Breaking the Final Rule

It will come as a surprise to many people that there are rules in politics. Most of those rules are unwritten and are based on common understandings, acceptable practices, and the best interest of the political party a candidate seeks to lead. One of those rules is this: Do not provide ammunition to the opposition party that can be used to destroy your party's nominee. This is a hyper-truth where the presidential contest is concerned.

By saying that only she and John McCain are qualified to lead the country, particularly in times of crisis, Hillary Clinton has broken that rule, severely damaged the Democratic candidate who may well be the party's nominee, and, perhaps most ominously, revealed the unlimited lengths to which she will go to achieve power. She has essentially said that the Democratic party deserves to lose unless it nominates her.

As a veteran of red telephone ads and "where's the beef" cleverness, I am keenly aware that sharp elbows get thrown by those trailing in the fourth quarter (and sometimes even earlier). "Politics ain't beanbag," is the old slogan. But that does not mean that it must also be rule-or-ruin, me-first-and-only-me, my way or the highway. That is not politics. That is raw, unrestrained ambition for power that cannot accept the will of the voters.

Senator Obama is right to say the issue is judgment not years in Washington. If Mrs. Clinton loses the nomination, her failure will be traced to the date she voted to empower George W. Bush to invade Iraq. That is not the kind of judgment, or wisdom, required by the leader answering the phone in the night. For her now to claim that Senator Obama is not qualified to answer the crisis phone is the height of irony if not chutzpah, and calls into question whether her primary loyalty is to the Democratic party and the nation or to her own ambition.

Comments

[widollar]

Today,Politics in America is a "Blood Sport" where you take no prisoners! Anything is OK just as long as YOU seize POWER for the people who put YOU in office,and they will continue to control YOU as long as YOU remain in office.

[bogananda666]

Hillary's attack on Barack are just a warm up for him to learn how to counter the Republican attack machine. It's certainly deplorable judgment on her part which come from desperation because she's simply outclassed by Barack. She would serve Barack well by continuing the attacks because he's going to need to hone up the skills of his campaign to counter the Republicans. Besides, HillBillary's are Republicans.

[iral]

Just think, if Hilary had passed the D.C. bar (she failed) she may not have had to move to Arkansas and marry Bill. She did pass the Arkansas bar which one must assume was a bit easier than the D.C. exam.

[cruisepuppy7452a]

Senator, you are correct, she did violate the rules of the game, but by whose rules? First rule of the game, never forget why you are running or for whom. You put personal wants and needs aside for the good of the public. That includes finanical wants. Then there is the rule that you should not make personal attacks on the opposition. Um, you can, but it never should become a war of insults, rather it should be a grocery list of what you can bring to the table, vs what they won't. Hillary had an arsenal of things she could have said, didn't, was given poor advice. had she done so, she could have come off wiser, more seasoned, professional, less emotional.
I worked on a poltical campaign, and what I observed, was how easy it is to get caught up in your own hype. Again, its not about the person running for office, its about the people and thier needs. it almost has to become a mantra. You tune out the noise, the nonsense, get back to basics, push what you do know, admit what you don't. You don't play both sides to the middle and expect to get votes from either side. The public is brighter than that. You tell them, you don't have all the answers, but will work hard to come to a mutual solution that works for everyone, not just a special intrest group. Hillary is a bright woman, a great speaker, hard worker. Had she had someone reminding her of what was important, not how to play the game, she would be winning big now. Ego can ruin the best of men and women. It can also ruin elections.

[Mauiloa]

Actually, Senator, Eliot Spitzer violated the final rule of politics: don't get caught with your pants down.
I believe this was the one that aborted your illustrious career. And that, sir, was a tragedy for all of us.

[cruisepuppy7452a]

Correction, he was caught, but never convicted. Besides, the man was a consenting adult. he wasn't paying anyone to have sex with him. The man still has an illustrious career in case you failed to notice, its what you do behind the scenes that counts, not what you do that gets PR time.

[dkm]

I have yet to see someone point out that Rumsfeld and Cheney both had a lot more actual experience than Clinton does. That is hardly an argument that experience is of any value. It is, in fact, an argument that it is a person's character that matters, and in a contest about character, Clinton doesn't even get to the starting line.

[Illinoisdan]

I have long held that Hillary's ambitions outweigh her sense of descretion. This kind of blind ambition is dangerous in a President, or Vice President as has been demonstrated by those who are presently in office. Hillary's tactics are more the tactics of a Republican candidate, than a Democratic candidate. Joe Lieberman should have been a wakeup call to the Democratic voters; Hillary has made Joe look like a light weight! It is time for the party elders to force her out!

