Posted by
Ned Barnett on Tuesday, March 11, 2008 5:28:13 AM
Ned Barnett © 2008
Note: I've been
invited to discuss this blog - about Eliot Spitzer's meltdown - on Fox
Business at 6 p.m. Eastern on Wednesday, March 12th ...
Conventional wisdom has already
identified either New York Governor Eliot Spitzer’s career ambitions – or, if
the commentator is more of a humanist than a political commentator, Mrs.
Spitzer and their three girls – as the real loser in Spitzer’s melt-down.
However, politically at least, they’re
wrong. Politically, the real loser isn’t
Eliot, his political career – or his family.
The real loser is … Senator Hillary Clinton.
That loss is not because Governor Spitzer
is one of Senator Clinton’s increasingly desperately-needed
super-delegates. And it’s not because
someone in the media (if not in Senator Obama’s campaign) will almost certainly
call on her to repudiate Governor Spitzer as a supporter, just as she recently demanded
that Senator Obama repudiate the endorsement made by “Minister” Louis Farrakhan,
but that’s not why she’s the real loser here, either.
The real reason why Senator Hillary
Clinton is the real loser is simple: here, in tenth anniversary year of the
Monica Lewinsky melt-down, the last thing Senator Clinton needs is for America
to be reminded of the facts and details surrounding her husband Bill’s
exploitative tryst with intern Monica Lewinsky.
Yet today’s fallen political unfaithful husband, Eliot Spitzer, will do
nothing so much as he will remind America of that other unfaithful political husband
… Bill Clinton.
Senator Clinton will be seen by some as
a precursor “victim” to today’s spouse-victim, Eliot’s wife – Silda Wall
Spitzer. However, the real memory-jog
will be more along the lines of then-First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton’s
misguided belief in a “Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy” as the architect of her
downfall, rather than a philandering husband who couldn’t keep it zipped. That one blame-comment, made on the Today
Show on January 27, 1998 showed her political blindness in the face of a fact
she’d known for decades – that Bill Clinton was a serial philanderer. She knew about Gennifer Flowers. She knew
about Paula Jones. No matter how much she
would have liked to believe otherwise, her attempt to blame the Lewinsky story
on political opponents instead of her husband of more than 20 years shows a
serious gap in judgment – the kind of judgment she is offering as her
justification for being named the Democratic Party’s candidate.
As an aside, I was frankly amazed that
Clinton-for-President campaign spokesman Mark Penn made reference to Ken Starr,
even in an effort to put down Senator Obama – it brought up what may be the most
shameful and painful part of Senator Clinton’s life – and the last thing she
needs is for people to start remembering what her tenure in the White House was
really like.
For more than a year now, Senator
Clinton has painted herself as “co-President,” using cleverly-crafted PR-driven
strategies to credit herself with all the stellar accomplishments of the Bill Clinton
Presidency. These range from those that President Clinton really had a hand in,
such as NAFTA, Welfare Reform and a Balanced Budget – to those the President
and his First Lady had little to do with, such as the peace in Northern Ireland. Strategically, the last thing Senator Clinton
wants, however, is a careful refresher course in the Clinton Presidency – not
the one marked by major political accomplishments, but the one marked by
scandal: Whitewater, Travelgate, Vince Foster, Casa Grande, Ron Brown, Susan
McDougall … and, Monica Lewinsky.
Yet that is exactly what Governor Eliot
Spitzer’s now-public assignation with a high-priced prostitute will do. Spitzer’s
downfall will remind Americans of that last high-level Democrat who misused his
executive position to further his own “unconventional” sexual needs and
desires. And, if Spitzer tries to make this out as a “personal problem” – which
is what he called it in his initial press conference – the way that President
Clinton tried to make Lewinsky and lying before a Grand Jury a “personal
problem,” one that was “just about sex,” this will only sharpen the comparison
and further damage Senator Clinton’s push to the presidency.
If nothing else, it will cause the press
to raise questions that, by their very nature, will diminish ex-President Bill
Clinton’s utility as Senator Clinton’s campaigner-in-Chief; instead of lauding
his wife’s accomplishments and potential, he’ll be peppered with “ten-years-after”
questions about his own scandal, and how that relates to Governor Spitzer’s
scandal.
So, at least politically, the big loser
from the Eliot Spitzer sex-tryst melt-down is … Senator Hillary Clinton and her
presidential aspirations. She may yet
survive this, as she’s survived so many other things in her tumultuous 30-plus
year marriage-slash-political career – those who count her out have lost more
bets than they’ve won – but clearly the last thing she needed in the run-up to
the final, and critical, primaries in Mississippi, Pennsylvania, North Carolina
and a dozen or so other states, was a reminder of the problems she faced as
First Lady, and what that might portend for her own Presidency.
Remember, you heard it here first!