Clicking on banner ads enables JWR to constantly improve
Jewish World Review June 13, 2003 / 13 Sivan, 5763

Dick Morris

Dick Morris
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
James Glassman
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
Michelle Malkin
Jackie Mason
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
MUGGER
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Roger Simon
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports


Why did Hillary write the book?


http://www.NewsAndOpinion.com | Having survived and gotten elected to the Senate without talking about her stormy relationship with her husband, why on earth would Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) do so now?

She must know that few people, if any, believe that she didn’t know that her husband was dallying with Monica Lewinsky. She has to realize how parading the phony explanation that she only “found out” on Aug. 15, 1998, wears down her credibility.

Is there anyone who really believes that she didn’t know despite:

• His admitting, under oath, to an affair with Gennifer Flowers;

• The stain on Monica’s dress;

• The FBI request for a DNA sample from her husband, the president;

• Secretary Betty Currie’s circumlocutions to get Monica into the Oval Office;

• Dozens of middle-of-the-night phone calls from the president to Monica;

• Learning that Monica had entered into a plea bargain deal with Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel.

For Hillary not to know, given all this, she would have to be deaf and blind.

So why would Hillary expose herself to this kind of public ridicule? With a dismal credibility rating in the USA Today poll of before the book came out, why would she have her own finger-wagging moment of lying in public, her sequel to his “I did not have sex with that woman”?

The answer is obvious: Money.

In the lexicon of Clinton scandalography, sex has been Bill’s problem and money has been Hillary’s.

He had Gennifer Flowers, she had Whitewater. He had Paula Jones, she had the Rose Law Firm. He had Juanita Broaddrick, she had the futures market. He had Monica Lewinsky, she had the billing records. He had the pardons, she had the gift registry. He had the state troopers, she brought Webster Hubbell to the table.

So Hillary had a choice: handle the Lewinsky scandal with dignity and studied aloofness, or plunge right in with an explanation nobody credits.

For an $8 million advance, Hillary decided to take the risk. For a memoir with distinction and credibility, she would only have gotten $2 million or so. But for a tawdry tell-all, she made four times as much.

Let’s get a few basic facts straight:

Hillary lied about not believing that Bill was involved with Monica on Jan. 21, 1998. She lied because she had to defend her husband to keep him — and her — in office. She couldn’t lead his defense and admit to believing the charges at the same time.

Then, when proof came in the form of an unexpected stain on a blue dress, Hillary had to backfill with a story about being deceived, so she invented the Aug. 15, 1998 denouement that supposedly happened right before Bill testified before the grand jury.

Now, to make $8 million, she must keep up the story and lead the book with a lie.

Why did she choose to stay with Bill? The answer: because he was, and he remains, pivotal to her political life, to her fundraising, and to her strategizing efforts. He is her consultant, her fundraiser, and her chief adviser rolled into one. He may not be faithful, but he sure is loyal.

All this begs another question: Why did she publish now? Why does she do this in the middle of the presidential race when the candidates of her own party are struggling to gain traction? And why is Bill planning to publish his own memoir in September, 2004, just 60 days before the election?

Neither of the Clintons wants a Democrat to do well in ’04. It is vital to their plans that President Bush wins reelection so Hillary can have a shot at an open White House in 2008. If she had to wait until 2012, she would be 65 and the bloom from her husband’s presidency might have faded from view.

By constantly talking about the 22nd Amendment, Hillary’s possible ’08 candidacy, the achievements of the Clinton administration, etc., etc., the Clinton duo keeps other Democratic hopefuls at bay. Unable to gain attention during the Iraq War and the war on terrorism, Hillary now pushes them off stage. Then comes the summer doldrums. By September, none of them will have any real traction.

One needs a codebook to unravel the Clintons and their motives, plans, and purposes. A very, very weird one.

Enjoy this writer's work? Why not sign-up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.


JWR contributor Dick Morris is the author of, among others, "Power Plays: Top 20 Winning and Losing Strategies of History's Great Political Leaders" Comment by clicking here.

