The era of big Clintons is soon over

By CALVIN WOODWARD  Tuesday, May 27, 2008
ADVERTISEMENT
 

Photo

In this Oct. 27, 1993 file photo House Speaker Thomas Foley of Wash., left, and President Clinton applaud as first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks in Statuary Hall on Capitol Hill. When Hillary Rodham Clinton finally exits the 2008 Democratic presidential race, she will end a decades-long, power-couple streak of unique political energy, savvy ideas, colossal policy flops and raw ambition dressed in pants suits and briefs, not boxers.

— There's been a Clinton running for the White House or living in it for approximately forever.

Bill, it could be said, was born to run. Running became Hillary's destiny, too.

One quarter of Americans have never known life without a Clinton trying for or having the presidency. Millions have gone from diapers to diplomas in the time of the Clintons.

When Hillary Rodham Clinton finally exits the 2008 Democratic presidential race, she will end a decades-long, power-couple streak of unique political energy, savvy ideas, colossal policy flops and raw ambition dressed in pants suits and briefs, not boxers.

"Every day is an adventure," Bill said cheerfully at the start of it all. And how.

By now, the Clintons have been assigned mystical qualities of perseverance. The notion that the adventure is over is almost beyond comprehension.

"I never quit," she says. "I never give up."

Even in defeat, Hillary Clinton has made history as the first woman favored for a major party presidential nomination — the first with a real shot at the presidency.

She's gotten more than 17 million votes in her own right this year, enticingly close to the number won by Barack Obama, who is making history, too, because he's black.

With her cachet, not to mention her job in the Senate, Clinton won't drift far from the nation's consciousness. (Nor is Bill likely to get out of the country's face.)

"Whatever else you might say about them, they have contributed to substantive dialogue and policy," says Mary Matalin, a Clinton-era Republican strategist. "Hats off to them substantively.

"They're really kind of giants in this world."

In the 2012 and 2016 presidential campaign years, Hillary Clinton, now 60, will still be younger than the Republican candidate, John McCain, is now. Meantime, she could become a powerhouse senator in the manner of the stricken Edward M. Kennedy. Or a Supreme Court justice. Or Obama's running mate.

Soon, though, there will be no Clinton running for president or about to. Imagine that.

___

Clinton I:

Dial back to Bill Clinton's two terms and a few big achievements and various smaller ones stand out: unsurpassed economic growth, a balanced budget, welfare reform, free trade, a Middle East peace agreement, gun control, more money for police on the street, the first Cabinet without white men in the majority.

Here was a man who could wear people out talking about the fine points of policy while owning up to his choice of underwear.

Another legacy was the transcendent His and Hers failure: universal health care. The complex, secretively drawn plan to achieve that goal was sent to and killed by a Democratic Congress, no less.

And there were the scandals, His and Hers.

They are known, in brief, as: Monica Lewinsky, Paula Jones, Gennifer Flowers, Whitewater, the White House travel office firings, White House coffees and Lincoln bedroom stays for donors, FBI background files on Republicans, missing documents and the presidential pardon of a fugitive friend.

The episodes involving women were his. Most of the others were theirs or hers.

___

Scene from a 'funeral':

In January 2001, shortly before George W. Bush was sworn in, some of the Clintons' fiercest critics from the right gathered in a Washington hotel to feast on filet mignon, salmon and sour grapes.

"It's our way of celebrating the fumigation of Washington," said L. Brent Bozell III, host of the "funeral" for the Clinton years.

"I've never seen a back I've found more attractive," said Robert Bork, the scuttled Supreme Court nominee, meaning Bill Clinton's back when he left town.

Bozell amended the Lord's Prayer to say of Mrs. Clinton: "Her socialist agenda got runneth over." And the Rev. Jerry Falwell gave the invocation, thanking God "a new wind is blowing."

They seemed to be forgetting someone.

Hillary Clinton came blowing into the Senate chamber, the newly minted junior senator from New York.

___

Clinton II:

She was diligent from the start, attentive to constituent needs and a hard worker on the Armed Services Committee. She promised to be "pretty New York-centric," and was.

But everything she did was colored by the expectation of a presidential run.

The most polarizing woman in politics turned into a workhorse and formed surprising alliances with Republicans.

She edged toward the center and attempted to accomplish in little pieces what she could not pull off as a whole in her years as first lady.

Clinton joined Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, an architect of her husband's impeachment, in a law improving health coverage for members of the National Reserve and Guard serving in Iraq.

She pushed for tighter regulation of prescription drugs for children and help for recovery workers whose health was impaired by laboring at the site of the 2001 World Trade Center terrorist attack.

And she voted to authorize the Iraq invasion, which she would never live down after she cruised to re-election in 2006.

No monumental law bears her name.

But in the campaign, universal health care returned to her agenda. This time, she said, she would learn from her experience and do it right — more openly and less intrusively on parts of the health care system that work.

Clinton was the one to beat out of the gate. Everyone knew her, for one thing.

"Ninety-nine percent of the country feels they have a relationship with her," said Mike McCurry, former press secretary to President Clinton.

