Which Clinton is really running here?

It's getting hard these days to keep track of which Clinton is running for president. They both seem to be popping up everywhere.

Whatever happened to the early Hillary Clinton campaign decision to use her husband sparingly lest the natural campaigner overshadow the hardworking one in the forced smile and pantsuit? Have they made a calculated in-house decision that the narrowing Democratic polls mean she isn't the inevitable winner after all? And she needs to call up the big gun already?

Barack Obama's campaign sent out an e-mail to supporters yesterday seeking, of course, more money. But this time it was a very specific $850,000 online this week, which the missive said would allow Obama to cancel a planned future week of national fundraising and invest it instead in Iowa, where he is also hiring more staff and the race is tight. What would an Obama victory or close second do to Clinton's handmade invulnerability image?

Clearly, Bill Clinton loves the campaigning, the speaking and the crowds' adulation. There have been a few reported times recently where he maybe goes a little long into his remarks before bringing up the alleged reason for his presence, to press the candidacy of his Mrs.

Many still adore him. They're likely Hillary fans anyway. This high-profile for Bill carries some real risks too. First of all, his presence may cause many to remember the numerous scandals and soap operas, the Monica Lewinsky and Gennifer Flowers businesses, Travelgate, Whitewater, the last-minute pardons, which Hillary alone might not engender, at least not so intensely.

Also, he's something of a loose cannon. Twice, in recent weeks he has totally detracted from Hillary's campaign messages by making distracting news himself on what constitutes torture and the over-the-top suggestion in Iowa that her opponents' criticisms were like the Swift Boat smearings of 2004.

In both cases, Bill had to back off the next day and agree with his wife's differing stand on torture and her revised statements that the criticisms were not "piling on" but because she was indeed the front-runner. Yet more days lost in the news cycle, not to mention her own recent debate stumbles over drivers licenses for illegal immigrants, releasing her first lady papers and, last weekend, planting questions at her public forums.

Yesterday in South Carolina he told a Charleston audience "these boys have been getting tough on her." Or maybe she's bringing it on herself. (UPDATE: Today, Clinton staffers rushed to explain that Clinton's use of "boys," which his wife's campaign manager used last week as in "the boys" are "piling on," was not intended to re-play the gender card but was simply good old boy Arkansas vernacular.)

Perhaps more importantly, a ubiquitous Bill Clinton on the campaign trail raises the whole dynasty specter and the issue of just what the precise role would be for B. Clinton in an H. Clinton administration with the first-ever ex-president hanging around the White House Oval Office full time. She has said she would send him on global missions to improve America's image. Fine.

Can anyone imagine a well-behaved Bill Clinton fully satisfied with trooping off to Kenya to ride an elephant and visit hospitals for the cameras full time? Since the Clintons refuse to release the White House papers from his two terms until after the 2008 election, we have no way of knowing exactly what role Hillary played in advising and influencing her husband's policymaking. So we can't guess about vice-versa. Anecdotes in recent books suggest the couple was often not on the same page.

Beyond that, who in their right mind of any substance would agree to be Hillary Clinton's vice presidential partner when she's married to an assistant president already?

--Andrew Malcolm

Comments

[julie]

Anyone who thinks Hillary can win the general election needs only to reflect on this last week. It actuallly took very little to bring down Hillary enough for her to lose her "inevitability". Think of the damage that would easily be waged against her in the general.

Hillary is too vulnerable to attack because americans already don't trust the Clintons. She can't win the general. It's too easy to turn her moderate supporters against her.

[Larry from Purdue]

One thing's for sure: Press has a lot more to dig up on Clinton than they do on Obama.

10 months of campaigning and media scrutiny, and the biggest scandal they've turned up on Obama is that his middle name is Hussein.

[Martin]

It feels like Hillary is exploiting a loophole in the presidential term limits amendment, if not breaking the letter of the law, she is certainly crossing the spirit of it. Nobody likes someone that exploits a loophole and qualifies on a mere technicallity.
Of course Bill will not be signing the laws, treaties, executive orders, and pardons, but he will certainly advise, and we can see from the campaign that he is VERY interested in influencing public policy. I think we should be very suspect that his influence on the presidency will be stronger that Hillary is currectly letting on.
To some that is a good thing - to others it's exactly what we hope to avoid when we changed the constitution after FDR.

