Anderson Cooper 360: Blog Archive - Carl Bernstein’s View: A Hillary Clinton presidency «

April 12, 2008

Carl Bernstein’s View: A Hillary Clinton presidency

Posted: 11:01 PM ET

Editor’s Note: Carl Bernstein is a CNN analyst and author of A Woman in Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton. He is also the author, with Bob Woodward, of All the President’s Men and The Final Days, and, with Marco Politi, of His Holiness: John Paul II and the History of Our Time. Here, he writes a commentary on the prospect of a Hillary Clinton presidency. For an opposing viewpoint from former Clinton lawyer Lanny J. Davis, click here.

What will a Hillary Clinton presidency look like?

The answer by now seems obvious: It will look like her presidential campaign, which in turn looks increasingly like the first Clinton presidency.

Which is to say, high-minded ideals, lowered execution, half truths, outright lies (and imaginary flights), take-no prisoners politics, some very good policy ideas, a presidential spouse given to wallowing in anger and self-pity, and a succession of aides and surrogates pushed under the bus when things don’t go right. Which is to say, often.

And endless psychodrama: the essential Clintonian experience that mesmerizes the press, confuses the citizenry, confounds members of both parties in Congress (not to mention the Clintons themselves, at times) and pretty much keeps the rest of the world constantly amused and fixated.

Such a picture of Clinton Redux is, by definition, speculation. But it is speculation based on the best evidence at hand: the demonstrable and familiar record of Hillary and Bill Clinton coupled together in Permanent Campaign-mode for a generation, waging a continuous fight on the national political stage since 1992, an unceasing campaign for the White House, for redemption, for their ideas (sometimes) and for themselves (almost always), especially in 2008.

The basic dynamics of the campaign, except for the Clintons’ vast new-found personal wealth and its challenges, have been near-constant since they arrived in Washington: through Whitewater, health care, the battle of the budget, the culture wars, the tax returns released only under duress, the travel office, Monica, impeachment, the pardons and through Hillary Clinton’s often repugnant presidential campaign.

In many ways, the characteristic tone, secrecy, and resilience of the Clinton political march have been determined more by Hillary Clinton than by her husband, reflecting her deepest attributes and attitudes, fermented in recognition of the antipathy held against both of them, and often, the foul tactics of their enemies. As an aide put it (quoted in my book, A Woman In Charge: the Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton):

“She doesn’t look at her life as a series of crises but rather a series of
battles. I think of her viewing herself in more heroic terms, an epic
character like in The Iliad, fighting battle after battle. Yes, she succumbs
to victimization sometimes, in that when the truth becomes
too painful, when she is faced with the repercussions of her own
mistakes or flaws, she falls into victimhood. But that’s a last resort
and when she does allow the wallowing it’s only in the warm glow
of martyrdom—as a laudable victim—a martyr in the tradition of
Joan of Arc, a martyr in the religious sense. She would much
rather play the woman warrior—whether it’s against the bimbos,
the press, the other party, the other candidate, the right-wing.
She’s happiest when she’s fighting, when she has identified the
enemy and goes into attack mode. . . . That’s what she thrives on
more than anything—the battle.”

The latest transmutation of leadership in the campaign of Hillary Clinton for president –- Mark Penn’s departure or non-departure, be it window dressing or window cleaning –- is perhaps the best index we have of the more absurd aspects of her candidacy and evidence of its increasing bankruptcy.

The Clinton folks asserted to donors and reporters alike that this second “shake-up” in eight weeks at the very top of the campaign apparat represents some kind of great electoral moment, an opportunity for Hillary to state her case “more positively,” as if the negative approach had been forced on her; the beginning of yet another “turnaround” as if Penn, rather than Hillary (and Bill), has been the big problem. As if Penn were not an appendage of his two patrons, as if he were some kind of independent contractor twisting the candidate’s arm to do what comes unnaturally to her. The willingness of so much of the press, sensitized to the Clintons’ off-center complaints about one-sided coverage, to buy into this line is stunning.

In fact, the demotion of Penn –- like the departure of Hillary’s acolyte Patty Solis Doyle as campaign manager –- is a confession that, for all her claims of “experience” and leadership abilities, Hillary Clinton has now presided over two disastrous national enterprises, the most important professional undertakings of her adult life, both of which she began with ample wind at her back: the healthcare reform of her husband’s presidency, and now her own campaign for the White House. These two failures -– and the demonizing of her opponents in both instances –- may be the best indication of the kind of President she would be, especially when confronted (inevitably) by unanticipated difficulty and/or entrenched opposition to her ideas and programs.

It is exactly under such circumstances that she usually resorts to the worst excesses that mark her in full warrior-mode — and all its scorched-earth, truth-be-damned manifestations. Bosnia, anyone? Smearing the women involved (or even thought to be involved) sexually with her husband. Responding to Barack Obama with the same mindset, disdain, and arsenal as she did Karl Rove and Lee Atwater, as if Obama’s politics and methodologies were as mendacious and vicious as theirs–and her own. Tax information kept secret (in 1992 to hide her profits from trading in cattle futures; in 2008 to shield the identities of Bill’s foreign clients.) A campaign that openly boasts of throwing “the kitchen sink” at her opponent.

What you see is what you get: Hillary’s cynical view of the larger interests of the Democratic Party, exhibited in her 3 a. m. red telephone ad. And her simultaneous, incongruous suggestion that Barack Obama –- notwithstanding his supposed lack of national security qualifications to be commander-in-chief -– would make a good vice president on her ticket.

And, yes, a sense of entitlement that veritably shouts, “Look, because I believe in good things, and because of all I’ve been through, I deserve to win this.”

And yet, there is no denying that, compared to the Bush years, the accomplishments of the Clinton presidency, in which she was an elemental force (and generalissimo in the often successful fight against the forces of “the vast right-wing conspiracy”) are prodigious, marked by peace and prosperity, whatever the price of the Clintons’ methodologies and personal failings.

In projecting what a Hillary Clinton presidency would look like, there is the conundrum of her senatorial tenure and what had appeared to be a surcease in her Pavlovian resort to trench warfare: a period in which -– until the day drew near for her to announce her presidential candidacy –- she seemed (to her oldest friends, certainly) happier and more at ease, and straightforward in her public dealings, and less guarded, than at any point in her life since she followed Bill Clinton to Arkansas.

Hillary Clinton’s unique star power, her performance as a senator and fundraiser on behalf of her party are what gave legitimacy to the idea that she might be a credible presidential candidate: all premised on her changed demeanor in the Senate years, compared to her embattled tenure as first lady. As a steward of her state’s interest, and a patient student of senatorial compromise and collegiality, she was widely commended by former skeptics in Congress and the press.

True, her most revealing moment as a senator of national consequence was the vote she cast to authorize George W. Bush to go to war, which she’s been trying to explain since with dubious credibility. (“If I knew now what I knew then,” etc.) Twenty-one of her fellow Democratic senators had no doubts about what Bush intended, and voted against the authorization.

The second most revealing moment was her endorsement of legislation to make flag-burning illegal, the kind of pandering she once attacked right-wing Republicans of practicing. Meanwhile, she and her husband have regularly misrepresented their own postures and statements in the run-up to the war, as well as Obama’s record, with Bill Clinton claiming to have been against the war from the start, and Hillary saying she has consistently been more adamant in her opposition than Obama -– except for the matter of his single “speech” against the war before it started.

