Stephen Spruiell writes:
A trove of unreleased documents from Hillary Clinton’s years as First Lady became an embarrassing land mine for Clinton as she plodded through what felt like the eight-hundredth Democratic presidential debate Tuesday night. Moderator Tim Russert asked Clinton:
RUSSERT: Senator Clinton, I’d like to follow up, because in terms of your experience as first lady, in order to give the American people an opportunity to make a judgment about your experience, would you allow the National Archives to release the documents about your communications with the president, the advice you gave? Because, as you well know, President Clinton has asked the National Archives not to do anything until 2012.
Clinton, looking slightly annoyed, responded:
CLINTON: Well, actually, Tim, the Archives is moving as rapidly as the Archives moves. There’s about 20 million pieces of paper there. And they are moving and they are releasing as they do their process. And I am fully in favor of that. Now, all of the records, as far as I know, about what we did with health care, those are already available. Others are becoming available. And I think that, you know, the Archives will continue to move as rapidly as its circumstances and processes demand.
I could buy that if it weren’t for this part:
As they are entitled to do under the Presidential Records Act, the Clintons have appointed a proxy (long-time advisor Bruce Lindsey) who has veto power over virtually any records request until 2012 (thus the date on Bill’s letter). Bottlenecks at the National Archives are not the real issue; the Clintons will ultimately decide what documents from Hillary’s tenure as First Lady will see the light of day prior to November of 2008.
Democrat or Republican, I have a problem with politicians who run on a record they won’t share with the people who will be electing them. John McCain is one such. Now there’s Hillary and Kerry before her and so on throughout parts of our history. They can claim what they want but hiding their records is not a quality that endears them to me. I expect there are a lot of people who feel the same way. For Republicans, Hillary’s ideology is extremely undesirable. For her to hide her record while running on it is another strike against her in my mind. Sandy Berger a second. Gee, does that make it three strikes you’re out?
Not likely. There’s still the consider Clinton Machine to work against. I pity the poor candidate who thought attacking her at the debates would be a good way to rack up some points for themselves. Given Mrs. Clinton’s propensity to spy on her enemies, I expect they’ll drop out of the race one by one over the next few months.
Newt gives her a 50% chance of winning the nomination after the debate fiasco, but I wouldn’t be too sure about that. The Clintons have a capacity for doing the dirtiest nastiest most unethical things and still come out looking like my two cats with fat bellies after enjoying big bowls of cream.
It’s this capacity that frightens me more than anything else.
Update: Not a minute after I hit the publish button I found this:
Hillary Unhappy with Russert Boohoohoo! If she can’t stand the hard questions now, how in the world is she going to handle the entire country?
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice plans to cable all U.S. diplomats urging them to serve in Iraq, the State Department said on Thursday, a day after a furor erupted over plans to order some of them there.
At an emotional town hall meeting on Wednesday, U.S. diplomats bitterly complained about the State Department’s decision to identify “prime candidates” who may have to accept compulsory one-year tours in Iraq or risk losing their jobs.
One said it was a “potential death sentence” to serve in Baghdad, where mortar rounds land in the heavily fortified “Green Zone” where the U.S. embassy is located. (emphasis mine)
Honestly, that diplomat should consider finding a new line of work. A diplomat is the “face” of America. How weak we must seem if our diplomats are so fearful. On the other hand, there’s not much point forcing them. Either way it’s a disastrous mix. Unwilling or fearful, they won’t be doing their jobs properly. Better to put out the call for people willing to serve.
How much does a diplomat earn, anyway?