Bill Shaheen was clearly wrong. The Hillary Clinton supporter and husband of former Governor of New Hampshire Jeanne Shaheen ignited a firestorm by suggesting that Barack Obama's open admission of drug use in his youth could be ammunition for the Republicans in a general election. In case you missed it, what he said was that Obama's candor "could open the door" to further questions from those mean old Republicans. "It'll be, 'When was the last time? Did you ever give drugs to anyone? Did you sell them to anyone?' … It's hard to overcome."
The short answer is: No, it's not. See George W. Bush. When he was young and crazy, he's said enough times to make it a mantra, he was young and crazy. More than that he would not say, lest he serve as a bad role model for kids, and more than that no one ever demanded.
The problem with Shaheen's comments, though, is not simply that they were wrong or unauthorized, or that they forced Hillary herself to repudiate him and them. He hurt the candidate he was trying to help. He helped the candidate he was trying to hurt. He made Hillary look desperate. He made Barack into her victim. He commanded attention he didn't deserve, hadn't earned and that his comments didn't merit.
Why?
Why does anyone really care what a volunteer who is best known for being somebody's husband has to say about what the Republicans would do in a general election?
It's a reflection of what politics has come to that nothing either candidate said or did in the last two days commanded near the attention that Shaheen's unauthorized comments did. What politics has come to is a slugfest, and if the candidates themselves aren't throwing the punches, the press is willing to cover anybody who does, in whatever form they're thrown.
If Billy Shaheen had given a two-hour speech on all the things he likes about Hillary Clinton, no one would have written a word about it. Who cares, we would have said. But throwing a punch at Obama? Now that's news.
Shame on us.
The press is desperate to turn this into an ugly war, even if they have to use sucker punches by nobodies to do it.
Of course, it's true that Obama's people seized on the remarks, seeing in them an opportunity to portray their opponent as desperate, and as acting in a way inconsistent with her own prior statements. Why wouldn't they? This is how the game gets played. If politics has become a business in which the fact of an attack gets more coverage than its substance or merits, why not look for an opportunity to brand your opponent as an assailant?
Volunteers, including "officials of state campaigns," are what we in politics call "loose cannons." Many of them have titles, titles being a dime a dozen in politics. They say lots of things. But they don't deserve the press's attention, or the country's.
When a loose cannon takes a bad shot, it shouldn't be enough to start a war. It shouldn't be the story of the day, with the apology becoming the story of the next day. This is why people hate politics. And they're half right. It isn't politics they should hate, but what those of us in the media have done to turn it into a combat sport in which only the punches get attention. If a nobody throws a punch and we all ignore it, it's not a punch. It's a tree falling in a forest that no one sees.
In a campaign that's likely to go on as long as this one, we'll all be stuck in the swamp by the time it's over if we're not careful. Billy who? Forget him.
To find out more about Susan Estrich and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2007 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.
|
 |
Comments
|
6 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
I do not believe for one minute that Hillary did not authorize Shaheen to make those remarks about Obama. She is destroying him in her path to power as she has many others. The remarks and accusations back fired on Hillary and now she is trying again to separate herself from the remarks. Last month she separated from the giving Illegals licenses when the popular vote went against it. It scares me that someone who can not debate or take a stand and stick with it is running to be president of this country. What scares me more is that most women will vote for her just because she is a women and don't look at her incompetence.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Kathaleen McCausland
Fri Dec 14, 2007 6:03 PM
|
|
|
|
i seldom ever agree with susan's pontifications ;however ,she hit the nail on the head
with MUDDY WATERS.
Comment: #2
Posted by: t.g.gaylor
Sat Dec 15, 2007 1:14 PM
|
|
|
|
Lying under oath,missing FBI files,Monica L.,right wing conspiracy,Charlie Tree, Jonny Wong,firing of the travel office folks,firing of the US attorneys,Al Gore invented the internet, etc,etc. Who smoked more stuff ??? LOL. jerrysrollin.blogspot.com
Comment: #3
Posted by: Jerry G.
Sun Dec 16, 2007 11:12 AM
|
|
|
|
Subject: 21 Ways To Be A Good Democrat
21 Ways To Be A Good Democrat
1. You have to be against capital punishment, but support abortion on demand.
2. You have to believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity.
3. You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans are more of a threat than U.S. Nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese and North Korean communists.