The assumption of many senatorial colleagues, former Clinton aides, and reporters (including this one) was that her presidential campaign would be much different from the one she and Bill Clinton waged through the White House years.

In A Woman in Charge, I wrote about her ability to evolve, observable especially in the years before she met Bill Clinton and in the Senate: to learn from her mistakes. Events have proven me wrong on that count.

The 2008 Clinton campaign, in fact, has been an exercise in devolution, back to the angry, demonizing, accusatory Hillary Clinton of the worst days of the Clinton presidency, flailing, and furtive, and disingenuous; and, as in the White House years, putting forth programs and ideas worthy of respect and deserving of the kind of substantive debate she claims she wants her race against Barrack Obama to be based upon.

Bill, meanwhile, has taken up Hillary’s old role as defender and apologist, with disinformation and misinformation, but (far less effectively than she defended him). Also with near-apoplectic tirades that have left their friends worried and wondering.

In the process of their search-and-destroy mission against Barack Obama, the Clintons have pursued a strategy that at times seems deliberately aimed at undermining Obama’s credibility if he becomes John McCain’s opponent — heresy in the view of an increasing number of the Clintons’ former suppporters and aides, a suprising number of whom now back Obama.

The choice ahead -– in Pennsylvania, and the remaining primary states, and for the super delegates, and perhaps even the arbiters of a deadlocked convention -– is clear enough at this point, at least in terms of what the 2008 Clinton campaign is about: the Clintons — plural. Theirs is a campaign for Restoration to the White House, not simply the election of Hillary Clinton. Theirs is, has always been, a joint enterprise, a see-saw routine in which the psyches and actions of each balances the board according to the personal dynamics of the moment.

A long-time associate of the Clintons, with whom Hillary has consulted in their quest to return to the White House, said early in her campaign: “She has a very plausible case for president. She had an eight-year super-graduate course in the presidency, a progressive platform…” He paused, and added: “[But] I’m not sure I want the circus back in town.”

That is what the Hillary for President campaign has become: the whole Clinton three-ring circus, with little evidence that moving back to the White House will alter that most basic fact.

- Carl Bernstein

Filed under: Barack Obama • Election 2008 • Hillary Clinton • Raw Politics

Share this on:

del.icio.us

Share post | 219 Comments | Permalink


mary		April 12th, 2008 11:35 pm ET Why is Carl Berstein even reporting on CNN. He obviously has an EXTERMELY BIASED opinion of Hillary Clinton, and even more offending is his highly sexist subjective opinion of her and what she has accomplished. If he wants to espouse his own sexist politial views of this nomination race, he should start his own show to let America know that what he says is very sexist coloured politics. If Carl Bernstein can’t stand the thought of an effective and strongly opinionated woman who acts on her beliefs as a someone who would make a good presidential candidate - then Carl Berstein should just stop trying to throw his kitchen sink at Hillary Clinton and he should just get out of his own messy Kitchen. If effective and strong leadership with a president who can tackle issues wisely and with detailed precision, and who also holds her staff accountable for their actions is nto what Carl Berstein thinks is good for Amercia, then that is why he doesn’t want Hillary to be President. But I think and believe America is smarter than that and hopefully will see the light and bote in HILLARY CLINTON AS THE NEW (VERY DESERVED) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!

sue		April 12th, 2008 11:54 pm ET Thank You, i’ts about time someone is willing to speak the truth about the Clintons, Sen. Clinton has run a incompetant campaign, amost controversy, straight out lies and deceit. What kind of a leader would perfer to win a Presidential Election on the account of her opponents mistakes. How can Sen. Clinton manage the United States when she can’t even run her own campaign,

David		April 13th, 2008 12:15 am ET I’m glad someone is brave enough speak truth about Hillary Clinton. The media let her get away with murder.

Komoa		April 13th, 2008 12:39 am ET Yep, what Carl jst said. Thank u Carl for jst putting it out there and letting all the readers know wht they will get with I know everything because of my husband Hilary!

Yvonne		April 13th, 2008 12:45 am ET Thank you Carl. Her candidacy in my opinion is unconstitutional. She’s a scary woman. If you ever write another book about her, call it: “Diary of a Mad White Woman.”

Saera El Paso, TX		April 13th, 2008 1:40 am ET wow for once i’m not entirely sure what to say… but, i suppose i’ll thank you for your honest opinion. it’s interesting. perhaps i might be more inclined to read your book. or perhaps not? i haven’t decided yet.. again, interesting anyway.

anita sena-johnson		April 13th, 2008 2:20 am ET Thank you Mr. Bernstein for your insights and comments. I, too, once had a different vision and high expectations of Hillary Clinton. You remind us, however, (it’s amazing to me how anyone could ever forget) that if she is elected, we could all look forward to an extension of the chaos and drama of the first Clinton administration. (of course, she and Bill will remind us that it was someone else’s fault). We would also continue to see more of her inability to select and manage people, and witness the speed with which she disengages herself from those who disagree with her, and those she who are no longer useful to her, politically. We can look forward to more of Hillary posing as a feminist and as a friend to women, unless they happen to be women with whom Bill chooses to become sexually entangled. At that time, we can witness her, again, turning her back while these women are maligned, called “trailer trash”, or “mentally unstable”. Hillary and Bill have had one primary goal, and that is power. They are very adept at changing roles, friendships, and professional relationships as needed to achieve and maintain this position of power. You are correct in saying that this is quite evident in her incongruous assaults on Barack Obama’s character and ability to lead, while also wanting to leave the door open to the possibility that he would be her underling as Vice President, if it will help her win. She can find a way to get rid of or dismiss him later. Her need and desire for power is also evident in her greedy and instant criticism of Barack Obama’s recent remarks as being condescending, and as looking down on people in small towns. This criticism is ironic, given that she delivered it via speeches to people in these small towns in a way that was patronizing and obsequious, playing “good parent” to his “bad parent.” She told all of these “good children” that, indeed, they were not bitter, but resilient and hardworking. Her criticism about Barack being out of touch or looking down on these people is also hypocritical, since Hillary cannot honestly say that she identifies with these people, given that she lives in one of the richest counties and in one of the richest states in our country, and that some of her voting policies helped to put some of these people in a bad economic position. Hillary Clinton might not “look down” on these people, but that is probably because she can’t even “see” them from her ivory tower in Weschester County.

anita sena-johnson		April 13th, 2008 2:20 am ET Thank you Mr. Bernstein for your insights and comments. I, too, once had a different vision and high expectations of Hillary Clinton. You remind us, however, (it’s amazing to me how anyone could ever forget) that if she is elected, we could all look forward to an extension of the chaos and drama of the first Clinton administration. (of course, she and Bill will remind us that it was someone else’s fault). We would also continue to see more of her inability to select and manage people, and witness the speed with which she disengages herself from those who disagree with her, and those she who are no longer useful to her, politically. We can look forward to more of Hillary posing as a feminist and as a friend to women, unless they happen to be women with whom Bill chooses to become sexually entangled. At that time, we can witness her, again, turning her back while these women are maligned, called “trailer trash”, or “mentally unstable”. Hillary and Bill have had one primary goal, and that is power. They are very adept at changing roles, friendships, and professional relationships as needed to achieve and maintain this position of power. You are correct in saying that this is quite evident in her incongruous assaults on Barack Obama’s character and ability to lead, while also wanting to leave the door open to the possibility that he would be her underling as Vice President, if it will help her win. She can find a way to get rid of or dismiss him later. Her need and desire for power is also evident in her greedy and instant criticism of Barack Obama’s recent remarks as being condescending, and as looking down on people in small towns. This criticism is ironic, given that she delivered it via speeches to people in these small towns in a way that was patronizing and obsequious, playing “good parent” to his “bad parent.” She told all of these “good children” that, indeed, they were not bitter, but resilient and hardworking. Her criticism about Barack being out of touch or looking down on these people is also hypocritical, since Hillary cannot honestly say that she identifies with these people, given that she lives in one of the richest counties and in one of the richest states in our country, and that some of her voting policies helped to put some of these people in a bad economic position. Hillary Clinton might not “look down” on these people, but that is probably because she can’t even “see” them from her ivory tower in Weschester County.

