Posted on 06/08/2003 10:39:59 PM PDT by Jewels1091
Dumbfounded?" "Tears and tirades?" "Gulping for air?"
It's worse than I thought it would be. What is Hillary Clinton doing?
"I'm a private person," she said outside her Senate office on Wednesday, where dozens of cameras were gathered to record her reaction to the feeding frenzy that excerpts from her forthcoming book have caused. Could have fooled me.
Like her or not, there's no denying that Hillary Clinton is a smart woman. When she wrote this book, she had to know that the passages that would get the attention would be the ones about her husband's relationship with Monica Lewinsky. For a supposedly private person, she gave chapter and verse: the scene in the bedroom; the marriage on the brink; sleeping arrangements on vacation; and how her decision to run for Senate brought them back together, which I'm sure is true.
As for the rest, who knows?
Was Hillary really the last to know? Sometimes the wife is.
I've known Bill Clinton for years, and I never doubted for a minute that he had an "inappropriate sexual relationship" (that's what I called it, when I talked to him) with Monica Lewinsky. I laughed when one White House aide suggested that I deny it. The president himself all but acknowledged it to me when I asked him, in the course of giving him advice. But maybe Hillary never asked; maybe he lied to her and she believed it, notwithstanding everything that had gone before.
But why detail it all now?
For $8 million? Sure, the publishers wanted the details. But she was in charge. They couldn't make her say what she didn't want to. Money has never motivated the Clintons. Power has.
It certainly doesn't help Democrats. On television last night, there was Hillary, on every network, on every show, dominating the news. Forget about John Edwards or John Kerry or Dick Gephardt; forget about WMDs and the economy and deficits ... Who can get attention when the Clintons are out front discussing their marriage? President Clinton's book is due out just in time for the general election. What a coincidence. Good for sales. Bad for the nominee.
Do they really want a Democrat to win in 2004? I hate to say it, but the answer may be no. Hillary will be too old to run in 2012. Her year would be 2008. But she couldn't take on an incumbent Democratic president. She needs an open seat, not President Dean running for a second term.
She also needs the support of women, many of whom still don't understand why she stood by her man when he humiliated her so publicly. Early polls during the New York Senate race showed that many women who agreed with her on the issues were angry at her for letting him off the hook so easily. The conventional wisdom was that it was her ambition that explained her loyalty, an explanation that women liked even less.
So is this the answer for '08? Is it an effort to win the sympathy of women, to make clear that, contrary to top aide Sidney Blumenthal's version, which had them working together to save him and his presidency, she wasn't sure she would stand by him this time? So it seems, unfortunately.
I don't believe that Hillary Clinton will ever be president, for reasons that have little to do with Monica Lewinsky. Any woman will face huge obstacles, and Hillary Clinton begins as one of the most divisive figures in politics. Her husband is a political genius. But she could be a great senator, if she put that ambition aside.
But if she did, she really wouldn't need him ...
Nonsense and hogwash.
[Do they really want a Democrat to win in 2004? I hate to say it, but the answer may be no. Hillary will be too old to run in 2012. Her year would be 2008. But she couldn't take on an incumbent Democratic president. She needs an open seat, not President Dean running for a second term.]
I agree completely. With GW's popularity, and with the economy slowly improving,the dims have written off the 2004 election -- excepting the obligatory sacrificial candidate. Hitlery! is clearly positioning herself for a run in 2008. Bar the doors!
Has there been any mention of the who real authors of this book are?
I know why she stood by her man ~~ she needed his coattails.
But, for the heck of it, I would like to hear her explain the special division she established during the 1992 campaign to "handle bimbo eruptions". ~~ Was she gulping for air during that, too?
Like her or not, there's no denying that Hillary Clinton is a smart woman.
I deny it. We gauge intelligence by results. Look at how much scandal she's endured, with no way to explain her many misdeeds. Look at whom she married, and what she's had to put up with from him. Look at how she's had to twist and squirm to defend him -- and her own incredible statements about who was "persecuting" him.
She's a Senator, true. But the Democrats could have run Jack the Ripper against Rick Lazio and still won that seat. Intelligence not required.
Evil is essentially stupid. -- Robert A. Heinlein.
Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit The Palace Of Reason:
http://palaceofreason.com
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.