By Jennifer Rubin on 5.29.07 @ 12:08AM
It's official: she was for the war before she was against it. Does it help that she remains staunchly anti-capitalist?
Hillary Clinton may have sealed her fate last week. Revealing
the depth of her desperation on Iraq and her innate distrust of the
free markets she seems only to have picked up the baggage, but no
useful political lessons, from her husband's administration.
Back when Barack Obama was an unknown legislator Hillary cast
her vote in favor of authorization for President Bush to use force
in Iraq. For a time she seemed to follow the advice of "third way"
Democrats that to be credible on the national stage Democrats need
to be stalwart on national defense. She resisted pleas to renounce
her war vote and refused to call for a timetable for
withdrawal.
Then came Obama, not to mention John Edwards and the Democratic
Congressional majority. Perhaps spooked by polls showing remarkably
high "unfavorable" ratings or by the one ups-manship of dueling
anti-war rhetoric of her opponents, she quite frankly lost her
nerve.
Unlike her colleague Joe Biden, who refused the entreaties of
the Left, she and 13 of her colleagues voted against funding for
the troops. Carl Levin, who seems to have stolen her
"responsibility gene," voted for the measure and declared: "I don't
want to send a message that we are not going to provide funding for
the troops." Not Hillary. Should she survive the primaries she will
now be in precisely the same position as John Kerry: she was for
the War before she was against it and against withdrawal deadlines
before she was for them. How quickly they forget.
Meanwhile, she is back to her old anti-capitalist tricks. The
gal who declared contemptuously that small businesses should just
grin and bear Hillarycare health costs ("I can't be responsible for
every undercapitalized small business in America") was at it again.
The Wall Street Journal reported that in a speech on
reducing health care costs she declared that "insurers be required
to sell coverage to anyone who wants it and said companies should
be barred from charging sicker people higher premiums." The mind
reels. Should insurers also be prohibited from charging bad drivers
more for car insurance? Will there be Nixonian wage and price
controls for insurance companies?
Apparently she also doesn't like new drugs, nor the cost
associated with bringing new drugs to the market, declaring: "A lot
of these so-called blockbuster drugs are no more effective and
sometimes less effective in treating conditions than the old
standbys." Presumably Dr. Clinton will instruct the drug companies
and doctors around the country which drug trials to pursue.
Then we were greeted with previews of the new Clinton
biographies. Like a bad dream, memories of Gennifer Flowers, Rose
law firm documents, cattle futures and travel office firings came
flooding back. Some sniffed that there was nothing "new" in these
books. Perhaps, but that misses the point. It is precisely because
voters may not want reruns of this version of Desperate
Housewives that the books matter. We have all moved on and
learned our lesson that there is a price to be paid for electing
craven people to high office. Once again a beaming, unbesmirched
Obama, with lovely and devoted professional spouse, stands at the
ready offering to change the political channel permanently.
In the Democratic debate this week her opponents are unlikely to
seize upon these flaws as they battle for the title of anti-war and
anti-capitalist champion. Nevertheless, Republican candidates are
watching and consultants are making notes for future ads. In due
course, they will be all too happy to remind voters of the week
Hillary dropped her mask and revealed what a Clinton II
administration might really be like.
Jennifer Rubin is a writer in Virginia.
topics:
Health Care, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Business, Books, Law, Iraq