Very Concerned American		April 13th, 2008 6:48 am ET Anderson, This is unfair. One view of someone that does not like the Clinton’s is not fair coverage. If in fact you plan on having Bernstein remarks, then you should have someone that dislikes Obama on the show also. At least have a Clinton supporter there. This is so wrong.

C. Elliott		April 13th, 2008 8:16 am ET Mr. Bernstein - thank you very much for stating the truth. Something that both Hillary and Bill need some schooling in. It truely amazes me that she - of all people - would critize Sen. Obama for making factual statements. Of course people are “BITTER” - I am. And living in rural America and I see it every day. I can only hope that more people will see and take the time to read your article. Perhaps then the light will come on and they will remember the most (perhaps even more so than the present one) scandalous administration in America history. If they will take the time to listen to what she says. How she changes her stance on issues to suit the town/state she is in. How she fabricate an elaborate story that was totally proven to be false. And then how she simply dismissed it as “misspoken”. Yet she has the nerve to call Sen. Obama out of touch. Hillary look in the mirror. Again thank you Mr. Bernstein.

Diane		April 13th, 2008 9:16 am ET So…here we go again! 360 letting their pundits go off on Hillary again! When is 360 going to stop this mess and be fair to them all? You are supposed to be the news and be partial…as of yet I haven’t seen anything done that way on here. Please get back to reality and stop this nonsense! You are driving people away.

J. MaHaffey		April 13th, 2008 9:42 am ET . . .If Hillary Clinton operates in this manner of bad management during a campaign, who in their right mind would want her to be President? Barack Obama conducts himself as the most Presidential by far.

Donna R.		April 13th, 2008 9:58 am ET I find this story as nothing more than a way to cloud over the issue of the “bitter” statement by Senator Obama.

Sara		April 13th, 2008 11:59 am ET Well said. Hope this gets a wide readership. Let’s leave the circus to Barnum & Bailey.

lynn		April 13th, 2008 12:14 pm ET I hope voters actually read this thoughtful, thorough assessment!!

Eugene		April 13th, 2008 12:16 pm ET Thank you, Carl Bernstein I could not have said it better. Your writting is Art of the highest level. True realism, now senator Clinton would now address herself as a Victim of Bill Clinton. ‘ Carl, you might want to watch your back now Senator Clinton and her crew will be coming after you. The Clinton have a history your remember what happen to Peter Paul and the guy that ended up on the park bench. So please becareful.

Bob in western PA		April 13th, 2008 12:16 pm ET An excellent assessment by Bernstein, who eloquently lays out the discomfort that most of us thinking and reading voters feel about “the Clintons.” Let’s hope the voters in PA send the Clintons a strong “go home” message, so that real change and healing can begin in our great country.

Benjamin		April 13th, 2008 12:16 pm ET If you don’t want the circus in town, then the media shouldn’t BRING it. There are real stories the media refuses to cover, and pop culture gossip stories that the media loves. If the media began treating political culture with the dignity and respect it deserves, it could restore the honor the office of President should be bestowed with.

Herman LA, CA		April 13th, 2008 12:18 pm ET I totally agree with Carls Bernstein assessment of Hillary campaign and how she would govern and the fact that we don’t need this kind of drama back in the white house.

Adrian		April 13th, 2008 12:19 pm ET I am still for the clintons. I just find it mesmerising people cant see that Obama has the same problems. I am sick and tired of people blasting her and I reckon people will get tired of this eventually and face the fact that people see beyond these kinda views and still support her regardless. Stop masking ‘analysis’ for blatant support of the other candidate. The pollsters have been wrong and I have faith you will be proven wrong too. Start being an objective news source like you have always been, CNN.

elliana		April 13th, 2008 12:19 pm ET Thank you, Carl, for this very informative, and candid article!! I certainly hope that as many Americans as possible can read the contents and finally confirm that HILLARY CLINTON IS NOT CAPABLE OF, NOR DESERVING OF BEING THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!!

george Illinois		April 13th, 2008 12:20 pm ET Superb and accurate assessment. She is also so phony whenever she speaks.

more condescension		April 13th, 2008 12:20 pm ET Why don’t all the Hillary haters take their nonsense elsewhere? Any drama is being created by the media constantly trying to drag a good woman and a great candidate down. If you want to look at lies and distortions and condescension… scrutinize Obama. We are sick of you talking heads.

Cris in PA		April 13th, 2008 12:21 pm ET This article by Bernstein sums up the progress in my opinion of Hillary since Oct 2007. I started out being an extremely ardent supporter of Hillary. But right now, I am not to sure if she is the right person to be in the WH. Her actions and speeches are just downright presumptuous. She seems to set different rules for herself and her opponents. Not to mention the lies, the self-sympathy, anger, arrogance etc etc which she has displayed. As Bernstein puts it, I am not too sure if I want the circus back in town. There is no way I can bring myself to vote for Obama or any Republican. And that is turning out to be case with Hillary too. I think the Democratic Party is proving to be incompetent in the race to the WH.

Debby Ragland-Lakeland, FL		April 13th, 2008 12:21 pm ET Right on Carl!

Cathy Lovsmith		April 13th, 2008 12:21 pm ET I agree with Mr. Bernstein. Hillary is the epitomy of the things I don’t like about women. She’s sneaky, underhanded, backstabbing, and will lie at the drop of a hat to make herself look better than she is. As a woman, I would have a very difficult time voting for her, or anyone else who has such difficulty with ethical behavior. I don’t understand those who idolize her– I expect more from a woman candidate, and I hope someday soon we will see someone with the right qualities, but it is not this day. Cathy

Waiting for our tune in Penn		April 13th, 2008 12:21 pm ET …because of the respect I have for you Mr. Bernstein…i see this “Hillary” thing for the first time. I have felt these same things that you write about….but could not put into words. I will be for Obama on the 22nd here in Penn now. Thanks.

Roger		April 13th, 2008 12:24 pm ET I stopped at the second paragraph. All Carl Bernstein has to say was I am pro-Obama and that would have been enough. But instead, he would like to destroy the democratic party’s chance to win the general election since Obama’s not going to be able to beat McCain.

Kim in Pa		April 13th, 2008 12:29 pm ET Very true and well put.

beth		April 13th, 2008 12:33 pm ET What a bunch of garbage. Carl Bernstein is at it again. His opinion is needed why? Oh yes FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

Theo		April 13th, 2008 12:33 pm ET Whoa….. I could not have said it better myself! Pure elegance in writing! Thanks for making this so much clearer for me. Obama 08!

elise		April 13th, 2008 12:53 pm ET WOW What a bitter nasty commentary that reflexs his smug demeaner when on the air at CNN. Are we to consider him an expert on Senator Clinton due to his biography of the former First Lady that smaks of Kitty Ketty’s style? Whats wrong Carl didn’t Hillary join you on your book tour?

