President Clinton and Mr. Hyde
A case study in contrasts.
by William Kristol
12/10/2007, Volume 013, Issue 13
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Has Bill Clinton lost his touch? In the old days, when he didn't want to take a clear position, he was the master of the straddle. Two days after Congress authorized the first Gulf War, in January 1991, he remarked, "I guess I would have voted for the majority if it was a close vote. But I agree with the arguments the minority made." As former Democratic senator Bob Kerrey commented in 1996, "Clinton's an unusually good liar. Unusually good."
In January 1998, as president, Clinton tested that proposition. He assured the American people, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky"--apparently having in mind his own (rather restrictive) definition of sexual relations. And yet he survived.
His best days of debauchery and obfuscation behind him, Clinton now seems to think he can get away with just making things up. Campaigning for his wife in Iowa last week, he told voters that he "opposed Iraq from the beginning." On May 18, 2003, during a commencement speech at Tougaloo College in Mississippi, Clinton said, "I supported the president when he asked for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq." A little over a year later, he told Time, "That's why I supported the Iraq thing." Now, he says he "opposed Iraq from the beginning"? Really?
And, one might add, opposing Iraq from the beginning was hardly on-message for the Hillary campaign. If it was so clear that one should have opposed the war from the beginning, why did Hillary vote in October 2002 to authorize the use of force? Hillary's narrative depends on her having been deceived by Bush into supporting the war. Bill's vainglorious claim that he--and presumably other intelligent observers--were always against the war doesn't help Hillary.
Does any of this matter?
Yes. It brings the tawdriness of the Clinton years rushing back. And it's not as if Hillary can distance herself from Bill--or from those years. What is, after all, Hillary Clinton's claim to the presidency? Her seven years in the Senate? Her years of law practice? No. Her claim is the "experience" she acquired as first lady. Her claim is that she was and is Mrs. Bill Clinton. The Monica scandal gave Hillary a fantastic political gift: a kind of separation from Bill Clinton while she still remained Hillary Rodham . . . Clinton. But now voters are reminded by Bill's presence on the campaign trail that the Clintons come as a pair. When Bill was running for president in New Hampshire in 1992, voters were told they would get "two for the price of one." Now voters have been reminded that they still get two for the price of one. Last week was a good week for Barack Obama.
***
Last week also brought news of the death of former Illinois congressman Henry Hyde, who managed the impeachment of Bill Clinton. In February 1999, in the face of an overwhelming consensus that President Clinton would emerge the political victor from his impeachment showdown with the Republican Congress, this magazine editorialized that "Republicans should be proud to stand with Henry Hyde against Bill Clinton." And today, we say, Republicans should honor the legacy of Henry Hyde.
In 1999, we noted, in light of the unpopularity of impeachment, one of Hyde's statements: "There are issues of transcendent importance that you have to be willing to lose your office over. I would think of several that I am willing to lose my office over. Abortion is one. National defense is another. Strengthening, not emasculating, the concept of equal justice under law."
This remains a good description of what Republicans should stand for: defending the country, the Constitution, and moral principle. We also noted in 1999 that Republicans needed to come to grips with "their inability to figure out how to oppose a superficially alluring Clintonism." This time around, in 2008, the Democrats--even if they have the wit to avoid nominating Hillary Clinton--are presenting another superficially alluring message: that we can avoid tough choices both abroad and at home. Al Qaeda, entitlements, Iranian nukes--according to Democrats, none of these requires doing anything difficult or challenging.
The example of Henry Hyde--honored by George W. Bush with a Medal of Freedom shortly before his death--should remind Republicans that to govern is to choose, not to straddle.
--William Kristol
? Copyright 2007, News Corporation, Weekly Standard, All Rights Reserved.
