Wednesday, October 17, 2007

HILLARY CLINTON, BARACK OBAMA, JOHN EDWARDS

Hillary Clinton's Fifteen Years of Conditioning Grassroots Democrats

Quin Hillyer at the Spectator says that Obama and Edwards are "gutless wonders" by refusing to go after the frontrunner on the "Clintons' mind-boggling record of corrupt political thuggery."

These men are fearful, but less of Hillary than of the Democratic primary electorate. Hillyer's hitting on the massive advantage Hillary Clinton has on any challenger when it comes to the hearts of her party's grassroots: The gradual conditioning of their standards and preferences since 1992. Read on:

When Hillary Clinton first appeared on the national scene in 1992, and abrasively quipped about baking cookies or Tammy Wynette, a lot of rank-and-file Democrats defended her.

Whitewater, the cattle futures, the disappearing and reappearing billing records - on every scandal, most grassroots Democrats came to her defense, and insisted she was the blameless victim of a partisan witch hunt. When health care reform went down in flames, they had to overlook her faults. Chinese fundraising? Renting out the Lincoln Bedroom? Time and again, they looked at emerging facts - or perhaps the proper metaphor is closed their eyes - and declared, "it is not her fault, she has done nothing wrong."

Finally, the women: Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Monica Lewinsky: on each of them, grassroots Democrats told themselves, and the rest of the country, that the charges were false, that this wasn't the public's concern, that each and every one of the tawdry tales was a puritan smear job of the right-wing conspiracy.

We laughed at Michael Kelly's "I Believe" column. To our friends on the left, there was nothing funny or ironic about it.

Now, these same Democrats are supposed to be persuaded when Obama or Edwards brings up the pardon of Marc Rich? They're supposed to turn on her because one of them reminds them of disappearing White House silverware?

Declaring that Hillary Clinton has done nothing wrong is as instinctive as breathing to many Democrats now.

Nominating Obama or Edwards over Hillary now would invalidate all of those defenses over the years. It would mean her critics had a point all these years, and they cannot concede that core belief they've held close to their hearts for a decade and a half. Democrats aren't just supportive of Hillary Clinton's rise to the presidency: they're emotionally and intellectually invested in it.

10/17 04:23 PMShare