And there was Bill, still in everyone's face. He stumped for his wife as if possessed. Hillary Clinton flashed him that bright smile on stage through thick and thin.

For some voters, that was one Clinton — or two — too many.

"We've had enough of the Clintons," said Haydon Grubbs, 77, of Shalimar, Fla. "New direction, right?"

Grubbs, a Republican who voted in the past for the "He Clinton," backed Obama this time.

The "She Clinton" found her own voice.

But, like her husband, she seemed the strongest when her back was against the wall.

As the odds of beating Obama sank into the nearly impossible, she campaigned as if there were some previously undiscovered "third way" to win, just as Bill Clinton had sought a third way to govern between the old politics of left and right.

On Friday, she cited the 1968 Democratic primaries as a reason why she should stay in the race. She mentioned the assassination of Robert Kennedy in June of that year, then apologized for bringing it up.

___

Together, Bill and Hillary Clinton have pulled it out of the fire over and over, going back to 1976, when he bounced back from losing a congressional race two years earlier. He won election as Arkansas attorney general.

Two years after that, at 32, he became the nation's youngest governor.

Then, defeat in 1980 when he sought a second term. It would be his final election loss, but hardly the last dip in the Clintons' seemingly endless cycle of failure and renewal.

By the mid-1980s, when he was back in office in Little Rock, Clinton's name was floating as a Democratic presidential prospect.

He took a pass in 1988. But that year marked one benchmark in the rollout of the Clinton era.

He delivered a speech at the Democratic convention laying out a new orthodoxy that he would bring to the presidential race himself four years later, his activist wife at his side.

The Clintons' national conversation had begun.

The speech went on for so long that some people wondered if it would ever end.

In a way, it never did. Not until now.







reader COMMENTS (25)
farmdude
May 28, 2008 at 9:48 a.m.
Suggest removal

Quit ragging on the Gazette. All they did was simply run a story from the national Associated Press.

jviers77
May 28, 2008 at 7:58 a.m.
Suggest removal

Washington needs a change, regardless of who it is. Since 1988, it's been either a Bush or a Clinton, both families full of career politicians. It's time for a new bloodline to help move our country forward instead of chaining us to the past.
*
Whether or not we want to admit it, our future is in real jeopardy with a crashing housing market and the freefall of the value of the dollar. I hope by the time I have kids to raise (should be soon) we'll have the economy back on track and a solution to rising healthcare costs.

billnewbie
May 27, 2008 at 6:58 p.m.
Suggest removal

If the Gazette staff, or any other media staff, was perfectly balanced between left and right and political views were never included in news items, there would still be those on both sides who would complain of bias against their favorites. As far as columnists carried by the Gazette are concerned, they are not all from the right. Ellen Goodman and Joel McNally, to name just two, are prominently left of center. If a newspaper gets too far from center, such as the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, they loose credibility and end up just "preaching to the choir".

kiowamohican
May 27, 2008 at 6 p.m.
Suggest removal

The Gazette is pretty moderate.
Pick up the NY times, or LA Times, if you want major left wing spin on hard news. The WSJ is probably the only real main stream paper with a conservative bias. The Gazette is pretty balanced. Lot of OP-ED's from both sides. Most of the national news is straight off the AP (who pretty much has no bias in hard news). Seems like most of the Gazette's local reporters are politically to the left. The editors seem more center-right leaning, but I could be wrong.

kiowamohican
May 27, 2008 at 5:34 p.m.
Suggest removal

Hillary is finished. I have posted numerous times on the reasons why. This race was over with after super Tuesday. Hillary's campaign set up their network for a knock out blow on super Tuesday. All Obama had to do was survive super Tuesday (and he did with it ending in a draw), as his strategists had planned FAR ahead. That was why he won 11 straight contests after Super Tuesday. He had his ground network set up in all those states past Super Tuesday, and had HUGE $$$ backing to boot. Hillary's war chest was all but broke after Super Tuesday, and had next to no networking set up in the Patomic states, or anywhere else; as they figured it would be all over after Super Tuesday. Obama's team simply out calculated Clinton in every aspect of the game. While Clinton's team was way over confident, and did not take the Obama threat seriously. They figured they could paint him as the "black candidate", of obscurity; like Sharpton, or Jackson of past years. That strategy backfired immediately in South Carolina, and was the start of the Clinton demise. From a strategic standpoint, I really give Obama credit. His team did a brilliant job taking down an overwhelming front runner.

garyprimer
May 27, 2008 at 5:30 p.m.
Suggest removal

If this is the era of any presidential family, it is Bush, not Clinton.

garyprimer
May 27, 2008 at 5:28 p.m.
Suggest removal

I don't recall a Clinton running in 2000 or 2004. Wasn't it Gore and Kerry? This article is based upon an imaginary premise.

Whatdidyousay
May 27, 2008 at 4:27 p.m.
Suggest removal

whocares:
I believe that your observation is right on the money. Hillary will look like she is supporting obama in public, but behind the scenes see will do her best to sabotage his candidacy. She has to be careful though, it could backfire on her and the party would turn its back on her.

