Off the leash: Democratic politics is all about Bill—again

[babylonsister]

http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10566914

Off the leash

Jan 24th 2008
From The Economist print edition
Democratic politics is all about Bill—again


Illustration by Kevin Kallaugher


THE Democrats are in the midst of making an historic choice between nominating their first female presidential candidate or their first black presidential candidate. And who is everybody talking about? A certain 61-year-old white male with a habit of waffling on about the old days, falling asleep in public and turning puce when crossed.

For most ex-presidents retirement is a golden time. They top up their personal fortunes, polish their reputations, perform good works and indulge in their hobbies (skydiving, in the case of George Bush senior). Richard Nixon turned himself into a foreign-policy sage. Jimmy Carter builds houses for the poor. Ronald Reagan wrote movingly about Alzheimer's before the disease silenced him.

For years Bill Clinton trod the same path. The Clinton Global Initiative is widely regarded as a model of its kind. Mr Clinton teamed up with Mr Bush senior to raise money for the victims of the Asian tsunami and Hurricane Katrina. The mere mention of his name was enough to put the devotees of Davos and other such gatherings into a swoon.

But over the past few months Mr Clinton has downgraded himself from global statesman to political hatchet-man. No former president has inserted himself so wholeheartedly into a presidential race. (Mr Bush senior stayed in the background of his son's campaign, and declined to get stuck in even after John McCain won in New Hampshire.) Mr Clinton has not only dismissed Barack Obama as a roll of the dice and a purveyor of fairy tales. He has also ripped into awkward reporters and wandered into the Nevada caucuses to canvass for his wife. He is spending more time campaigning in South Carolina than the candidate herself. Mr Clinton seems intent on playing Spiro Agnew to his wife's Nixon, but with one important difference: Agnew went after the other side.

snip//

The biggest damage is to Mrs Clinton's claim that she will be an effective chief executive. Mr Clinton's frenetic role in the campaign surely prefigures the role he will play in the White House, advising here, meddling there, and using the access to top-secret information that his position as an ex-president affords him to second-guess the most sensitive decisions. Who will hold Mr Clinton accountable for his actions? How will the White House function with an ex-president and a vice-president vying for influence? (One insider once termed the “three-headed” relationship between the Clintons and Al Gore a “rolling disaster”.) The Clintonians like to describe their bosses as complementary figures who act as “force multipliers”. But in the 1990s what actually got multiplied was confusion.

All this will be material for the Republican attack machine. By most reckonings the Republicans should be doomed. But the Clintons' tactics are alienating blacks and young people. The Clintons are in the process of doing the impossible: making the 2008 election a referendum on them, rather than on the Republicans. And the Republicans are inching towards nominating their one candidate, Mr McCain, who has broad popular appeal. If what ought to be a stroll in the park in November becomes a real fight, then the Democrats will know who to blame.

[TwilightZone]

1. "Off the leash"? Hmm, I wonder what the reaction would be if Michelle Obama...

or the spouse of one of the other candidates was referred to as "off the leash".

Methinks that a ton of outrage would have ensued.

[DJ13]

2. None of the other candidate's spouses eclipse the message of their spouse

Due to his being an ex-president Bill tends to get more coverage than his wife, who by coincedence is the one who is supposedly the candidate, right?

[Jensen]

4. Not according to Bill??

:rofl:

[babylonsister]

5. Funny you don't address the potential damage he/they are

doing to our party, a topic many people are picking up on. Yes, they're in it to win it, but at what cost? I imagine you didn't even get past the title.

[TwilightZone]

6. The sudden renewed interest in Bill's presidency has little to do with his presidency...

and everything to do with the next one.

[babylonsister]

10. The damage would be the same. nt

[Tarheel_Dem]

9. None of the other candidates' spouses have been nick named

"The Big Dog", :rofl: nor have they been caught on camera red-faced & frothing at the mouth.

[Doctor_J]

17. Has Michelle ever been know as Big Dog?

:shrug:

[BeyondGeography]

3. This is a fantastic line

"The Clintons are in the process of doing the impossible: making the 2008 election a referendum on them, rather than on the Republicans."

[bemildred]

7. And this one:

"A certain 61-year-old white male with a habit of waffling on about the old days, falling asleep in public and turning puce when crossed."

[BeyondGeography]

8. Leave it to the Brits to best assess an absurd situation

[stillcool]

11. It really is sad...

the masks came down, and now they won't go back on.

Some of Mrs Clinton's confidants are also worried that their attack-dog has a touch of the mange. Mr Clinton's stump speeches tend to narcissism—particularly when he is reflecting on his glory years in the White House. He claims that he never supported the Iraq war, a statement that does not stand up to a couple of minutes' research on the internet. He fell asleep during a service in honour of Martin Luther King at a church in Harlem (“Bill has a dream”, quipped the New York Post).

[Tarheel_Dem]

13. LOL......

He fell asleep during a service in honour of Martin Luther King at a church in Harlem (“Bill has a dream”, quipped the New York Post).

:rofl: that quote is priceless.

[Tarheel_Dem]

12. how long before this piece is denounced as just another

"right wing attack"? Thom Hartmann, who is no right winger, loves this publication. He cites it all the time.

k&r.....

[babylonsister]

14. Either that, or 'crickets'. nt

[Tarheel_Dem]

15. Their silence is proof that the article is a genuine smackdown....

hits the nail on the head.

[Doctor_J]

18. The Economist is a right-wing rag

And Hartmann usually quotes Financial Times.

But the Brits loved Clinton, and miss having him as president. If he's pissing them off, that's bad.

[focusfan]

16. why do people leave out John Edwards

it's always the first woman president or the first black
president have people forgotten John Edwards is running
too.it's not just Obama and Hillary in this race

[babylonsister]

19. Because there are three categories, win/place/show, and he

isn't there. Maybe tomorrow?

[crud76]

20. Hopefully Bill

will continue his antics and the race will be down to Barack and Edwards soon. And as long as I'm letting my bias show, I'll say that hopefully of that contest, the candidate with the substance to back up his rhetoric will win.

BUT, I will vote for the Democratic nominee regardless of who he or she happens to be. We'll just have to work harder in the years leading up to 2012.