel in comments like Wesley Clark recently made. They are not great minds, they are simply little people with small minds.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — July 1, 2008 @ 5:13 pm
You know how to tell when a politician is lying? "His/her lips are moving. Obama is the ONLY hope we have,otherwise we will have to return to Jefferson's long overdue revolution!
Comment by Frank Elkins — July 1, 2008 @ 9:02 pm
Yes, the saga of Bill and Hillary Clinton continues. A.B. Stoddar's analysis, as usual, is insightful. During the campaign, Bill Clinton was sometimes like an unguided missile, committing one gaffe after another. He now gives the impression of sulking or throwing a silent temper tantrum, while Hillary Clinton has done just enough to avoid being blamed for a lack of party unity. If what Bill Clinton wants is Senator Obama to grovel, I do not think Obama should lower himself to playing that game. I think that Bill Clinton's behavior is beneath him. If he has grievances, he should state them. If he believes that Obama would be better than McCain, despite what he views as the Senator's flaws, he should get on board the train before it leaves the station. Many people still look to the former President as a leader. He should lead, rather than playing these petty political games.
I find this all a little hard to take. I know that Hillary Clinton wants to preserve her political future, and doesn't want to alienate Democratic Party activists, any more than she already has. However, if she really believed some of the things that she said about Senator Obama in her attacks on him during the primaries, her about-face in now endorsing him so effusively and giving rousing speeches at joint appearances takes one's breath away.
We did not see Gene McCarthy and the Kennedy family out on the hustings campaiging their hearts out for Hubert Humphrey in 1968. McCarthy evidently believed that Nixon couldn't be any worse than the Johnson-Humprhey legacy. Though a small child at the time, I disagreed, feeling that Johnson had enacted sweeping liberal reforms, but understood that the Vietnam War made such a reconcilation within the Democratic Party impossible. I did not like Teddy Kennedy's brand of liberalism, but never blamed him for failing to aggressively support Carter in 1980. It would have been hypocritical. Reagan did not campaign aggressively for Ford in 1976, because he believed that Ford had betrayed conservative principles. Hubert Humphrey, Ed Muskie and Scoop Jackson carried their fight against McGovernism all the way to the convention in 1972. Following the McGovern debacle, Scoop Jackson and Humphrey supporters formed the Coaltion for a Democratic Majority in an attempt to resurrect pre-McGoven liberalism and move the party back to the center on defense and foreign policy.
I voted for Hillary Clinton, but it seems to me that she has tried to "have it both ways." Hillary's voting record was relatively centrist and pro-defense until she began actively running for President. She then lurched to the left. When she saw that the liberal base was swooning over Obama, she made a play for the Reagan Democrats, female voters and Hispanics. Now that she has lost the nomination, she wants to preserve her political viability and conveniently forgets her charges that Obama was too inexperienced, unvetted and naive and ill-informed on national security policy. This is all a bit unseemly, but I guess that is what passes for smart politics now.
Comment by Scoop Jackson Democrat — July 3, 2008 @ 1:00 pm
"Obama is the ONLY hope we have,otherwise we will have to return to Jefferson's long overdue revolution!"
Has someone drunk a little too much of the Obama cool-aid? Obama is our ONLY hope? What sort of revolution?
Comment by Diogenes — July 3, 2008 @ 4:24 pm