[gabbyone]

You can complain about Joe Lieberman, but he won and he kept his committees and
he is making policy. Just what are the tactics of a Republican?.....to win. Maybe its time the
Democrats try that strategy. If you don't have some one willing to fight to win in November, say hello to President John McCain. I hope you will be happy when Obama loses and you can
strut around saying, we lost.....but we had a guy who wouldn't fight to win. We have been there
already with Kerry and Gore. You guys are just having a hard time with the fact that a woman
has what you don't have.......the fight necessary to win.

[speakyourmind]

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with you. The goal of either party should not be to "win," as you so eloquently stated. The goal of BOTH parties should be to make our country better by improving the quality of life for its citizenry. To "win" simply highlights everything that is wrong with this country's style of politics. To win......what a simpleton.

[Xander]

I just want to know how it is she thinks she can take credit for everything good that happened during Clinton's reign in the White House, but nothing bad.

Kosovo? Oh that was all her (the peacemaking portion)--why? Cause she flew over there with Sheryl Crow and had tea, of course!

Bill getting oral in the Oval Office by an intern? Not her fault. Though some would suggest that if she was satisfying Bill, he wouldn't have wandered off to find Ms. Lewinsky. Something to think about.

Tech boom? All her. Why? Cause she was really in charge of Bill.

Tech bubble burst? Not her fault.

All this supposed "experience"? How? Are we honestly to believe that at the end of every day, Bill was sharing all the state secrets with Hillary and asking what he should do? I highly doubt that--and if that IS the case, then I'm sure there's a crime that was committed in the process.

[Emmaboverry]

Gary Hart, you're still the man!

Hillary's threshold was the one Bill carried her over about 35 years ago.

[LAcarlito]

Being older than your opponent does not automatically make you more "experienced." I hope Sen Obama spends a lot of time over the next few weeks highlighting Sen Clinton's actual lack of experience. It is time to call her on her claims. This 35 years rings hollow.

Being a hack lawyer in Arkansas and tea-drinker for photo-ops while in the White House doesn't cut it. When Hillary had no security clearance, it is hard to understand where she actually played a role in anything in Bill's White House. Those are the facts, until she can prove otherwise--like releasing the White House records from Bill's eight years if this is wrong.

[fortuna]

Don't look now but this inspired a video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuUmwPEhvjs

[getrealalready]

I say this to Hillary campers-
GETREALALREADY!
We're extremely lucky to see these personality dynamics of Hillarys' because some people need more and more proof as to who's more electable. (OBAMA 08)
Thank you, Mr. Hart, for your commentary. When chutzpah means "hurtspah"- presidential candidates become losers when deploying this tactic against their own ticket .

[djjlynch]

It is difficult to believe that you understand Clinton's comments as you describe. It is Obama who must make his case to the American people - McCain had made his, she hade made hers. Now Senator Obama needs to make his.

Certainly there is nothing wrong woth being a partisan in support of Senator Obama. It just isn't OK to be dishonest in doing so.

[dolphin65]

Exactly what case did Hillary make for herself to the American people? Just because she says that she has a 'life time of experience' doesn't mean that she actually has it. What constitues 'life time experience'? If its sleeping with the former President; I guess that constitues it.

[Illinoisdan]

Most of the experience being touted by the Hillary camp is now being discredited by those close to her during the times in question. Having been a Locomotive Engineer for 30 years, with my wife at my side most of the way, I say this with complete confidence; you do not want my wife running a train through your town, and you do not want Bill's wife running your country!

[lifebylisa]

In that case, maybe Monica can be her VP choice. ; ) I"m with you, I haven't seen or heard her make any real case for herself, and older doesn't get you respect nor does it automatically make you wiser.

[HurryUp1212009]

Being a cocktail waitress at the White House and putting up with a sex addict in the White House does not, repeat NOT, qualify someone to lead the USA. Hillary Clinton is on a personal ego-trip of unprecedented scale; and fortunately, the American people - except uneducated, unemployed, retired trailer park trash in Ohio - recognize her for what she is UGLY and UNQUALIFIED. If the cogniscienti of the Democratic Party hand her the nomination, I'm finished with that party, because she's utterly un electable in the general election, with 50% negatives going in...