[JON]

It's great to see both Bill and Hillary out there traveling around the counrty and talking about the changes that are going to come about. This is so long over due. We need Bill and Hillary back in the white house and get this country back on track. The other candidates don't seem much interested in this country as they are in tearing the democratic party apart. I definately so NO to Edwarda and Obomba. Clinton definately has my vote!

[Scott]

Uhhh, didn't Hillary promise that she was not running for president two years ago? Hillary is such a lying thief. Someone needs to ask her why Sandy Berger is one of her closest advisors. You know, the guy who was recently caught stuffing Clinton documents down his pants in the National Archives? It sure makes one wonder what was in those documents huh? It seems that Sandy Berger sure knew she was gonig to run. Is there not ONE real journalist left in America?

[al]

If for some reason Hillary wins in 2008 She would be president in name only.Bill would be the one calling the shots I dont know who her vice president would be or who would want to be with that tandem...God help us.....

[vwcat]

I agree with martin. there is something faintly unconstitutional feeling about the second round of Billary.
As a democrat, I was not too thrilled with the first round that gave way too much to the republican agenda and far too little to the democratic one. Both moved our party so far to the right it was looked upon as republican lite.
And this caused so much confusion for democrats we still see the fall out with our congress who cannot decide if to give into republicans as Clinton did or be real democrats as the Clintons tried to deny us.
With them both alluding to a co-presidency i see that the 90s were the two terms of both Bill and Hillary. Somehow another round of the this very dysfunctional family is just pushing the constitutional amendment too far. And I find myself agreeing with, of all people, Grover Norquist, and his pushing for another amendment to keep nepotism out of our presidency.
With all the talented and hardworking and decent people we have to choose from - not all politicians are as sorry as the Bush and Clinton families - why do we keep punishing our country by putting these two families in office time after time. they both have been awful for our country.
Besides, didn't we fight a revolution to free ourselves from monarchy and dynasties.

[Jerome]

This is probably the most an ex-president has been involved in a primary campaign in history, certainly in my lifetime. I think Bill is behaving is a way that is undignified for an ex-president. He sounds more like a political hack than a thoughtful individual. Personally I find the whole thing ridiculous, it would be laughable if it weren't so true and serious. If Hillary wins the presidency, we would have 6 consecutive terms, 24 years, from two families. You can add 8 more years to that if you count Bush the First's years as vice president. Are the Bushies and the Clintons the only families qualified to become president? This reminds me of the Young and the Restless, everyone is sleeping with the same people, they just change partners every year,

[Kiku]

I think the Clinton years were great years. The world was at relative peace. The economy was booming, the budget was surplusing. Money was being invested in research and tech in the US, leading to US jobs. Now, with Bush, we have a flagging economy, world on the verge of WW3, undermined our Constitution, and all the Iraq money is going to brutal contractors who do the bidding of the State Department at all costs. The Clintons closed down military sites. The Clintons are not Republican lites.

I also don't mind the scandals, a result of Republican zealots. They investigated the Clintons for years, spending over $50 million in the process. All they could dig up was a sex scandal.

Nonetheless, these inquests would probably reoccur when the Dem congress falls out of favor (like with Bill) because of infighting and Republicans regain Congress.

We need a candidate that can bring people together to make progress. Obama has show that capabillity throughout his career. For an example, his speech on politics and religion is brilliant:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/faith/

If he can bring secular and religious groups together, imagine what he can do for the country and the world. Imagine a time when a real agenda is in place to fix real issues in this country. When someone works to bring us together, despite our differences.

[DR]

So Bill is playing both the gender card and the race card. Calling an adult African-Amercan male "boy" before a South Carolina audience is hardly casual Arkansas vernacular. The connotation is specific. Clinton always knows what he is saying. And he knows his audience. If Joe Biden's characterization of Obama as "clean" was offensive, Bill Clinton's choice of words is inflammatory.

[Rushay]

We've had enough of the Clintonites, & it's time to move on to new turf.
Hillarious Clinton is such a demagogue & consummate liar I can't imagine any
sane voter wanting to "Hire" this socialist to run our country!! Our country
would be brought to it's knees quickly, due to her polarization--our country would be divided like never before!!

Amen? Amen, for sure!!!!