Tobias		April 13th, 2008 12:54 pm ET Having the Clintons back in the White House is just what this country needs. It is also the only choice we have now. Obama has no chance of winning in the general election and if we don’t want another Bush third term then we had better all start supporting Senator Clinton. I was a big fan of the peace and prosperity of the 90’s.

Jim, American in Paris		April 13th, 2008 12:59 pm ET Ridiculous! What would people like you do without a three-ring circus to invent and then live on! The United States had 8 years of peace and prosperity under Bill Clinton and Hillary was an oustanding First Lady and politician!

hero		April 13th, 2008 1:07 pm ET Hillary Clinton is a true hero. She battles daily for her country. She is intelligent, hardworking and informed. If her detractors went away, she could be the best president thus far. Even with all the media fueled hate, and the media created drama… she shine and rises above it all. Other politicians just lie and cheat… she works for everything.

Portland, Oregon		April 13th, 2008 1:08 pm ET Harvard guy stumping for another Harvard guy? Old boys network?

Victoria in LA		April 13th, 2008 1:11 pm ET Stop writing this sexist rubbish, Mr. Bernstein. You just can’t stand it when a woman is in power, like the rest of the Obama-bots. You’ve never had anything constructive to ever say anyways. It’s OUR time now! HILLARY 08!

S. Holland		April 13th, 2008 1:16 pm ET Perfectly stated!!!!!!!!!!

Dilly WA		April 13th, 2008 1:16 pm ET Thank you, thank ,you, thank you. I sincerely hope this is the focus on CNN this week. It is the truth and the public deserves and needs to hear it. Please, CNN stay on this. Thanks.

Sterling Brown		April 13th, 2008 1:16 pm ET You said is best my good man P.T. Barnum’s family should invest in their brand after she mops up the rest of her campaign’s blood, sweat, and tears with her own hair. The circus is not going to make it back to town this fall kids.

Adam		April 13th, 2008 1:18 pm ET I’m certainly a voter who doesn’t want the “circus” back in town. I don’t think America does either, which is why Obama is winning and will win the nomination, and will (and should) be our next president. Thank you, Carl, for this article, and for all your work.

honky white boy from cali		April 13th, 2008 4:12 pm ET Mr. Bernstein You left me absolutely speechless! That was one of the most accurate non bias assessments of this mess I have read to date. All I can say is you deserve a Pulitzer prize and a purple heart for that piece. Very Very Brave!, and from the bottom of my heart thank you! I have had my faith in the media and CNN placed into questionable territory recently but no more that is what true journalism is all about. Go Obama 08

Siafu		April 13th, 2008 4:36 pm ET Perfect. Clinton enjoys the battle, damn the result. That would work oh so well with a minority party that’s proven adept at blocking just about any legislation. But then, should Clinton become the nominee, she would have to beat McCain with the votes of white women over 40, because she should be assured that much of the “new voter” block Obama brings into the mix will not be casting a vote for her.

Panala Kinzie		April 13th, 2008 4:36 pm ET I beg to differ with you Roger, Obama is the reason we have all the new voters! I for one would sit this one out if Hillary wins the nomination. Perhaps before all her ugliness, I would have considered it. Had she run a campaign of dignity. But as it stands, myself and my family would sooner let McCain win than vote for Hillary. Come to think of it there would not be much difference there as I truly believe Hillary has no intentions of getting out troops out of Iraq. — Not even at 3:00 in the morning after drinking all night.

Gail		April 13th, 2008 4:37 pm ET This is very well written. Hillary and Bill have been about themselves and riding the country as a personal platform for personal gain. What type are trying to do the Democratice party after her campign is virtually lost, shows how self centered she truly is. Dems Unite for a victory in 08

Natalie Shepherd		April 13th, 2008 4:38 pm ET Thank you, I really needed this. I live in Pennsylvania and I am an Obama supporter. I have gotten such a kick out of watching Barack narrow Hillary’s lead. Here we go again, though, less than 10 days before our primary and the Clinton campaign has gone negative again and negative BIG TIME. What Barack said about small towns is basically true for a lot of small towns across the United States. What Barack said about peoples’ attitudes and mindsets and how they react and / or cope with hard times probably could have been worded better but he iwas not talking down to people or even talking about gun rights or freedom of religion. He was just telling it like it is. It’s really scary to see how the Clinton campaign has turned a fairly simple statement into a falsehood and is using it to attack Barack’s character and credibility to win an election. The Clintons and the surrogates speak with such certainty, they have got the whole body language thing down and they look right into the cameras with straight faces. The sad thing is that there are people out there who will unfortunately believe what they are saying. I hope to hear more from you about the Clintons so that the American public can be better informed.

George		April 13th, 2008 4:38 pm ET So you don’t think Obama as President would NOT be a circus?? Think of the convocation Rev Wright and Farrakhan at the Inauguration! Think of Michelle and her bizarre comments! Not to mention the “typical white person” grandmother. OMG, are you serious??

bademus		April 13th, 2008 4:39 pm ET I too started this primary season taking a close look at all candidates and while undecided I defended Hillary against friend’s negative comments about her. Well now I am eating my words and conceding that they were right. I am appalled at the turn of her campaign. It seems as though she is trying to say “if I don’t win it then he won’t either”. Perhaps she is angling for 2012 or maybe just trying to cut him down hard so she can argue that he can’t be elected. Who’s the Judas of the Democratic party?

Chaz Washington State		April 13th, 2008 5:09 pm ET Thank you Bernstein, This is something that everyone has been thinking, but just hasn’t put it in words. I can understand the Hillary supporters for standing their ground to still support her, because I wouldn’t want to look like a flip flopper when it comes to whom I’m supporting, but the obvious is the obvious. Why continuing supporting someone that is desperate and has no shame in showing it.

gloria		April 13th, 2008 5:09 pm ET Been to the circus for 8 years. Now her campaign is another circus. I found out I hate the circus. Obama ‘08

Mary, Dallas, Texas		April 13th, 2008 5:09 pm ET As they say in the Baptist, “Let the church say Amen”.

deb813		April 13th, 2008 5:10 pm ET Roger I don’t think you read this post, because if you had you would realize that a second Clinton presidency is a pipe dream. It was a pipe dream after Obama won 11 contests in a row. It was a pipe dream during the four different recounting of her Bosnia story. And it is a pipe dream today.

Dionne M.		April 13th, 2008 5:10 pm ET Thank you. Hillary Clinton should not be at the helm.

dawn		April 13th, 2008 5:11 pm ET Frankly, it is amazing to me that there are still people in Pennsylvania, or anywhere else, who would still vote for her after the blatant lies she has told. Now she is jumping all over Obama for telling the truth about the people who are bitter, because they continue to get beat down by their government. Presto…she has turned herself into a gun-slinging, whiskey drinking Pennsylvanian. How can she live with herself?

lynn		April 13th, 2008 5:13 pm ET This should be on the regular political ticker not buried away!!

beth		April 14th, 2008 8:12 am ET The best analysis I have read on the Clintons modus-operandi. Carl has put into context, with sound rational, why so many of us get a creepy feeling about this candidate. One can only hope more of our party will see this and votes accordingly. Bravoo, Carl !!!!!!!!

