Evan Thomas
BOOKS
The Marriage Tax
A new book questions how Bill would affect President Hillary.
If Hillary Clinton wins next November, on the day after she is inaugurated she should put her husband on a plane around the world and tell him not to come back until she's a private citizen again. At least that's what I couldn't help thinking as I read "For Love of Politics," Sally Bedell Smith's new book on the Clintons in the White House during Bill's presidency. Bill Clinton is already a great salesman for America in the world. He loves to travel, he loves crowds, he speaks with empathy and charm. Though by law Mrs. Clinton cannot formally appoint her husband to a federal job, she can make him an informal ambassador plenipotentiary.
She should send him to the Middle East, to Russia, to China, to Europe or South America or Africa or the North Pole—anywhere, just as long as she gets him out of the White House. Given modern communications, even the other side of the world may not be far enough away. It is clear from reading Smith's book (something that all political journalists need to do, and not just skim) that anyone who thinks he's voting just for Hillary on Election Day is naive. The Clintons are a political package, a two-for-one bargain, a duo inextricably intertwined. Judging from the evidence provided by Smith, they are also an unhappily married couple whose relationship would inevitably affect Hillary's judgment and actions. Bill will insist that he will be hands-off, but everything we know about him suggests that he will be meddling at every turn. He loves politics and being the center of attention too much. He will be America's first unelected vice president, also its first unconfirmed secretary of state, unconfirmed secretary of the treasury, etc.
As I read Smith's book I was strongly reminded of a notion I first read about in the Aubrey-Maturin novels by the late Patrick O'Brian. Capt. Aubrey's companion, the shrewd Dr. Maturin, perceived that moral superiority is corrosive in a relationship. It undermines the trust and intimacy that are essential to a good friendship, more so to a good marriage.
Bill Clinton is in almost every way a superior politician to his wife. He is in many ways a better leader. But he is morally inferior, not just because of his philandering but because of his natural inconstancy. The stress of not being able to trust the man she loves has had a strong negative effect on Hillary. It has made her harder, harsher, more brittle, and secretive herself. Certainly that is the way she comes off in Smith's thoroughly reported book.
Senator Clinton has had the good luck to have Barack Obama as her foil for the last nine months. She has been able to look steady, experienced, in control. Obama, by contrast, has seemed soft and, at times, weak or naive. He is, next to Clinton, the "Obambi" of unkind caricature. She is the one tough enough to be president—tough enough to overcome the Democrats' long-standing liability (at least among some voters) of appearing to be the Mommy Party to the GOP's Daddy Party.
But her real relationship is with her true partner, her husband. Next to him she seems less impressive—less warm and captivating than he is, for sure, but also a person whose fierceness betrays an inner hurt. Despite her recent attempts to laugh a lot, she often seems tense and somewhat hostile. The fact that at some level she is mad at her husband and wounded by him—and that she knows he might at any moment get her caught up in some kind of tawdry replay of Monicagate—is inescapable.
- 1
- 2
- Next Page »
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: BevSims @ 03/10/2008 11:59:51 AM
Comment: I am always amazed as to how the American people have one, a very short memory, two, a very short attention span ( in believing everything that someone tells them) and three allow the media to let the Clintons always change the goal post if it does not go in their favor, how is it that Obama has one more states, and this idea that he won't get votes in the General is crazy, democrats will votes for him with his crossover appeal, he has accumulated more delegates even in Texan, and the media in wanting Clinton to win and overcome his lead so badly stated that the momentum was over, she so called won by less than 3% of the vote and now with the caucuses that is questionable.
Most of the votes she received at the last moment was due to the kitchen sink strategy, but those who made up their minds to vote for her, were not going to vote for Obama and looked for a reason, this Resko crap that the press is allowing her to continue to bring up, he is not on trial Resko is, you have dug and dug and the only thing that you can come up with is property that he purchased, remember Obama gave his money to charity, why can't we see the presidential papers or her tax returns to see what she did with Resko donations that she received, or his middle name or his wife's papers from college, let's not forget the scandal in about her senatorial campaign with Peter Paul giving her campaign 1.2 million dollars, which was never used for the campaign, never donated to charity, but there is a court case that is pending that shows Billary and Chelsea will have to testify on charges.
