Two Critical Biographies
Two biographies of Hillary Clinton have just been published and both paint a negative picture of Democratic Senator for New York, and presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton:
Two new books on Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York offer fresh and often critical portraits of the Democratic presidential candidate that depict a tortured relationship with her husband and her past and challenge the image she has presented on the campaign trail.
The Hillary Clinton who emerges from the pages of the books comes across as a complicated, sometimes compromised figure who tolerated Bill Clinton’s brazen infidelity, pursued her policy and political goals with methodical drive, and occasionally skirted along the edge of the truth along the way. The books portray her as alternately brilliant and controlling, ambitious and victimized.
The Clinton campaign has nervously awaited publication of the books for fear they would include a bombshell revelation or, at the very least, revive memories of less-savory moments in the couple’s rise to power. The books, both by longtime journalists and both obtained by The Washington Post yesterday, include a number of assertions and anecdotes that could confront her campaign with unwelcome questions.
“A Woman in Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton,” by Carl Bernstein, reports that Clinton as first lady was terrified she would be prosecuted, took over her own legal and political defense, and decided not to be forthcoming with investigators because she was convinced she was unfairly targeted. While in Arkansas, according to Bernstein, she personally interviewed one woman alleged to have had an affair with her husband, contemplated divorce and thought about running for governor out of anger at her husband’s indiscretions.
“Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton,” by Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr., reports that during her husband’s 1992 campaign, a team she oversaw hired a private investigator to undermine Gennifer Flowers “until she is destroyed.” Flowers had said publicly that she had an affair with Bill Clinton while he was governor of Arkansas.
The running for Governor just to piss Bill off is indeed new to me, but I have to say that it sounds a bit awkward to me. She would not have stood a chance. She could have destroyed Bill’s career of course, but that would also have meant the end of her own career. Now, if there’s anything Hillary Clinton would never consider doing, it’s throwing away her chances of becoming America’s first female president / having a remarkable political career.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
19 Responses to “Two Critical Biographies”
I think you underestimate the emotional state of a woman scorned. It doesn’t say that she decided to do it- probably reason and personal ambition held her back- just that she considered it. We don’t often think of Hillary as hurting and vengeful, but that is because she always seems to have her emotions in check in the Senate.
LOL, obviously we think alike at least on some things, Kim: before I clicked the link to read your comment I was thinking “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” and all that.
Don’t forget, too, that Hillary has a throwing arm like John Elway’s.
Well, CS, she wouldn’t be human if she didn’t at least think about it! From her perspective, it must have been humiliating to be his wife and First Lady of Arkansas, and be expected to smile graciously through it all.
lol – that’s certainly true. However, again, I don’t think it’s likely.
On the other hand, I am a man, what do I know?
…Not to make a woman angry!
I guess he owes her everything for sticking by him- over and over. She could have very easily ruined his career.
Well, that’s what insiders say, isn’t it- that a bargain was struck? (I think it was Dick Morris that I’ve heard that from).
And Michael, she didn’t decide to do that so obviously she’s smart enough for logic to prevail, but we’re just saying that it doesn’t surprise us that initially it must have been difficult to get past the anger and humiliation and figure out how to turn the situation to her advantage instead of reacting emotionally.
I can’t help but think that for an obviously strong woman, having to graciously smile and “stand by her husband” while he showed her little respect must have been utterly humiliating. Such a thing is completely humiliating for any woman, but at least a normal woman doesn’t have to pretend it doesn’t bother her, or have the entire world think that her husband considers her a drag in bed and is out looking for greener pastures.
Considering revenge, even career ending revenge, actually contributes positively to my view of her. It makes her human, at least.
[...] View original here: Michael van der Galien [...]
She needed him, he didn’t just need her. As far as her rise to the Presidency goes (officially this time), she can divorce “Booster Bill” after he’s been spent during the last stage of ascent between now and November 2008.
I think she would wait until after being elected to a second term to divorce him.
Bill just seems like he is stuck in the party animal stage. He probably shouldn’t have gotten married in the first place, since he is incapable of fidelity. But at least he’s done a lot with his life.
Well, they would have been drummed out of the GOP by now- can you imagine Bill asking James Dobson for forgiveness? Oh wait, he did forgive Newt, so anything’s possible in the nexus of politics and religion!
BTW, MvdG- I think Hillary was considering what would happen to Chelsea, not just her future in politics. Even the smear books give her that.
Kim,
(since you brought it up, I assume it’s fair game)- have you forgotten Clinton’s tearful apology to the religious leaders at the national prayer breakfast? Many of them had been supporting Clinton and saying that they believed him when he said that the accusations of the affair with Lewinsky weren’t true, and then he really had to do the mea culpa when he finally admitted his lie. Of course I don’t think he ever got around to apologizing to “that woman, Ms. Lewinsky” or her family for what he put them through.
I’m not condoning Newt or anyone else but I’m not sure why you think the Dobson/Newt exchange was any different than what Clinton did when he confessed his sin and asked for forgiveness.
I think both incidents were shameless political posturing, CS. But its not as though Clinton was able to put his adultery behind him after the breakfast. I don’t think either man should be judged by what religious leaders do or don’t do, but maybe that’s because I’m not religious myself. Newt was only remarkable because he led the charge to impeach Clinton, when he was having an affair of his own. I don’t remember Clinton judging others for their sexual misconduct, though there is plenty of it to go around up here in Washington. Many of the Conservatives who judged Clinton had some hanky panky on the side.
Jeff Gerth has made a decent living writing stories about the Clinton’s based on, shall we say misconceptions on his part.
I have no doubt this book will be more of the same. (And I don’t even like the Clintons!)
The Clinton marriage is typical of failed marriages before the restrictions were relaxed on divorce. Doona Reed and other BS was 1950′s fanatsy. I don’t know whats worse, the Clinton marriage of convience or the thrice married Republicants telling others about family values.
Well I like them separately, but already know way more than I want to about their marriage and their personal lives. They do seem to have burned a lot of bridges. Just raise money for charity, develop a health care plan, end the war, whatever. As long as I don’t have to hear about who Bill’s cheating with, and whether Hillary is standing by her man!