Up

06/11/03: Will the Rev go rogue?
06/05/03: Napoleon's maneuvers at Austerlitz have nothing on prez's
06/02/03: Prez's tax-cut catch-22 for Dems
05/29/03: Liberal author documents Clinton's wasted second term
05/16/03: Early Democrat handicapping for 2004
05/14/03: Gephardt: AWOL
04/30/03: Prez can lose
04/25/03: My message to Putin: Call President Bush
04/23/03: NO OIL FOR BLOOD
04/21/03: The war that network news lost in Iraq
04/15/03: Media meltdown
04/10/03: Giving government a good name
04/03/03: Polls' message to Bush: Relax and win the war
03/31/03: Bomb as you need
03/28/03: The strong grow weak through inhibition
03/26/03: Carping pessimism of TV anchors and interviewers fails to give Americans a sense of defeatism
03/17/03: Poll: Get on with it
03/13/03: It's time for U.S. to play hardball at U.N.
03/10/03: The whole (Hispanic) world is watching
03/07/03: Anti-war errors
03/05/03: Domino theory II: Toppling Mideast despots
03/03/03: Europe's triangulators: Chirac and Blair
02/27/03: Invasion? More like a coup
02/21/03: The first casualty of Iraq war: Liberal credibility
02/19/03: Old Europe's last hurrah
02/14/03: Corzine throws down gauntlet on Wall St. fraud
02/12/03: An exile deal for Saddam
02/07/03: The Dems give up the House
02/05/03: France: Saddam's ally
02/03/03: War critics will suffer
02/30/03: Even by Clinton standards, it's sheer chutzpah
01/24/03: Rebirth of the balanced budget Republican
01/22/03: Next to Bubba, Dubya's got it good
01/16/03: End racism in affirmative action
01/13/03: The new swing voter
01/10/03: Political e-mailing comes of age
01/07/03: In Dem race: Home field no advantage
12/31/02: Hey, Hillary: Want to appear like a stateswomyn? Stay silent
12/19/02: Kerry in the lead
12/19/02: Lieberman the frontrunner
12/17/02: In defense of Lott
12/02/02: An issue for Bush: Drugs
11/27/02: Women gone wobbly?
11/25/02: The U.N. over a barrel
11/15/02: Gore's suicide
11/15/02 One-party control is an illusion
11/13/02 The House of Extremes
11/08/02 I have egg on my face
11/01/02 Is Bush losing control over events?
10/25/02What is causing Bush's free fall?
10/25/02: Anybody sense a trend?
10/23/02: A deadline for Iraq
10/18/02: Only sure bet of 2002 elections is voter angst
10/16/02: Endangered incumbents
10/11/02: Why multilateralism doesn't work
10/09/02: Hey, Dems: Believe NYTimes polling at your own risk
10/03/02: Dem suicide: Let's count the ways
09/30/02: The Dems just can't stop themselves
09/26/02: The perils of polling
09/19/02: W. boxed in the U.N.
09/19/02: Welfare reform: Keep on keeping on
09/12/02: Are Dems insane on Iraq?
09/09/02: Twin shadows of Election '02
09/05/02: GOP should triangulate
08/28/02: Trust the military
08/22/02: It's not the economy, stupid
08/09/02: As America unites, Gore goes divisive
08/01/02: Bush must focus on big picture
07/23/02: Election 2002: Advantage Dems
07/19/02: Rudy for SEC tough cop
07/17/02: The investor strike
07/15/02: Door open for drug testing students --- go for it, GOP!
07/12/02: Dubya looking out for No. 1?
07/03/02: The DNA war for Bush's soul
06/21/02: Why are conservatives winning?
06/19/02: Learning to love the feds
06/14/02: Hey, journalists and Dems: Dubya is doing just fine
06/12/02: It's terrorism, stupid!
06/10/02: Sanctions are a potent weapon
06/04/02: Al Qaeda's more dangerous new front
05/31/02: Why '04 looks tough for liberal Dems
05/24/02: Democratic self-destruction
05/22/02: The Clinton failures
05/15/02: Pataki positioned to win
05/08/02: A wakeup-call for American Jewry
05/03/02: Give Bush back his focus
05/01/02: Immigration fault li(n)es
04/25/02: It's the war, stupid
04/17/02: Bush goes small bore
04/12/02: Bush must be a gentle partisan
04/10/02: In defense of polling
04/08/02: Focus on Iraq, not the Palestinians
04/01/02: Only Internet will bring real campaign finance reform
03/27/02: Where W's drawn a line in the sand
03/22/02: Enron scandal will not trigger a wave of economic populism
03/20/02: Term-limited --- by war
03/15/02: Europe doesn't have a clue
03/11/02: Bush popularity = GOP win?
03/01/02: Will America be forced to chase its tail in its war on terrorism?
02/27/02: The Arafat/Saddam equilibrium must be destroyed
02/21/02: Campaign finance reform won't hurt GOPers
02/13/02: Dodd scurries for cover
02/11/02: U.S. 'unilateralism'? The Europeans don't have a case
02/06/02: WAR: What women want
02/01/02: They all talk in the end
01/30/01: The odd couple: Chris Dodd and Arthur Andersen
01/22/01: His father's son? Bush better get an 'Act II' fast!
01/18/01: Dubya & the 'vision thing'
01/14/01: The Rumsfeld Doctrine 01/03/01: A President Gore would have been a disaster
01/03/02: Clinton's priority: Political correctness over fighting terror
12/27/01: Terror network grew out of Clinton's inaction, despite warnings
12/24/01: Call 'em back, George
12/18/01: What Bush did right
12/13/01: Libs worry too much
12/11/01: "Open Sesame": Feinstein's proposed bill allows 100,000 non-immigrant students from anti-American countries to our shores
12/07/01: The non-partisan president
12/05/01: Both parties are phony on stimulus debate
11/29/01: When terrorists can enter legally, it's time to change the laws
11/21/01: Go for the jugular!
11/16/01: You are all incumbents
11/14/01: Clinton's failure to mobilize America to confront foreign terror after the 1993 attack led directly to 9-11 disaster
11/12/01: To the generals: Don't worry about losing support
11/08/01: The death of the white liberal
11/07/01: Our leaders are being transformed in a way unprecedented in post-World War II history

© 2002, Dick Morris