Debi		April 14th, 2008 1:02 pm ET Thank you, Mr Bernstein, for telling it like it is. The likely scenario for Hillary has resulted in this sequence: 1. No way can this nobody compete with me ! 2. No way can he outraise me with some little online donations ! 3. Our backers need to put up or shut up ! 4. We have to bend every rule in the book to stop this ! 5. Find or create some dirt so I can make him disappear ! 6. If I’m going down, I’ll bring him down with me !

Brendan Wilson		April 14th, 2008 1:12 pm ET Not exactly Pulitzer-worthy analysis there, Carl. You are simply repeating everything that the Republicans have been saying about the Clintons for the last 15 years or so. They are ambitious, manipulative and duplicitous …and this is NOT news. Neither you nor the readers that are cheering you on had any complaints when the Clinton methods were being targeted at Republicans. How come?

GG		April 14th, 2008 1:13 pm ET Every comment I have heard out of this pundit’s mouth has been anti-Hillary. He and Dick Morris make interesting bedfellows.

j		April 14th, 2008 1:14 pm ET Not for nothing, but 8 years ago the election was botched and look what happened. Welcome to the the Bush Admin. I’m not saying she’s a perfect fit (or a totally honest one), but at least she’s a known evil. Obama has great spirit and ideas, but can he deliver? I’m also not big on his high and mighty attitude that he presents, what makes him better than any one of us? He speaks grandly, but always with a mocking tone. I just feel a known political agenda is better than one no one has ever seen.

Holly		April 14th, 2008 1:16 pm ET Wow! Can you take out an ad in a Pennsylvania newspaper? That would be wo wonderful! You go, Carl.

MikeyC		April 14th, 2008 1:18 pm ET There is a morbid part of me that wants to see the Presidency unfold like a reality show on VH1.

JMR PhD		April 14th, 2008 1:20 pm ET As an amateur psychologist, I can’t decide if both the Clintons suffer from a narcissistic personality disorder or a borderline personality disorder, the latter characterized by: re-writing personal history, a strong sense of victimhood and betrayal by others “for no good reason,” constant accusation and devaluation of others, inability to really feel others’ pain, treating others like Kleenex: to be used and abandoned, hair-trigger, bottomless rage, a sense of entitlement, and a corresponding demand that if they are “over it” (anger, lies, various sins) then everyone should be “over it”–because it really didn’t happen anyway. All of this appears to be driven by abandonment issues and loss of approval–hence the frantic need to be in the adoring public eye. But we get what we deserve: our whole American culture is absorbing these characteristics, and, as we do, losing our ability to survive as a nation.

Larry		April 14th, 2008 1:27 pm ET Thanks Carl for a great article. Finally, some truthful analysis of the Clintons without fear. Much appreciated. And Roger, if you think Obama can’t beat McBush then are you saying Billory can? That’s delusional. No way she can win. No way. Why do you think everyone, including Fox News and Rush jump on Obama at everyone opportunity to try and destroy him. Granted they are racist but they really want to run against Billory. You think John Kerry was attacked and swift-boated, just wait. Both of them will be attacked unmercifully and unfairly. But that’s Republican politics. Thanks Karl Rove. They know McBush will be trounced by Obama, they fear him. Not her.

jake		April 14th, 2008 1:30 pm ET No matter what you say, Obama, if he’s the nominee will not beat Mcain, Obama has lot’s of lies, the worst of all, the Wright controversy. How could we have a President who has ties with a Pastor who teaches hates, who hate Jews, white people and America. Why he could not disown people who are racist? The Wright issue will surface again in the General Election if Obama is the nominee and this controversy is still in the minds of millions of voters.

JD		April 14th, 2008 1:30 pm ET “the accomplishments of the Clinton presidency, in which she was an elemental force (and generalissimo in the often successful fight against the forces of “the vast right-wing conspiracy”) are prodigious, marked by peace and prosperity” Excuse me, but what did the Clinton’s do in their terms to foster this? Did they bring down the Iron Curtain? Did they create the massive ‘peace dividend’? As far as the economy goes they governed over the largest stock bubble in history, the effects of which we are still feeling today - the massive credit bubble we are suffering from today can be traced back to the zero interest rates created by Greenspan in response to the stock bubble and the unchecked growth of Fannie and Freddie under Clinton’s watch. Did they pass Kyoto? Bush gets blasted by Gore today on this and why didn’t they pass it on their watch? What did they do except coast along during some pretty good times?

Lisa		April 14th, 2008 1:32 pm ET I live in Illinois and chose to support Obama. It was not an easy decision since I would love to see a woman become President in my lifetime. In the beginning of primary season, I simply preferred him to Hillary Clinton because of his integrity and his courage to say what needs to be said. In short, I just liked him a bit more. As the primaries continued on, my respect for Hillary Clinton began to dwindle. I began to see what the Republicans disliked so much about her (which I used to see as only a witch-hunt to decrease Bill’s popularity at the time). By contrast, my respect for Obama has increased proportionately to my growing dislike for Hillary. Each time she attacks him without judgment or mercy, he comes back stronger than before. In short, Hillary is putting her personal ambitions before everything else, including the Democratic Party, this country as a whole, and what’s left of her integrity. The only way she could recoup any respect from me at all would be to drop out of the race - - immediately and with grace.

Robert Dalton		April 14th, 2008 1:32 pm ET Thank you, CNN, for putting Mr. Bernsteins remarks on your site. I’m almost as proud of you as the night I spent with Bernie and the Boys watching the Coalition aircraft bombing Baghdad. At last, the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

robert		April 14th, 2008 1:33 pm ET It has been obvious for quite some time that Bernstein had an axe to grind against the Clintons. The contempt oozed throughout his last book leaving stained and greasy fingertips as you turned each vindictive page. He has lost substantial credibility with this crusade, and would now have has bow to the condescending messiah Obama, who pisses on rural white women in Pennsylvannia as he jabs the air with an elite finger lecturing Americans on the ‘change’ he intends to bring. Why don’t you tell us about the back door money Obama plied from Abramoff’s law firm while cascading invective against Hillary Clinton for doing the same thing. What people need to know is that these DC journalists are in on the take and Bernstein is just another pig lining up at the Obama trough. Give me a break!

Steven Mays		April 14th, 2008 1:35 pm ET Very well written article. However, Mr. Bernstein forgets to mention Mrs. Clinton’s flip-flop opinion of the Second Ammendment. If Im not mistaken, isnt Hillary one of Sarah Brady’s best friends? Everyone should remember Mrs. Brady’s total, almost fanatical, commitment to nationwide gun bans. Keep in mind the name Evan Bayh, he is a former Indiana Governor who is trying his best to become the Clinton choice for V.P. Pro-gun?, a staunch Clinton supporter, Mr. Bayh is also the loudest mouth-piece for all of the anti-gun, anti-hunting, special interest groups. I know it may be hard for some to fathom, but could it be that Hillary’s sudden “fond memories” of hunting and target shooting as a child are simply one more in the string of lies? Sniper fire, ” I support a strong military”, ( psst..it was the Clintons who initiated the BRAC process that cut our troop strenght to almost a quarter of where it should be, why do you think the deployments and tours of duty are so long and so frequent?), taxes, Whitewater, Monica, ( I thought you werent some little woman standing by her man, like Tammy Wynette?)..hmmm..so far the track record is’nt looking too good…and last but certainly not least..what did really happen to Vince Foster?..I never have bought into the whole “He shot himself in the back of the head with a shotgun” theory..it just isnt possible. The list goes on and on…NAFTA..the LIncoln bedroom…oh yes, probably the biggest most blatant lie of all…remember when Hillary first ran for the Senate?..what was it she said with a straight face to all in earshot and camera range?..”Absolutely NOT, I HAVE NO PLANS WHATSOEVER TO EVER RUN FOR THE PRESIDENCY”…hmmm, How can there be anyone, possibly, who thinks Hillary is NOT a liar who’s sole purpose in life is ..simply..to serve herself and no one else.?

max		April 14th, 2008 1:37 pm ET Carls sounds angry. I give him credit for his work in the past but every singlr sentance was an attack line…not much of an analysis…it is obvious who he is voting for… this article just sounds a little over the top angry

Chuk Walton		April 14th, 2008 1:39 pm ET I get the impression that Bill and Hillary will kill to win the ultimate prize of their career. It is an ugly scene. McCain smirks through it all. After the Bush disaster, how could it be. McCain might as well have Hillary as Vice President.