NVgrf
May 27, 2008 at 4:21 p.m.
Suggest removal

The only flaw in your logic.........."when Obama gets defeated this time"
I know you don't really believe this.

Whatdidyousay
May 27, 2008 at 4:19 p.m.
Suggest removal

Those people that think obama will be the next president are going to be singing the blues after november. Don't count your chickens before they hatch, or come home to roost. I'm not happy with any of the current choices, but McCain is beating obama in the polls already and obama continues to make too many mistakes relating to foreign policy issues. His lack of experience will be his down fall in the general election with those voters that pay close attention to politics. Those that vote based on a persons ability to mesmerize people with an eloquent speech will still vote for obama regardless of what they do or do not know about him.

whocares
May 27, 2008 at 3:33 p.m.
Suggest removal

Don't kid yourselves - Hillary's not done. She quit running for 2008 some weeks ago - she's now running for 2012. She won't get out of the public eye for the rest of this campaign, and when Obama gets defeated this time, he will be done and Hillary has a clear shot for 2012. She'll be campaigning for the next 4 1/2 years.

NVgrf
May 27, 2008 at 3:28 p.m.
Suggest removal

I certainly agree bill. Look at how many Republicans have jumped ship on Bush after voting for the man twice.

coast2coast
May 27, 2008 at 2:52 p.m.
Suggest removal

I think most will be just happy to see NO Bush OR Clinton in the oval office!

billnewbie
May 27, 2008 at 2:24 p.m.
Suggest removal

And just six months ago most were convinced that Hillary was as good as the next president following an easy campaign. According to Bill Clinton, she's still could win, and until six months ago, he was considered a political genius. Six months is a long time in politics. I wonder if today's sure thing will be as expected six months from now.

Zoom
May 27, 2008 at 1:06 p.m.
Suggest removal

I look forward to the article titled "The era of Big Bush is soon over". What are the chances the Gazette will actually publish one?

thekid3477
May 27, 2008 at 12:47 p.m.
Suggest removal

there has been a bush/clinton in office since 1980. there are more families than those 2 that can run this country. good riddance to both. can we change?? 'yes we can':) welcome and good luck president obama:)

JCK
May 27, 2008 at 11:23 a.m.
Suggest removal

I'll be happier when the era of Big Bushs is over.

NVgrf
May 27, 2008 at 11:21 a.m.
Suggest removal

I have noticed the online Gazette featuring more and more of these op-eds from the righties out there. I haven't seen really anything at all here from the left.
But at least they are featuring pretty much the nut fringe right. That really does a positive service for the Obama campaign by highlighting their "goofiness". Keep up the good work Gazette!

Seabee
May 27, 2008 at 11:01 a.m.
Suggest removal

Without ad revenue, there is no paper. If you don't like it, there are plenty of hippy rags out there and I'm sure they all provide an honest unbiased view.

momof5
May 27, 2008 at 10:44 a.m.
Suggest removal

Did I miss something? Has Hillary actually bowed out of the race? I understand that she has all but mathematically been eliminated from getting the nomination, but there are super delegates at stake yet. I'm not being a hopeless optimist or anything. Just wondering if I missed something over the weekend from her camp or the race itself.

proartist
May 27, 2008 at 9:39 a.m.
Suggest removal

TCB: Absolutely correct. The name of the game in newspaper publishing is selling ads. But, just who do you think buys the largest portion of the ad space? The big dollars come from corporations more interested in bigger profits than the welfare of the people and that spells G-O-P.

TCB
May 27, 2008 at 9:01 a.m.
Suggest removal

hiregun:

Why not show a little class and state there has been a bush or clinton in office for the past 20 years and it looks like America does not want another 4 or 8 years of another Clinton.

If you think the gazette has a republican agenda you are nuts. There agends is selling advertising and papers.

hiredgun
May 27, 2008 at 8:45 a.m.
Suggest removal

This is a stupid story. We've had 8 years of a President Clinton, but we will have, by the end of the current president's term 12 years of Presidents Bush. Why not focus on that?

But the Gazette has an ill-concealed policy to promote the Republican agenda and trash all Democrats, so I guess I'm not surprised.

Before you post a comment, consider this:

Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy Agreement
  • Keep it clean. Comments that are obscene, vulgar or sexually oriented will be removed. Creative spelling of such terms or implied use of such language is banned, also.
  • Don't threaten to hurt or kill anyone.
  • Be nice. No racism, sexism or any other sort of -ism that degrades another person.
  • Harassing comments. If you are the subject of a harassing comment or personal attack by another user, do not respond in-kind.  Hit the "Suggest Removal" button on offensive comments.
  • Share what you know. Give us your eyewitness accounts, background, observations and history.
  • Do not libel anyone. Libel is writing something false about someone that damages that person's reputation.
  • Ask questions. What more do you want to know about the story?
  • Stay focused. Keep on the story's topic.
  • Help us get it right. If you spot a factual error or misspelling, email newsroom@gazettextra.com or call 1-800-362-6712.
  • Remember, this is our site. We set the rules, and we reserve the right to remove any comments that we deem inappropriate.

Post Comment

Commenting requires registration.

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment:

ADVERTISEMENT