Forget the books and tabloid garbage, attack Hillary on her job as senator
By Carol Devine-Molin
I can understand why some Republicans are caught up in the latest Hillary Clinton book, The Truth About Hillary: What She Knew, When She Knew It, and How Far She'll Go to Become President by author Ed Klein. Smart, unscrupulous individuals who are determined to win at all costs are really fascinating by their very nature. For those of us that distrust and dislike Hillary and her politics, the book will undoubtedly reinforce our notions about her. We can say to ourselves, "see, see, I knew she was scamming us, I knew she was capable of those really creepy behaviors." Big deal, it's essentially of little consequence. As for liberals, they're going to be disinclined to buy and read Klein's tome. On the local news channel here in Westchester County where I reside, most people interviewed dismissed the book as trash and had no desire to purchase it.
Unfortunately, there are no new revelations in this book from what I've garnered – It's all rehash. And a rehash of Hillary's Left-leaning and unsavory ways will only tend to provide psychologically inoculation for independent voters. When they hear about her proclivities at a later point, they will probably dismiss them as "old news" that's already been vetted. I think that's precisely why the publisher decided to bring out the book considerably before the 2006 Election Day, which is approximately sixteen months away.
However, let's get real. Republicans have to keep their collective eyes on the ball. The salient race is the presidential race, not the New York senate race. I live in New York, and I'm prepared to concede that, in all likelihood, Hillary is going to be reelected to the Senate in 2006. That's my sense of it although I'm sorry to voice what amounts to unpleasantness for my fellow Republicans. For heaven's sake, the majority of women in the New York City metropolitan area adore Hillary. It's akin to goddess worship. And most of the men have a favorable view of her, as well. These people are largely liberal Democrats and their opinions of Hillary are consonant with their party affiliation. My understanding is that Hillary is polling decently in upstate counties too.
Let me reiterate the pivotal point for Republicans: We must concentrate on defeating Hillary Clinton in her quest for the presidency. The GOP must expose the truth: Hillary is "gaming" the American people; She is not a centrist, despite her attempts to create that illusion. Hillary was, and still is, very liberal. And, frankly, this is still a center-right nation comprised of many voters that find Hillary and her liberal ways terribly divisive. How does Hillary's Leftism evidence itself? Just keep listening to Hillary and observing her ways. She invariably gives herself away. Hillary either strives to keep it copasetic with her Left-leaning base, or actively reaches out to them. For instance, Hillary did nothing to criticize fellow Democrat, Senator Dick Durbin, who compared the actions of American soldiers at Gitmo to those of "Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime - Pol Pot or others - that had no concern for human beings". As a member of the Senate, Hillary was obliged to denounce that disgraceful smear against our troops forthwith. But instead, she decided to launch an unwarranted attack upon Karl Rove, President Bush's chief advisor.
Clearly, the GOP needs individuals who are willing to fight the good fight and challenge Senator Clinton when she is behaving in less than acceptable ways. Unfortunately, the liberal mainstream media refuses to do its job when it comes to demanding accountability from Democrats. However, we have a good Republican - an articulate and feisty Republican - here in Westchester County, New York, who is ready and willing to take on Hillary. Former mayor of Yonkers, John Spencer, is just that person. He has declared that he will be running for the Senate seat now held by Hillary Clinton. Although GOP county chairmen throughout New York State reportedly wanted Westchester County District Attorney Jeanine Pirro to run against Hillary, Pirro exhibits no real interest in the senate spot to date.
The GOP needs to focus on The Big Picture: Whether Spencer wins or loses in New York is almost irrelevant. Spencer will be doing the Republican Party and the entire nation a very good deed by insisting that Hillary be answerable for her voting record and remarks during her tenure as Senator.
In a recent article in the Gannett's Journal News, it noted that: "Spencer criticized Clinton for having not spoken up about the ‘vitriolic rhetoric' coming from other Democrats attacking Bush and Republicans over the last year and a half." Spencer further stated: "She says we all love our troops. But then to be silent when politicians like (Sen.) Dick Durbin, Howard Dean and Ted Kennedy and John Kerry attack the president, that's really aiding and comforting the enemy." To that I say Hillary's hypocrisy is blatant. One wonders if Hillary is more interested in protecting the interests of the Democrat Party than overcoming our common enemy, the terrorists.
Moreover, in that same Gannett piece, Spencer averred that "Clinton's questioning of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld at a Senate Armed Services hearing Thursday constituted a ‘thinly veiled attack' on President Bush and was another example of how Democratic rhetoric on the war is dividing the country. Clinton, a Democrat, asked Rumsfeld to repudiate White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove's remarks this week that liberals are not tough enough on America's enemies. She said the remarks, made at a Conservative Party dinner in New York City, were ‘insulting' and ‘disturbing' to people like herself who had ‘legitimate questions' about the administration's conduct of the war while supporting it."
This is just another example of Senator Clinton's attempts to have it both ways; She voted for the war in Iraq, and then bashes President Bush about the war every opportunity she gets. It should have occurred to Hillary that her remarks demoralize the troops, since the vast majority believe in the Iraq cause. On a more positive note, it was nice to see Hillary embrace the notion that being "liberal" is tantamount to being a Democrat. And whether Hillary admits it or not, anyone who follows politics grasps that the moveon.org crowd is in league with the antiwar movement. There isn't any question that liberals or the Left-leaning crowd are apt to be "softer" on terrorism than conservatives. Rove's remarks were certainly within acceptable bounds. Moreover, the antiwar movement is demonstratively Leftist, in nature. I refer the reader to the fine investigative journalism of Sherrie Gossett of Accuracy in Media for abundant evidence.
The Gannett article also noted that Spencer was "particularly incensed that Clinton brought up the Vietnam War and its divisiveness while questioning Rumsfeld. Clinton said that she was old enough to remember how deeply divided the country was ‘and never want to see that again'. But Spencer took issue, saying that as a Vietnam veteran he was ‘appalled that she would raise the fact that our nation was divided during Vietnam, and then proceed to divide us further today'." Hillary's rhetoric is undoubtedly dividing this nation, particularly when she raises the specter of Vietnam. Spencer served in Vietnam and he is very much opposed to Hillary playing the Vietnam card, which is patently inflammatory.
John Spencer is not your ordinary politician. The first thoughts that come to mind are that he's extremely combative and controversial, and a true maverick. He's also a wonderfully gifted individual that communicates very effectively. John Spencer does not mince words. I, for one, wish him well in his endeavor to defeat Hillary Clinton here in New York.
Carol Devine-Molin is a regular contributor to several online magazines.
Get weekly updates about new issues of ESR!
© 1996-2013, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.