|
May 1, 2007
– Here we go again. Another election, another media
storyline that doesn't follow reality.
It is a phenomenon which is a bit
difficult to pick up or understand. After a debate in which
Hillary Clinton was clearly a cut above all the others, the media
reports her to be a candidate on the decline.
Barack Obama was clearly a bit off his
game. His answers were nice, but to look at him, it could not
be said that he had the aura or presence of someone who could assure
the nation they should trust him to lead in these precarious times.
John Edwards also was a bit off his
game. Of all the Democratic candidates, Edwards is the most
charming, charismatic, and remembers the Golden Rule of politics -
present a positive vision rather than focusing on the negative.
But on during the MSNBC debate this past week, John didn't get a
chance to show his stuff.
And with both Barack and John, there
lightweight background was a clear issue. Not just in a
background sort of way, but in the way their answers paled in
comparison to those of Hillary Clinton.
While others fought to put out pithy
slogans or strong-sounding statements or folksy commentaries,
Clinton consistently sounded both genuine and like someone who saw
the big picture behind the issue being discussed.
For example, hit with a bizarre question
about their view of hedge funds (note: the MSNBC-moderated
debate sounded more frequently like one of the bad conservative
shows the station airs rather than a Q and A meant to find out about
the candidates,) compare the responses of John Edwards to that of
Hillary Clinton (see
MSNBC transcript):
(Moderator Brian) Williams:
And, Senator (Edwards,), I have a follow-up for
you. On modern day America, you've been of counsel to hedge
funds.
Do hedge
funds make America any better in any way?
I think you
can see the point about the ridiculous questions - hedge funds are
the burning questions on Americans' minds? Nope, just a
chance to get an obscure smear in on John and try and make him
look bad. John fends the question off like the trash it is:
Edwards: Well,
I think what -- first of all, I think the financial markets are
an important component of trying to figure out what it is we
need to do about the fact that we have 47 million people without
health care, 37 million people who wake up in poverty every day.
They play
an enormous role in how money moves in this country. And I
happen to believe that we have a responsibility to the people in
this country who wake up every day worried about feeding and
clothing their children.
And I think
those people in New York who work in financial markets
understand -- in some ways, at least -- what can be done and can
play a significant role in trying to lift people up who are
struggling.
I am proud
of what I've been doing for the last few years. You know, I've
been all over the country, organizing workers into unions and
raising the minimum wage, and also working at a poverty center
at the University of North Carolina.
But now look
at Hillary Clinton's response to the same question. She
doesn't just dally with the bizarre, unexpected query, but instead
uses it as an opportunity to make some profound points about an
extremely important yet mainly ignored topic like regulation, and
then moves onto other important topics like the price of college,
all while hitting that perfect Clintonian balance of embracing
free market capitalism in a manner that makes it work for
everyone, not just a few:
Williams: I'm
afraid time is up.
Senator
Clinton, you represent the state of New York -- just mentioned.
How is America a better place because of all these burgeoning
hedge funds?
Clinton: Well,
I think that America is a great place because we have an
entrepreneurial economy. We have people who are willing to make
stakes and new enterprises and invest their money.
And,
obviously, one of the other reasons we're a great country is
because we've learned over the years how to regulate that, so
nobody gets an unfair advantage -- and that we, you know, have a
framework within which our free market system operates.
Obviously,
for me, it's exciting to represent both New York City, the
global capital market leader, and yet I also represent a big
state where there are a lot of poor people and people who have
no access to health care. They don't have access to affordable
college. They're worried about their futures.
So what
we've got to do here is get back to having a Democratic
president who will set the rules, so that we can continue to
build our economy, we can inspire and incentivize people to take
those risks, but we begin to repair the damage that has been
done by this president and Republican Congress.
Hillary again and again showed that her
eyes are on the ball, and that ball for her is looking out for
average American people - and having a complex mastery of how
subjects interrelate. Yes, a very complex thing, but all done
with a pleasant and authoritative delivery style that shows she has
come of age as an orator. Gone is clumsy, overly didactic
Hillary; here is, yes, likeable Hillary; humble about past failures
on health care reform and people's negative perceptions of her - yet
unflappable at the same time.
Moderator Brian Williams went on to hit
other LImbaugh themes, hitting not one but multiple angles on
abortion - something so tiredly overdone and to which everyone knows
these candidates' answers.
But then he climbs out of the nonsense
into another loaded throw at Hillary, this time about the recent
Virginia Tech shooting:
Williams:
Senator Clinton, a question
for you: Did the government -- did any role that federal
government plays fail those students at Virginia Tech?
Hillary
didn't miss a beat.
Clinton: Yes.
No political
peddling or hemming and hawing for time to formulate a response.
A very direct and brave answer. She continued:
You know, I
remember very well when I accompanied Bill to Columbine after
that massacre and met with the family members of those who had
been killed and talked with the students, and feeling that we
had to do more to try to keep guns out of the hands of the
criminal and of the mentally unstable.
And during
the Clinton administration, that was a goal -- not to, in any
way, violate people's Second Amendment rights, but to try to
limit access to people who should not have guns.
Unfortunately, we saw the tragedy unfold at Virginia Tech. We
now know that the background check system didn't work, because
certainly this shooter, as he's called, had been involuntarily
committed as a threat to himself and others. And, yet, he could
walk in and buy a gun.
This was
another very brave and right-on-mark answer. She in effect
laid blame for the event on the Republicans, reminded America that
when the Clintons are in the White House, the nation moves to
address important issues; unlike Republicans who neglect and
ignore them. And then she hit exactly the part of the
situation that every American can agree was flawed - the selling
of weapons to someone who had been committed as a danger to
himself and others.
With this
answer, as throughout the night, Hillary showed that she gets it,
that she knows what the important points at the core of things
are. And just as importantly, she laid out - subtly - the
beginnings of a general campaign message. Rather than
focusing on her follow candidates or even on herself, she made
sure again and again to point out that things could be better if
there was a "Democratic President."
That was her
central theme, and it is the most powerful one any candidate could
possibly bring to the general election cycle. Simply saying
George W. Bush was a liar or failure won't be enough.
Simply laying out policies on health care or Iraq won't be enough.
The theme
Hillary nailed again and again is that it's not just what has been
done wrong, it's what hasn't been tended to at all. More
than being able to tout a different path for Iraq, Hillary brings
the Family Medical Leave Act. What does that have to with
anything now? It was a Clinton-era addressing of a vital
issue of the type no Republican would even stop to notice - and it
is one that many people have had direct experience with in their
lives since. You can see it coming in her above answer about
regulation, in her remembrance of what they had wanted to do after
Columbine. Again and again, you can hear it coming:
Yes, the Bushies have made a mess out there; but we must not
forget to tend our house and families even as we do the massive
work of cleaning up the distant disasters.
Like during
his drinking days when, by his own admission, George W. was
neglecting his home and family to go out and get blackout drunk
regularly, so has it been with the nation. The nation is out
every night in a blackout drunken brawl abroad.
But the
problem is not just the bar tab or the tarnished record or the
fights or stupid drunken incidents. The real problem - and
to this point only Hillary seems to be on top of - is that what
should be the main focus, the house and family, are being
completely ignored.
Before this
debate, I was not very high on Hillary. I thought she lacked
a command and charm previous times I had seen her. I
expected to tune in and see Edwards make a move, being the best
orator in the lot, or Barack to move me like he did at the
Democratic Convention in 2006.
But instead,
Hillary was an awesome surprise. No one else compared.
And if the election were judged on this night, there was only one
person on the stage who was presidential; and awesomely
presidential she was.
|