WHY IS THE PRESS NOT BRINGING THIS UP.? And her 35 years of experience is a joke and makes me want to throw up when I hear it, do the comparison of her 8 years in office passing legislation or getting it passed and Obama's 8 years in the state senate and 3 years in the senate and the important legislation that he has passed and how he has always been able to cross over party lines, but not Hillary the fighter who only wants to get back in to show the (Right winged conspirators) republicans and rub it in their face.
The bottom line is if Florida and Michigan are allowed as is to be counted it is not fair, he was not on the ballot, and so what if he chose not to by following the rules, and they Super delegates can wait for the Convention and choose Hillary, I will never vote for her, it will be McCain or stay at home, and it would be a sad day, because all the youth that Obama brought into the campaign not Clinton, she only wanted the youth after she saw what Obama was doing, just like she is insulting the states that she did not win, or have very small delegates stating that in the general they won't count. Hopefully you guys will read and learn.
Posted By: BevSims @ 03/10/2008 11:59:38 AM
Comment: I am always amazed as to how the American people have one, a very short memory, two, a very short attention span ( in believing everything that someone tells them) and three allow the media to let the Clintons always change the goal post if it does not go in their favor, how is it that Obama has one more states, and this idea that he won't get votes in the General is crazy, democrats will votes for him with his crossover appeal, he has accumulated more delegates even in Texan, and the media in wanting Clinton to win and overcome his lead so badly stated that the momentum was over, she so called won by less than 3% of the vote and now with the caucuses that is questionable.
Most of the votes she received at the last moment was due to the kitchen sink strategy, but those who made up their minds to vote for her, were not going to vote for Obama and looked for a reason, this Resko crap that the press is allowing her to continue to bring up, he is not on trial Resko is, you have dug and dug and the only thing that you can come up with is property that he purchased, remember Obama gave his money to charity, why can't we see the presidential papers or her tax returns to see what she did with Resko donations that she received, or his middle name or his wife's papers from college, let's not forget the scandal in about her senatorial campaign with Peter Paul giving her campaign 1.2 million dollars, which was never used for the campaign, never donated to charity, but there is a court case that is pending that shows Billary and Chelsea will have to testify on charges.
WHY IS THE PRESS NOT BRINGING THIS UP.? And her 35 years of experience is a joke and makes me want to throw up when I hear it, do the comparison of her 8 years in office passing legislation or getting it passed and Obama's 8 years in the state senate and 3 years in the senate and the important legislation that he has passed and how he has always been able to cross over party lines, but not Hillary the fighter who only wants to get back in to show the (Right winged conspirators) republicans and rub it in their face.
The bottom line is if Florida and Michigan are allowed as is to be counted it is not fair, he was not on the ballot, and so what if he chose not to by following the rules, and they Super delegates can wait for the Convention and choose Hillary, I will never vote for her, it will be McCain or stay at home, and it would be a sad day, because all the youth that Obama brought into the campaign not Clinton, she only wanted the youth after she saw what Obama was doing, just like she is insulting the states that she did not win, or have very small delegates stating that in the general they won't count. Hopefully you guys will read and learn.
Posted By: Shankardada2 @ 11/15/2007 2:04:42 PM
Comment: You have to admit, most things he said were true, regardless of Hillary's prospective opponent. She HAS seemed tense. She definitely SEEMS more hard-nosed than "Obambi." It is probable that Bill WON'T be able to keep it in his pants and will attempt to have sex with other floozies. It is also true that Bill IS much smoother than Hillary. It is also evident that Bill and Hillary are in a marriage of convenience and not one of love and trust. Will any of this make any difference in '08? Probably not the loveless marriage, but the rigidity and lack of charisma will. She is the person to beat, like Al-Gore was in 2000. But Guliani is more Bill-like than Hillary (which in this popularity contest called an election is a good thing), and he has a great chance of knocking her off.