Angelita		April 14th, 2008 1:40 pm ET Obviously Bernstein is capitalizing via his writings about Hillary Cllinton. Should she get the democratic nomination, why not call his next book Hillary Potter: ” A Clinton’s Thirst for Power .”. I hope she really wins so that it will be a slam dunk in his face. It’s time he ends his Hillary hatred and get a real life.

Mercedes		April 14th, 2008 1:41 pm ET Ho hum……yawn…….I don’t have time for all these words. Mr Bernstein’s words started sucking the life out of me by the end of the first paragraph. Hillary Clinton is a remarkable woman who has been conducting a fantastic campaign. I know where she stands and I hear her challenge for all of us to help her get this Congress and all the special interests moving in a direction to benefit all of us. Nothing else matters unless you make your living talking and writing in Washington DC. You can’t show more than you know. So get out and see and EXPERIENCE the real country Mr Bernstein, Mr Obama, and all the other movers and shakers who think they have seen the light and must tell the rest of us how to live and what to think.

Barry Koch,Va. Beach, Va.		April 14th, 2008 1:42 pm ET As insightful and as well written as Mr. Bernstein’s book…the Clinton’s would rather desroy Obama if they can not return to the white house… its always about them not what is best for the country..how sad..but then Hillary showed her true character when she refused to follow her instructions on the impeachment staff of Richard Nixon..and was discharged as a result..why is that never mentioned ???

ibrahim		April 14th, 2008 1:42 pm ET The truth will win. If Barack is not elected, then America loses. You don’t need to be an Obama supporter to know that. Hilary is doing everything just to spoil this man. Why can’t we open our eyes?. In short enough is enough, we are tired and frustrated. Barack needs to be carefull because this woman is dangerous. God, oh God save us.

Peggy		April 14th, 2008 1:43 pm ET This very insightful look at a “Clinton White House” was admirable! Thanks for putting into such eloquent words- things that I have been thinking and feeling since this election process started. I was a Clinton supporter in 1992 and 1996, but cannot in good conscience support Hillary this election.

Bit		April 14th, 2008 1:45 pm ET One more thing Carl: I have read all the Whitewater scandals and other scandals that went on with the Clintons during Bill’s terms as Governor (Mena) and President. In all the scandals, there were peple that were killed that knew too much and who disagreed with the Clintons. I said all of this to say this-watch yourself so that you won’ t become a VICTIM at the hands of the Clintons. Well done!

marc1a		April 14th, 2008 5:06 pm ET Boy…Such an ugly picture of a Clinton presidency. You know, it wasn’t too long ago, and from what I remember, things were not so bad. In fact, for me personally and I suspect for many of you reading this, it was the best time of my life economically speaking. I can’t believe what s short memory this country has. Sure, some mistakes were made, but do you people and the media really think Obama is not going to make mistakes. The media like AC, Matthews and Olbermann are so in love with Obama that they’re willing to forget their journalistic duties, and do their part to influence the electorate. They stack their shows and their blogs with contributors or “experts” that are clearly in the tank for Obama. They are always quick to offer a defense of an Obama gaffe but relentlessly analyze Clinton’s. This is total BS and the country is catching up to it. Obama supporters may own the internet but that doesn’t mean the rest of the country doesn’t see what’s happening and Obama will not stand a chance in November without the support of Hillary supporters.

Independent Citizen		April 14th, 2008 5:17 pm ET Berstein, as always, stands up for objectivity and the American people. This is a well written, well researched perspective on Hillary’s political life and style. I am an Independant voter and will vote for Obama. I see Barack as intelligent as Bill without the baggage. Hillary is too much of a control-freak to manage a Presidency. She would make a much better Chief of Staff. I would say she would have made a good leader of the DNC, but I think she has burned that bridge (among many).

Deb		April 14th, 2008 5:41 pm ET Actually, I like the idea of Hillary as a warrior. Who wants an elitist wimp who can’t bowl, talks about arugula, and thinks you take a six-shooter into a duck blind, as president?

Terri		April 14th, 2008 5:57 pm ET Thank you, Mr. Bernstein. I was beginning to think that there was no one left who has actually been paying attention for the last few decades. Everything you’ve written is spot on and I’m simply baffled that more people can’t see through it all. It saddens me that with the Democratic line-up we had this year, candidates far more worthy were all but ignored next to the Clinton whirlwind. It’s a shame that circus has pre-empted serious issue considerations in elections more and more. Let’s hope more people turn away from the manipulated distractions and distorted spin and realize that the last thing we need at this time is a return of the Clintons to the White House, and I say that as someone who voted for Bill twice.

Pat Newcomb		April 14th, 2008 6:00 pm ET This is a tough article and hard to take. I wonder what the Clinton’s did to the writer to make him so hateful. Sadly, I did not see anything in this article referring to his personal experience of this behavior. I respect the fact that there is some sort of axe to grind here, but there are so many statements stated so definitively that it’s hard to separate fact from speculation. How does the writer answer the fact that Hillary Clinton was elected to the US Senate ON HER OWN - TWICE? Her re-election required her to win over hundreds of thousands of residents of small towns, farmers, factory workers AND small business owners. These folks can see through to someone’s character pretty quickly and they must have liked what they saw. How does the writer answer the fact that Hillary Clinton sponsored or co-sponsored so many pieces of legislation - some of which requiring her to sit down across the table with arch rivals and philosophical enemies? As to management of the campaign — in the end, the voters and the delegates have to like what they see. Campaigns will be judged on the ends and not the means. A “well-run” campaign for a candidate who loses because he routinely exhibits his disdain for typical white people, blue collar workers and people from small towns and rural areas will end up in the dustbin of history just like every other second place.

Edward in CA		April 14th, 2008 10:08 pm ET Thank you Mr. Bernstein, very well said.

JJ		April 14th, 2008 10:08 pm ET Ridiculous!

jeff		April 14th, 2008 10:08 pm ET Carl Bernstein speaks the truth. I recommend his extremely fair and balanced biography of HC to anyone who wants to know the pro’s and con’s of her background. BC is the kind of baggage no President needs to have around.

JJ		April 14th, 2008 10:12 pm ET Is this what an Obama presidency promises. If you say his middle name you will be put on a list. I’m going to keep posting until CNN stops censoring me.

Edward in CA		April 14th, 2008 10:13 pm ET Pat Newcomb, you must not understand anything about politics, or not understand anything about New York. Hillary Clinton would not have been elected to office in her own state. So she carpet bagged in New York to get elected, and leveraged her liberal cronies in the state to make it happen. Further, every political expert, even those working in her campaign, characterize her presidential campaign to be one of great folly, mismanagement, disorganization, and incompetence. If that’s who you want running the country, then we are in for some serious trouble.

jonathan		April 14th, 2008 10:13 pm ET If only she would campaign in Dallas.

paul		April 14th, 2008 10:14 pm ET wow! spot on, carl!

