The Democratic race is bound to be a heated one. But isn't attempting to muzzle Bill Clinton by implying that he is going to influence a Hillary presidency or that it is somehow unseemly for a past president to support his wife, politics as usual? Is Michelle Obama going to be demure and uninvolved until November? From past comments, that looks highly doubtful. Let's recall an interview with the potential First Lady in which she was asked if she and her husband were running together. She replied:
"We are. We are... Whenever you are running, a candidate, their family is running, too. We're feeling all the bumps and the bruises. Our lives are turned around. We're making the sacrifices."
But it's not OK for Bill Clinton to "make the sacrifices"? If he does, he's interfering. If he doesn't, he's accused of trying to undermine his own wife's campaign by indifference. In fact, we may have found the arena where there's a male equivalent of the woman's thin pink line, a blue thin line - damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Is what's fair and expected for one spouse prohibited to the other because he was once president? Are we slipping into those subtle, deniable gender differences only this time advantage to the female spouse and thereby to her husband? And what a good strategy it is, too, as it would be unseemly for Hillary or Bill to counter Michelle's remarks.
Fair or unfair, the anti-Bill theme is catching on. Andrea Mitchell had a field day with it yesterday. Under the guise of "news" on NBC Nightly News, she was once again provided carte blanche for a long anti-Clinton diatribe focusing on Bill Clinton's involvement in the race. NBC and Brian Williams should be ashamed of that blatant editorializing. She gave next to no time to Clinton's compliments to Barack Obama. How about a GE bright sign on her forehead next time - "EDITORIAL!"
In the first few seconds Mitchell used the phrases "seeming to long for the days when he was the candidate," "his job this time designated hitter for his wife, attacking Barack Obama so she doesn't have to." Then, after a few more slights, she reported President Clinton "refused" to do what he was told by Senators, not that he instead chose to support his wife. Mitchell only showed a choppy bit of Clinton's praise of Obama, followed by the comment, "but that's an exception." This kind of attack journalism in the midst of a supposed news program is despicable no matter the target.
Listen, getting Bill out by demeaning him if he challenges his wife's competition or Obama choosing to address the other man instead of the female candidate are clever strategies and ones that might work with some people. But they're cheap. And it leaves me wondering if Barack Obama really is all about change after all and whether doing this type of thing is the only way he can deal with the heat in the political kitchen.
More on PoliticsDoc