Duking It Out

Publication:The Oklahoman;
Date:Nov 20, 2007;
Section:Opinion;
Page Number:12
Clinton answers the bell Hillary Clinton’s tendency is to call disagreements personal attacks.
AFTER performing dismally in the Democrats’ previous presidential debate, front-runner Hillary Clinton looked to write a new storyline when the field gathered for another round last week in Nevada. And she did. If anything, the news out of Las Vegas was that the lady can take a punch and knows a thing or two about hitting in the clinches. Caught with her gloves down when Democrats debated Oct. 30 in Philadelphia, Sen. Clinton went after her rivals in Nevada. And she didn’t hit like a girl. She caught “Gentleman” Johnny Edwards walking in, flush on the nose, when he accused her of waffling on the issues. Mudslinging, Clinton called it, and what’s more, she branded it inaccurate mudslinging. She tagged “Bomber” Barack Obama on the chin, suggesting he wasn’t strong enough on health care. Grrrrr! Fightin’ words. And so it went. If the other campaigns thought Clinton had a glass jaw after Philadelphia, they were mistaken. Clinton was ready this time around, made the most of a friendly crowd and demonstrated why she’s leading the Democratic pack. Certainly, it’s good to see her get away from complaining about “piling on,” which her campaign did after the mugging in Philly. In the City of Brotherly Love, Clinton got no love. She took some shots — especially on immigration — but drawing fire is to be expected by the front-runner. Later, her husband said it was the men ganging up on the girl. But it was more like the kids’ game of kill the man with the ball. Having the ball draws a crowd. The senator does better when she demonstrates command of the issues with detailed answers. Spewing fog is safer; Republican ad men watch from the tall grass for sound bites to use against her in the general election campaign, to say nothing of YouTube. But she has to do more than equivocate. Clinton also should show a thick skin. Her tendency is to call disagreements personal attacks. Her opponents are obliged to call her out, but that doesn’t make each contrast a personal attack. Indeed, Team Clinton is better than most at bare-knuckle brawling. So it’s a little hypocritical to seek immunity from criticism by claiming someone is engaging in the “politics of personal destruction,” as the Clintons coined it while Bill was president. Politics is a full-contact sport. As Sen. Clinton showed last week in Las Vegas, it’s all about the give and take — and being sure to do more of the giving than the taking.

Publication:The Oklahoman;
Date:Nov 20, 2007;
Section:Opinion;
Page Number:12
Duking it out
Clinton answers the bell Hillary Clinton’s tendency is to call disagreements personal attacks.
AFTER performing dismally in the Democrats’ previous presidential debate, front-runner Hillary Clinton looked to write a new storyline when the field gathered for another round last week in Nevada. And she did. If anything, the news out of Las Vegas was that the lady can take a punch and knows a thing or two about hitting in the clinches. Caught with her gloves down when Democrats debated Oct. 30 in Philadelphia, Sen. Clinton went after her rivals in Nevada. And she didn’t hit like a girl. She caught “Gentleman” Johnny Edwards walking in, flush on the nose, when he accused her of waffling on the issues. Mudslinging, Clinton called it, and what’s more, she branded it inaccurate mudslinging. She tagged “Bomber” Barack Obama on the chin, suggesting he wasn’t strong enough on health care. Grrrrr! Fightin’ words. And so it went. If the other campaigns thought Clinton had a glass jaw after Philadelphia, they were mistaken. Clinton was ready this time around, made the most of a friendly crowd and demonstrated why she’s leading the Democratic pack. Certainly, it’s good to see her get away from complaining about “piling on,” which her campaign did after the mugging in Philly. In the City of Brotherly Love, Clinton got no love. She took some shots — especially on immigration — but drawing fire is to be expected by the front-runner. Later, her husband said it was the men ganging up on the girl. But it was more like the kids’ game of kill the man with the ball. Having the ball draws a crowd. The senator does better when she demonstrates command of the issues with detailed answers. Spewing fog is safer; Republican ad men watch from the tall grass for sound bites to use against her in the general election campaign, to say nothing of YouTube. But she has to do more than equivocate. Clinton also should show a thick skin. Her tendency is to call disagreements personal attacks. Her opponents are obliged to call her out, but that doesn’t make each contrast a personal attack. Indeed, Team Clinton is better than most at bare-knuckle brawling. So it’s a little hypocritical to seek immunity from criticism by claiming someone is engaging in the “politics of personal destruction,” as the Clintons coined it while Bill was president. Politics is a full-contact sport. As Sen. Clinton showed last week in Las Vegas, it’s all about the give and take — and being sure to do more of the giving than the taking.