Karen		April 14th, 2008 10:14 pm ET Mercedes said Hillary Clinton is a remarkable woman. She may have some remarkable accomplishments to her credit, but she is a LIAR as well. She is extremely deceptive, coniving, and not trustworthy. Everytime she tells a story about someone she met on the campaign trail, I seriously doubt it. We need a president we can believe in. That requires honesty. Simply stated, she is a phony. . . certainly not presidential material.

Mary Ann, Atlanta		April 14th, 2008 10:25 pm ET Carl, We get it. You’re just not that into her. Now move on.

Eileen,Canada		April 14th, 2008 10:28 pm ET Another biased Clinton hater A lot of men just don’t want a women president. But they would rather settle for a racist, elitist that we are just beginning to learn about. The media has not done theri job of investigating Obama more. If all these controversies were about Hillary Clinton she would have been asked to step down…double standard here…. how about some unbiased reporting for a change. Lou Dobbs said it right on tonights show about Obama.

Nan		April 14th, 2008 10:30 pm ET So Mr Berstein, How about you also talk about Rev Wright, “Bitter Controversy” , Rezko, Michelle obama’s comments and so on….. Hillary can create change not Obama. He just know how to give speechs. It’ll be funny when Obama gets to the Whitehouse. What is he going to do then? Get prepared for another Bush

JoAnne MN		April 14th, 2008 10:35 pm ET Carl must be trying to sell his book. No thank you!

Steve in California		April 14th, 2008 10:36 pm ET It’s difficult to digest any of Carl Bernstein’s Hillary bashing rants. He’s so transparent in his contempt and hatred, I tune out whenever he speaks. CNN and Carl should make more of an effort to appear objective.

Jeanne		April 14th, 2008 10:39 pm ET I don’t even want to think about another Clinton presidency. Just say NO!

A. Freeman		April 14th, 2008 10:40 pm ET Well said, and thank you Mr. Bernstein

Elva		April 14th, 2008 10:42 pm ET “We’re oppressed as hades and we’re not gonna take it any more.” Women are sick and tired of settling for a lesser candidate when the best man for the job happens to be a woman. These type of sexist diatribes only motivate her supporters more. Lanny Davis has it right in response And no Carl. You don’t have another book sale here. So you can stop pumping free ads for your book.

Ramesh		April 14th, 2008 10:42 pm ET Brilliant. Perfectly timed, perfectly written. This womans presidency would be run EXACTLY the way this campaing was run. Confrontational, partisan and brutally divisive. Oh and this would be in addition to her colossal mismanagement of people and resources. Best of luck people!!

Tim		April 14th, 2008 10:44 pm ET Bernstein is so blatently biased against Clinton it is hard to take anything he says seriously. And let’s not forget the serious gaffes that Obama has committed so far - Rev, Wright, Tony Rezco, and last but not least the “small town Americans are a bunch of gun-toting bible-thumping idiots who are too stupid to solve their problems” speech that just proves how elitist and out of touch he is with average Americans. Hillary may have made some mistakes, but that is nothing compared to the inexperience and elitist attitudes of Obama, and we are probably just seeing the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the skeletons in his closet.

Jimmy		April 14th, 2008 10:44 pm ET Bernstein is a prime example of one of those supposedly “neutral” pundits, all the while spinning and injecting his own biased beliefs in to the conversation. There is a difference between analyzying a situation objectively and writing a balanced article about the situation and having an axe to grind with someone and taking the opportunity to slam them in to the dirt every time they get the chance. Bernstein (and his anti-Hillary rant above) is an example of the latter. Whenever Carl can, he sticks a needle in Hillary’s back. Bernstein is a man on a crusade to stop the Clinton’s in every way, shape and form. It’s too bad he can’t do a better job of disguising that.

Hillary '08		April 14th, 2008 10:52 pm ET Thank you for presenting such an insightful article. You have provided me a perspective that I had not previously considered. I do believe you’ve convinced me that what I really want is a change from politics as usual. I am changing my support to Mr. Obama, who does seem to represent a real chance for change.

Jessica Schreiber		April 14th, 2008 10:53 pm ET I am confused by Mary’s critique of the Bernstein’s analysis. She repetitively refers to it as “sexist” without ever defining the term or providing a scintilla of evidence to support it. She has a right to disagree with Bernstein’s analysis — but she cannot refute it by name calling, at least as far as I am concerned. I am a feminist and of Senator’s Clinton generation — a natural ally who instinctively would like to support her. But I can’t because she no longer seems to stand for anything. I have found her attacks on Obama disingenuous and cynical. It seems she would rather McCain win than allow Obama to run. His has been the better campaign from Day 1. He is the real thing — an authentic, charismatic leader with a remarkable ability to distill issues down to their essence and in inspire the best in us as Americans. Hillary has good ideas and policies as well — she just cannot articulate them very well, she lacks Obama’s (and her husband’s) depth or scope of understanding and does not come across as deep, or original or authentic. I understand the pain for her, but I cannot respect her self serving ambition at the expense of the Democratic Party and the country. Obama offers the greatest hope of Presidential leadership in a generation. Hillary Clinton is standing in his way. Bernstein is right and I agree with what he has to say. It gives me no pleasure to disclose that I have lost respect for Hillary Clinton as a result of how she has run her campaign.

K		April 14th, 2008 10:53 pm ET Excuse me, but what planet are you guys on??? The presidency is a job for someone who can manage a country. Central to this job are POLICIES, PLANS, and CONCRETE IDEAS. I challenge any of you to present to me ANY policies, plans or concrete ideas that come from Barack Obama. I dare you. If you give me the same challenge with Hillary, I wouldn’t even know where to start. I will come back to you with handfuls of policy plans. Now who’s the best candidate?

Joe Terrogano		April 14th, 2008 11:04 pm ET Thank you Mr. Bernstein for your insights.

Tony Rizzo		April 14th, 2008 11:08 pm ET The Clinton years : marked by personal failings but with peace and prosperity. I’ll take it !

Carolyn C		April 14th, 2008 11:08 pm ET Wow! I wish I could have written this. An insightful description of why Hillary’s scorched earth approach will never unify the country. Thank you Karl!

Gary in DC		April 14th, 2008 11:08 pm ET I voted for Bill Clinton, both times. Overall, I think he was good for the country.The last thing I want is 4 more years of the antics we’ve seen from Bill Clinton during the past 6 months. We don’t need 2 presidents!

BCC		April 14th, 2008 11:08 pm ET Most people capable of successfully leading have visible and many times considerable flaws. This is certainly true with both Senator Hillary and former President Bill Clinton. On-the-other-hand, the one impossible to miss flaw in people who cannot successfully lead is their inability to lead. This is certainly true of President George W. Bush. Based on his agreement with the major policies and failures of President Bush, Senator McCain projects the dominate characteristic of being incapable of successfully leading because he intends to follow the flawed logic and of unrealistic goals of President Bush. Based on a lack of meaningful experience and a lack of details on how to achieve his stated goals, Senator Obama projects the dominate characteristic of being incapable of successfully leading. In a phrase, promising change for change sake is not a strategy for success. So, take your pick. 1) Bash Senator Hillary Clinton, a capable leader but flawed human; or 2) praise Senator Obama an excellent speaker but a man without meaningful leadership experience and without details on how he will actually bring about change and how the change he promises will be a change for the better; or 3) praise Senator McCain who has pledged to follow in the footsteps of President Bush. Footsteps that will continue to lead the USA to foreign and domestic ruin.

