HRC
By William Urban
When I first saw this biography of Hillary Rodman Clinton in the Warren County Library audio-book section, my eyes saw HRH, a title reserved for Queen Elizabeth. After listening to the first chapter, a eulogy of the former first lady that would be appropriate to a Lifetime Oscar award or canonization, I thought my mistake was probably shared by the authors, Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes. That was incorrect.
The subtitle of this 2014 book, “State Secrets and the Rebirth of Hillary Clinton”, does not appear on the cover, but it accurately reflects the inside-story, melodramatic narrative of the 2008 campaign and her years as Secretary of State. Allen and Parnes both covered the White House, he for Bloomberg News, she for The Hill; they are, therefore, both policy “wonks” writing for news junkies.
Hillary Clinton apparently knew them or knew their type, so this is a strictly unauthorized biography, with no input or assistance from her. I’m sure that she and her many loyal workers — LOYAL is the most important word in HRC’s vocabulary — must have been stunned by the first chapter. Praise practically gushed from the pages.
The shiv wasn’t stuck in until chapter two.
Let’s say that Allen and Parnes are unlikely to be invited to share HRC’s face time. According to people they cite, she never forgets a slight, and she rarely forgives. Time is a valuable commodity and she won’t waste it on anyone on her enemies list. Oh, yes, she made a list appropriate to Santa Claus and was very disappointed in 2008 when he wasn’t able to hand out presents to those who had been nice. Coal she had.
Her defeat by Barack Obama was completely unexpected by most experts and certainly by HRC herself, and that was one reason it happened. She had expected to walk right into the Convention and claim the prize and, therefore, had not taken his candidacy seriously; moreover; she had not mended fences with those who had been offended by the Clintons’ arrogance, people whose numbers seem to have been legion. Another mistake was being too loyal to long-time staffers who were not up to their jobs. She resolved to never make that mistake again.
A major fault of our authors, perhaps to see if we are still awake, is to quickly cite anonymous sources who contradict whatever the previous insider had just said. For example, after extorting significant concessions from Barack Obama in return for agreeing to become Secretary of State, she devised a “smart diplomacy” approach that would correct Bush’s alleged mistakes; then she appointed smart and experienced men to handle the most difficult problems, so that she could concentrate on reaching out to neglected areas of the world. That is, she was picked to travel around like a rock star, making sure that everyone knows that America cares. In short, she’s in charge. We are then told about the problems that the Obama people created, and why nothing that went wrong was her fault.
Insiders found it hard to think of any new policy that went right, so they mentioned her setting a new tone, but there is no doubt that she believed in what she was doing; moreover, every one of her subordinates believed in those new policies or quickly wished they had. Those kicked out seem to have talked with Allen and Parnes — after getting a promise that their identities would not be revealed.
Contradictions abound. Hillary was the only one who pushed relentlessly to kill Osama bin Laden, but it didn’t matter, because Obama made the courageous decision. People hated her, even feared her, but came to love her. She had numerous ideas that took people away from their usual tasks, but these innovations made “smart power” more effective. Her interventions helped the Arab Spring along the various roads to democracy; any failures were the fault of the Arabs. It was, all in all, a record she is proud of.
Bill was proud of her, too, but it was frustrating that people saw him as the real power in the family. So she cut him out of decisions — he learned about the bin Laden raid from a reporter.
What she wanted was a signature policy success of her own, a Marshall Plan or Opening to China. The Arab Spring was supposed to be that, but especially the overthrow of Gadhafi. Plans were underway for her to visit Benghazi when the demonstration/attack occurred. Her supporters told Allen and Parnes that she was on top of the crisis from the beginning, that she worked long hours, that she talked with everyone, and that any problems were someone else’s fault. I was beginning to wonder if the attack had occurred at all. Even the famous words, “What difference at this point does it make?” were uttered by an aide shortly before she testified; apparently they stuck in her mind. Anyway, the whole affair is just Republican grandstanding. Maybe, but more recent testimony suggests that the famous talking points were indeed efforts to put off blame for the ambassador’s death until after the election in two weeks, and the White House was involved as much as the Department of State.
Without Libya to point to, Hillary supporters called attention to her work in Burma, but that didn’t pass the laugh test. Perhaps her behind-the-scenes support of the Affordable Care Act is what we should remember. She had nothing to do with that legislation (she had tried national medical care once, with lamentable results) or the implementation, but she said that getting health care passed was worth risking every other part of the president’s agenda.
Her lack of achievements may be irrelevant. She was hired to be a rock star, to travel around and dazzle the world’s leaders. She did that well. Maybe “smart power” will become more obviously present in the future. Maybe developments show that past failures did, in fact, lay the foundation for eventual successes. History has a way of confounding our current assessments and predictions. Look at Iraq today.
What it is safe to say is that Hillary will be a political force in 2016. She is dogged, hard-working, demanding, unforgiving. No Democrat who thinks of challenging her should underestimate her ambition, her vindictiveness, and her massive campaign war chest.
Similarly, no enemy of America should want her to be president.
Review Atlas (June 19, 2014), 4.
