Richard Cohen is a liberal apologist of the first order.
So what is that when he comes up with something like this [1], you tend to sit up and take note:
If there is a phrase more closely associated with both Hillary and Bill Clinton than “the politics of personal destruction,” it does not come to mind. All the others — “It’s the economy, stupid,” for instance — belong to one or the other, but “the politics of personal destruction” is a phrase both Clintons have used repeatedly — so much so, it seems, that for Hillary it has lost all meaning.
[2]When, for instance, Gen. David Petraeus was slimed as “General Betray Us,” Hillary Clinton looked the other way. This was the politics of personal expediency.
The swipe at Petraeus was contained in a full-page ad the anti-war group MoveOn.org recently placed in The New York Times. It charged that Petraeus was “cooking the books” about conditions in Iraq and cited statements of his that have turned out to be either (1) not true, (2) no longer true, (3) possibly not true, or (4) like everything else in Iraq, impossible to tell. Whatever the case, using “betray” — a word associated with treason — recalls the ugly McCarthy era when, for too many Republicans, dissent corresponded with disloyalty. MoveOn.org and the late senator from Wisconsin share a certain fondness for the low blow.
Almost instantly, though, it got pretty hard to find a Democratic presidential candidate willing to dispute MoveOn.org. To his credit, Joe Biden did. “I don’t buy into that,” he said. “This is an honorable guy. He’s telling the truth.” But lonesome Joe, whose virtues have yet to come to the attention of the vast and apathetic electorate, was seconded only by Joe Lieberman, not a presidential candidate, and John Kerry, a man whose tomorrow is yesterday. When Clinton was asked about the ad, she avoided answering.
[3]It may seem unfair to single out Clinton in this matter when the bunker in which she took shelter was crowded with her fellow quivering candidates. But Clinton is the front-runner, quite possibly the next president of the United States, and so it is reasonable to focus on her and wonder if, as some allege, she indeed does have a spine. In this instance, it was nowhere to be found.
Which, logically, makes one wonder if the wicked witch of the west was not in fact that the root of this particular problem. We know, the denials of MoveOn on Err America yesterday notwithstanding that they and the Democratic party have been working hand in hand since the formation of the group.
It’s as Cohen says:
The issue with Hillary Clinton is not whether she’s smart or experienced but whether she has — how do we say this? — the character to be president. Behind her, after all, trails the lingering vapor of all those gates: Travel, File, Whitewater, and other scandals to which she was a part only through marriage. In a hatless society, she is always wearing a question mark.
That O.J. Simpson was, until last week still walking the streets, is an indication that Hillary will probably get away with this one too. Ones past transgressions appear not to the sources of shame, but talking points on a resume anymore. Too bad that Cohen’s anger with Hillry doesn’t extend to the remainder of the Democrats running for office, who share so much of a history, and a prevailing attitude, with her.