Manny		April 14th, 2008 11:08 pm ET OMG, what an editorial. Whether you support Clinton or Obama, McCain or the Man in the Moon, you gotta love the magnificent prose of an American icon, Carl Bernstein. I found myself suddenly divested of the topic at hand but more so simply enjoying one of the greats practicing his craft. More Bernstein please! Bravo!

blake		April 14th, 2008 11:09 pm ET It’s a blong, people. Nobody at CNN claimed that Mr. Bernstein’s piece was neutral…. It was, however, extremely on point. If you like Hillary, get over it. Or see the light — this woman cannot possibly win against McCain, because too many despise her. She lies and bends the truth constantly, is presumptuous and condescending, attacks a fellow Democrat even when it benefits McCain and purports to be one of “us” when she and Bill have pulled in over $100 million in less than 10 years. Thank you, Obama, for pointing out that many of us are indeed bitter and want to move on from the Clinton/Bush legacies that have left us with little to be happy about. And thank you, Mr. Bernstein, for a very interesting piece.

Jonathan		April 14th, 2008 11:09 pm ET This whole article is obviously a subjective and deliberately negative piece, but the thing I find most appalling is the assersion in the article that Senator Clinton’s Presidential campaign is somehow a failure. She has overcome enormous odds, a one-sided smear campaign from an Obama-obsessed press, a vicious and largly ignored onslaught from the supposedly doe-eyed Obama campaign, all to emerge as a lagimate candidate who will not only will Pennsylvania (as well as having won virtually every major state) but will continue to compete for the nomination of her party as the most qualified contender by far. Hillay ‘08

Patty		April 14th, 2008 11:10 pm ET Just the fact please! Keep your personal feeling out of the race….I expect these attacks from tabloids, not CNN.

Ann Zen		April 14th, 2008 11:10 pm ET Right, but gas was $1.15 a gallon. The first President Clinton really cared about working people. He understood us, and if not for opposition from the GOP, he would have helped people a lot more than he was able. I will vote for whichever Democrat gets the nomination, but I do sincerely hope it is Hillary Clinton. She would do better than another under-prepared, arrogant male like Obama, who is so inexperienced and yet so cocksure.

Shaunte		April 15th, 2008 1:32 am ET Excellent commentary!!

Blesson, India		April 15th, 2008 5:46 am ET brilliant material ! i totally agree with this piece of writing. if Obama becomes the president, i can truly say that America would be under one of finest men in power. The man has it all.

Joseph in PA		April 15th, 2008 5:48 am ET Excellent article! It summarizes how I have come to feel as well about the Clinton’s, and I was one of their biggest supporters, but it seems that the Clinton’s biggest supporters are…themselves. Interesting also how many more Clinton supporters say they will not vote for Obama as opposed to Obama supporters not willing to vote for Clinton. I am a Democrat foremost before being the supporter of a candidate. I wish Mr. Bernstein’s article could be front page on all the PA newspapers tomorrow!

John		April 15th, 2008 6:19 am ET Boy, was this a great piece of work to wake up to. No, I do not hate Mrs. Clinton. She’s been a good senator here in New York State. I hope she remains a U.S. Senator and quits the circus.

jim		April 15th, 2008 6:26 am ET Carl, how about next time you add some facts to your vitriol? If you want to make a claim, you should support it with something verifiable, not just an appeal to mythology. The Republicans spent tens of millions of dollars trying to get the Clintons on all these “scandles” you cite, but failed. Why? Because there was no there, there. So too one must consider your bit of hate published here by CNN.

R. Martin		April 15th, 2008 6:28 am ET Excellent piece. Thanks so much–I couldnt have said it better. Lets keep the circus out of town. One extended run was enough and something seems a litlle off with the ringmaster, Bill. Or maybe he is just saying all these things at 10 at night when he is tired!

jim in pennsylvania		April 15th, 2008 6:39 am ET as iowa goes so goes pennsylvania case closed

James		April 15th, 2008 8:09 am ET This commentary is a valid and true depiction of Sen Clinton, I still like Bill, but the truth is the truth. This attack and destroy, the win at all cost mentality of the Clintons have become very distasteful to nonsupporters and suppoters alike. Remember that phrase ” I you live by the sword, you will die by the sword” and Sen Clinton has the sword unsheathed!

Tom		April 15th, 2008 8:33 am ET Funny how anyone who criticizes Hillary Clinton is called a sexist. Does it follow that anyone who criticizes Barack Obama is racist? Interesting that Clinton backers have attacked female superdelegates because of their percieved obligation to back a female candidate for president no matter what. Didn’t that King guy say something about having a dream that people will be judged on the content of their character, not the color of their skin? Or gender? So much for that.

Jeff		April 15th, 2008 8:35 am ET Carl’s piece is right on. I voted for Bill the first time he ran and I don’t regtret it. The Clinton years were a heyday compared to what Bush has put us through. But any sensible person with any powers of observation only has to watch the Clintons questionable actions and repeated lies to know that they are mainly concerned with thier own image and legacy above all else, including the state of our country. Anybody who saw Hilary get caught red handed lying about snipers and use the laughable political plattitude “I misspoke” and still wants to vote for her, has some serious issues with critical thinking and judgment of character. I get a chuckle out of reading angry diatribes from the brainwashed Clinton zealots who posted their protests here. They mirror the victim defense Carl talked about perfectly. I’m not sure Obama is best for the country and I’m not sure McCain is either. I am sure Hilary is not. We need someone who is more interested in trying to fix our problems than being honored and admired for trying to fix our problems.

Doreen		April 15th, 2008 8:36 am ET I recall very well that Bill Clinton’s Presidency were very great years for all Americans. Great jobs and prosperity. Bill Clinton even left a surplus which George Bush squandered. I hope and pray Hillary wins.

Bruce		April 15th, 2008 8:46 am ET This is an excellent analysis… The Clintons are a sinking ship… So if you are a Clinton supporter, I would carry a life perserver with me at all times… Her campaign has suffered one failure after another… Sen. Clinton believes, Sen. Obama isn’t electible, I would argue, she would fair far less, She not liked by many people, She can’t be trusted and she is involved in so many shady dealings…

Lydia		April 15th, 2008 9:15 am ET Pat on the back for Carl Bernstein, telling the T R U T H. Everyone else seems afraid of the Clintons for some reason.

Jay		April 15th, 2008 9:15 am ET Nothing so one-sided can ever be taken seriously. Everything in life is much more nuanced. It sounds he just has something against Mrs. Clinton and needs to vent. These one-sided attacks seem to help Mrs. Clinton. There are troubling things about her that need to be explored, but there are positive aspects too. I am concerned about the future of journalism.

zuheir alfaqih		April 15th, 2008 9:16 am ET Wow … Am not a Clinton supporter, but this was about as dreary and sangfroid a review as ever I’ve read … It perhaps says as much about the author as the former first lady.

Leo in GA		April 15th, 2008 9:16 am ET great article….reflects my views on the clintons…..8 yrs was enough

rudy		April 15th, 2008 9:18 am ET This is not a race about the best candidate but rather whether a black man has the right to ask for the presidency because of the color of his skin. Carl has a