Mar 02, 2008 - 04:06:13 CST
Watching the waning moments of the Clinton era has been sad and painful.For all of their faults, the Clintons are a masterful American power couple, dedicated to public service, confident in their capacities, at home with power. Of the four remaining candidates, I believe that Mrs. Clinton would be far and away the most competent president. You may or may not agree with her political outlook, but her work ethic, her command of information, her determination to make the world a better place and her earnestness are tremendously impressive.
She has, by all accounts, been an effective United States senator.
The case Mrs. Clinton makes for herself has a great deal of validity. She really would be ready on day one. She lived in the White House for eight of the most contentious years in modern American politics. If she were elected, she (and we) would not have to go through that awkward orientation period when new presidents make silly mistakes because they don't yet know what a pressure cooker and garish fishbowl the White House is in the age of CNN.
She is married to a world celebrity, who is beloved throughout the planet in the way that only Muhammad Ali and Nelson Mandela are loved. That would certainly be an asset, especially at a time when American prestige is in tatters.
She really is battle tested. We really do know what we would get if we elected her. (That is part of the problem, of course.) She really is a political survivor. She really is a fighter. Her negatives may be high, but we have long since come to terms with them. It's hard to believe there can be any Hillary Clinton revelations that have yet to be uncovered.
Barack Obama is not battle tested. We really don't know how much substance there is behind the marvelous poetry of his speeches. He is wonderfully attractive, and he may in fact be the multicultural Jack Kennedy of the early 21st century, but he is essentially a symbol of our aspirations rather than a man of measurable achievement. Mrs. Clinton is right. We don't know nearly enough about him to entrust the future of the world's most important nation to him.
Even so, galling as it manifestly is to the Clintons, the American people (or at least the Democrats) seem willing to throw the dice for Obama. Why? Because they don't like the cynicism and the bickering and the paralysis of their national government, and finally someone has arrived on the horizon who offers something more in keeping with our dream of ourselves. In other words, what Mrs. Clinton regards as her strengths are actually her greatest weakness. She really is a known quantity.
Been there. Done that.
It will be difficult for Mrs. Clinton not to be profoundly embittered by the failure of her campaign. She will be disappointed in herself. She will know that if she had an ounce of charisma, she'd be the next president of the United States. She has never found her voice. She impresses but she does not inspire.
Given what her husband has put her through in their long, perplexing marriage and the countless controversies of her time in the White House, no wonder she moves through life in heavy armor. But the American people want to connect with the soul of their next president. Each of the other three remaining candidates seems more authentic, more human. Hillary Clinton is a masterful policy wonk. That may be what we need, but it is not what we want. Ronald Reagan was certainly not a policy wonk, but he knew that you cannot be president unless you tell us that "it is morning in America" again.
The feeling one gets from watching Mrs. Clinton is that it is always Monday morning in America - again.
Mrs. Clinton also will have (new) reason to be angry with her husband. His behavior in New Hampshire and South Carolina was appalling - subtly playing the race card, subtly playing the "Islamic" card, not so subtly likening Obama to a "fairy tale." These cheap tricks were bad enough in themselves (and they backfired), but the real damage to her campaign was that they reminded us of what we least like about Bill Clinton: that his enormous political gifts do not seem to be tethered to any core integrity. I think when the American people realized that electing her would be returning him to the White House for four or eight years, they decided that they had enough of all that for one lifetime, thank you very much.
It's ironic, of course. She would not be a candidate for the presidency had it not been for the meteoric career of her husband, but in the end it may have been her husband, more than any other single factor, that cost her the presidency. He'll pay for that.
The greatest blow to Mrs. Clinton, I believe, will be her realization of how much of herself she has lost in the last 30 years. She was once a youthful idealist. Back in 1968 and 1972, she believed, with passionate intensity, that the old guard had betrayed the American dream, and that the United States could only get back on track and realize its historic potential if a new generation of leaders, pure, lyrically naïve, untouched by the tar of power, got control of steering wheel. In other words, she was once Barack Obama, and now, almost 40 years later, she has been reduced to mocking in her opponent the very qualities that led her to commit herself to a life of public service.
In belittling Obama and sourly predicting that he won't be able to talk so hopefully once he realizes how the world really works, she is behaving just like the old hacks she despised back when she believed the Age of Aquarius was just around the corner.
Fueled by fierce political ambition, Mrs. Clinton has spent the last couple of months trying to convince the American people that they should not entrust their future to a man who is not yet disillusioned. Some part of her seems to recognize the terrible cynicism of her election strategy. That's why it rings so true when, once every week or so, she says publicly how honored she is to share a stage with Obama. He is, after all, what she used to be.
(Clay Jenkinson is the Theodore Roosevelt scholar-in-residence at Dickinson State University. He lives in Bismarck. Contact Jenkinson at Jeffysage@aol.com.)
VoR wrote on Mar 10, 2008 12:33 AM:
Can one leader fix it all? Not unless most of us are finally willing to stop this partizan insanity and start working together to help make it happen. Inspirational speeches can only go so far. But we have to start somewhere. Barrak Obama has managed to motovate people who have never been involved in the country's future before. This is a rare opportunity to get some things done and right some wrongs. If we let it slip away, we will live to regret it.
Above all we must NOT lose our hope, because without it we don't have a chance. "
to rapture wrote on Mar 9, 2008 8:26 PM:
mom-of-teens wrote on Mar 9, 2008 10:46 AM:
pbj wrote on Mar 9, 2008 9:34 AM:
BILL G-A-R-R wrote on Mar 9, 2008 8:22 AM:
Ali wrote on Mar 9, 2008 5:38 AM:
REX wrote on Mar 7, 2008 8:28 PM:
Dave wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:00 PM:
I don't see any difference between Hill / Obama / McCain. It will be "business as usual" in DC (see how much money you can stuff in your pocket before you're sent packing & spend 3x more tax money than the government takes in). We better get used to troops in Iraq. I don't see them coming home anytime soon. Iraq will be just like Germany, Turkey, Japan and Korea.
---------------------------------
Clay,
Keep up the good work. I love the 'Jefferson Hour'.
Thanks, Dave
"
Rapture- wrote on Mar 5, 2008 3:09 PM:
Every Christian knows rapture is drawing near.
Obama (if elected) will have the U.S. well on the
way to the end. . . "
Edward wrote on Mar 4, 2008 9:36 AM:
Rasmus wrote on Mar 4, 2008 8:07 AM:
Halatbis wrote on Mar 3, 2008 4:23 PM:
Mark wrote on Mar 3, 2008 12:31 PM:
Online editor wrote on Mar 3, 2008 10:12 AM:
Matt wrote on Mar 2, 2008 11:00 PM:
LL wrote on Mar 2, 2008 6:18 PM:
Matt wrote on Mar 2, 2008 3:01 PM:
Online Editor wrote on Mar 2, 2008 1:52 PM:
LL wrote on Mar 2, 2008 12:03 PM:
Matt wrote on Mar 2, 2008 11:29 AM:
"
Ryan wrote on Mar 2, 2008 4:45 AM:
America needs a president that will inspire and motivate people like JFK, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, etc.....and that is why I am voting for Obama.
"
Comments are reviewed for taste, tone and language before posting.
Some comments may be used in the Tribune's print edition.