4. You have to believe that there was no art before Federal funding.
5. You have to believe that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical documented changes in the earth's climate and more affected by soccer moms driving SUV's.
6. You have to believe that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal f unding.
7. You have to believe that the same teacher who can't teach fourth graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.
8. You have to believe that hunters don't care about nature, but loony activists who have never been outside of San Francisco do.
9. You have to believe that self-esteem is more important than actually
doing something to earn it.
10. You have to believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own money to make The Passion of the Christ for financial gain only.
11. You have to believe the NRA is bad because it supports certain parts of
the Constitution, while the ACLU is good because it supports certain parts
of the Constitution.
12. You have to believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.
13. You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Edison, and A.G. Bell.
14. You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides are not.
15. You have to believe that Hillary Clinton is normal and is a very nice person and that she is not the devil.
16. You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried is because the right people haven't been in charge.
17. You have to believe conservatives telling the truth belong in jail, but
a liar and a sex offender belonged in the White House.
18. You have to believe that homosexual parades displaying drag, transvestites,
and bestiality should be constitutionally protected, and manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal.
19. You have to believe that illegal Democratic Party funding by the Chinese
Government is somehow in the best interest to the United St ates.
20. You have to believe that this message is a part of a vast, right wing conspiracy.
21. You have to believe that it's okay to give Federal workers off on Christmas Day
but it's not okay to say "Merry Christmas."
Ready to vote???
Comment: #4
Posted by: William M. Reeves
Mon Dec 17, 2007 7:10 AM
|
|
|
|
Thank you for the spot-on comments. If Mrs. Clinton is such a terrible person, I'd really like to know, because I am planning to vote for her. But instead of anything substantial, all I read is accusations and innuendo. People say she “masterminded” the whole thing. If she did, it backfired big time(which makes her a bit stupid) if she didn't, then what she have done? She denounced the comments, Shaheen is no longer working for her….. And people are acting outraged and calling this “dirty politics”? It's such a nothing.
As a matter of record, I have never seen anyone more consistently attacked by the press. Starting with the years of nasty drivel about her clothes, hair style and make-up, then being severely criticized for the health insurance thing(does anyone know what her plan actually was?) , relentlessly investigated for over a small about of money in the 30 million dollar Whitewater inquiry(which found nothing) and so it goes. In a new book she is criticized for talking about politics too much when at home(that's a bad thing?) My favorite disparaging remark was after the Monica nonsense, when she didn't divorce her husband, a woman snidely said, “ Oh isn't that just like her.” Oh yes, I can't forget Elizabeth Dole's remark at a Republican convention a few years ago when she stated defiantly, “ …and it doesn't take a village to raise a child!” Huh?
All of this is in lieu of reporting about anything of substance. How many Americans can intelligently discuss and contrast the positions of the major candidates?
In the meantime the Bush team seems to be dropping like flies. One person after the other is abandoning ship: senior advisors, cabinet members…a whole lot of them. What's going on there? Why has the press barely reported on this? Something very scary is happening over there and the press is covering drivel like this?
Comment: #5
Posted by: Mark W
Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:15 PM
|
|
|
|
Re: Mark W. Read back on Whitewater and how many people went to jail (fear of the clintons) and ? suspicious deaths (?suicide). Look into why they did not get charged. All the witnesses went to chair or feared death. You are free to vote for who you want but if you read back on the Clinton administration you will see what vile people they really are. If anyone is not getting a fair shake with the media it is George Bush and the republicans. I do my homework and get most of my information from the internet and talk radio. Give me facts on what good she has done and I want where I can get the information myself to convince me otherwise. Read the books written by Dick Morris and he knows what they are like. Hillary fixes her debates and if they go against her she uses tactics to make the commentator look bad or cries the gender assault. How will she handle Iran, Iraq, immigration along with domestic problems? She can not answer that. Can you provide the information about how she will? Prove me wrong I challenge you on that. Facts only though.
Comment: #6
Posted by: Kathaleen McCausland
Tue Dec 18, 2007 3:45 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