[BetterDeadthanRedState]

Yesterday while watching George Steppinoutonus, I heard Cokie Roberts put down Obama for his response to the red phone ad, saying the Iraq vote argument was old and tired! I wanted to reach through the screen and strangle her! Raising a candidates complicity in the worst decision in 100 years if not in the whole history of the nation is "old and tired"? No, Cokie, what is "old and tired" is your MSM and Clinton's glossing-over of the Iraq debacle.

[coloradofeminist]

NO FOOL LIKE AN OLD FOOL!
Gary: How dare you lecture Hillary about breaking the rules? How dare you lecture Hillary about party loyalty? How dare you lecture about good judgement? Remember Donna Rice?? We supported you and you broke our hearts.
You give new meaning to the expression "no fool like an old fool." Just shut up and go home.

[Nofuzzydreams]

Right on! Gary Hart has no right to lecture anyone after how he let down everyone. BTW, I found the following about how biased the press has been to Hillary -

The Center for Media and Public Affairs reported that since mid December, when the Iowa caucuses came into play, Obama has received the lion's share of the positive coverage: "From Dec. 16 through Jan. 27, five out of six on-air evaluations of Obama (84 percent) have been favorable, compared to a bare majority (51 percent) of evaluations of Mrs. Clinton. The gap in good press widened since the New Hampshire primary, with Clinton dropping to 47 percent positive comments and Obama holding steady at 83 percent positive.

"NBC's coverage has been the most critical of Clinton - nearly 2 to 1 negative (36 percent positive and to 64 percent negative). Conversely, ABC's coverage was most supportive - nearly 2 to 1 positive (63 percent vs. 37 percent). CBS and Fox were more balanced - 50 percent positive comments on Fox and 56 percent positive on CBS."

The Pew Research Center found a sharp difference in tone between coverage of Clinton and Obama.

The SNL skit was dead on.

[indiethinker]

So, one candidate runs a desperate campaign, playing the entitlement card, the victim card, the gender card, the fear card, the mockery card & even the party sabotage card, while the other candidate runs on a positive vision, civility, and engaging citizens in politics. Even though I didn't name them, does anyone out there not recognize which is which? And the press has been more negative to one than the other? How dare they let reality influence their reporting!

[BikerJim]

If you did you research you would have found out (not that you wanted to) that The Center for Media and Public Affairs is run by a Clinton Supporter. Also, it is not uncommon for a candidate that won 11 contest in a row, and the campaign has been managed flawlessly, to get positive press, while another candidate that had lost 11 in a row and had political infighting within the campaighn to get negative press.

[SubparDude]

:
Love your feminine touch. Such Grace!
:

[polly14]

Remember Monica Lewinsky?

Mr Hart makes complete and total sense. If Clinton actually steals the nomination, she's given the Republicans an entire arsenal to use against her. If anyone is an old fool, it's Hillary Clinton.

[getrealalready]

IT'S NEVER TOO LATE FOR A NAUGHTY SENATOR TO LEARN-
WITH AGE COMES WISDOM.

[psatm]

Shut up and go home? What an intelligent, classy person you must be.

Mr. Hart bowed out of the race early, quietly and graciously, something Mrs. Clinton would never do. He has done nothing but serve the Democratic Party ever since.

Hillary Clinton has caused much damage to the Democratic Party already. She cannot beat John McCain, period. If she is the Democratic candidate then we WILL have four more years of George Bush's administration in the White House. She is the Republican's dream candidate, because she represents everything that the moderates, conservatives, extremists, and independents despise and distrust about Democrats.

If you think the Republicans played the fear game against Kerry in '04, just wait until you see what they unleash about Clinton in '08. Her little fear ad with the 3am phone call will seem like a nursery rhyme by comparison.

[gabbyone]

Gary Hart fought the race with Mondale all the way to the convention.
Mondale called Superdelegates to get enough votes to win the night
before the convention. - so much for class.

[marykins123]

Will the Clinton stoop to even new lows to win? This is something you don't find on our 24/7 news and one has to wonder WHY?
Remember how Rush Limbaugh was encouraging Repubican's in TX and OH to crossover and vote for Clinton during their primaries? Well, of all people in the party that is labeled as "liberal" to have a lengthy interview on Rush's program, the DAY of the primary, is none other that Bill Clinton. Take a listen and them ask yourself - 'how desparate is Bill to have some more time in our White House?'
http://images.radcity.net/5155/2461772.mp3