Not Sure What to Make of Bernstein's book on Hillary. I feel troubled by this.

[illinoisprogressive]

I am uneasy about this book.
he is a well known liberal and yet this book of his is suppose to be rough on Hillary. From the reports it brings back up the comment that the clinton's lie too well.
Though I am not a Clinton fan by any stretch of the imagination, I do wonder about this book.
It is legit or hatchet job.
Is Bernstein writing a real book that examines some troubling things or is he just out to shoot down Hillary.
I am very torn and I suppose it won't be resolved until it's realeased in the middle of June.
I just don't want some Morris style hit piece. If she is to get this I would hope it would be balanced and Bernstein is still a liberal and just printing facts.
it still troubles me.
here is the story from Times online UK.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article1719879.ece

I will let you read it yourself and I do not want to paste it for those who do not feel this is right.

[Cleita]

1. I haven't read it but Hillary was a Republican before

she became a Democrat for Bill. She still keeps many Republican ideas IMHO and maybe the lying is part of being a Republican.

[aquart]

3. The Republicans examined EVERYTHING.

The pried into their underwear. ALL they were able to get was a lie about a blow job.

Sorry. Maybe the media NEEDS to believe that the Clintons are the liars. To make themselves look less ugly.

[Cleita]

6. I think she's lying right now when she says she didn't know

that the information she got about Iraq's alleged WMDs was false when most of us knew the information was bogus. She just won't admit that voting for the IWR was the wrong thing to do.

[papau]

33. The "lie" the book reveals is his/others conjecture Hillary knew of Bill's cheating on her and

claims not to have known...

Some important "lie" - if it is a lie - eh?

[karynnj]

48. not quite true - there were things that were not totally kosher

From the cattle futures trades that had a profit margin you or I couldn't get to some of the foreign money used in campaigns - the sad thing is that this was McAuliffe and the Clinton's but Gore is the one who got bit.

[Cleita]

51. Yes, and there is enough corruption in politics.

We need to clear it out of our party.

[paulk]

5. that is false

she was a Republican when she was a teenager and during her first term in college. She did not become a "Democrat for Bill" She became a Democrat on her own free will.

That's an outrageous charge on your part.

[ElizabethDC]

7. You're right

Hillary was a Democrat before she met Bill. She switched parties while she was at Wellesley as an undergrad and didn't meet Bill until they were in law school at Yale.

[karynnj]

50. True and this was the 60s

as someone about 4 years younger - for midwestern kids, this was a very normal shift. There were far more Freshman Republicans than Senior Republicans.

[Cleita]

11. So maybe the biography I read about her back in 1998 was

wrong? It stated that she was a member of the young Republicans. She met Bill in college and she became a Democrat sometime between then and marrying Bill. Sure she could have come there by her own logic, but still both she and Bill have a lot of RW ideas IMHO. I too was raised in a Republican family and had to break from them when I got old enough to vote. But even then I registered as an independent at first before I became completely sure that I was really a liberal. So, I feel that Hillary has proved to be a triangulator with her actions since she entered political life in her own skin, not just as a first lady for the governor and then the president.

[paulk]

13. see post #7

and all the rest of the responses to your post.

[Cleita]

17. Okay, I get it. This is the we are in love with Hillary thread and we

won't look at the warts very hard. I don't hate Hillary like the freepers do and I find a lot to like about her, however, I do believe in questioning everything when it comes to those who are aspiring to be President especially after the disaster that they are going to have to clean up after the Bush presidency. I find some things that she has voted for as a senator to be questionable, the IWR being very important. So excuse me if I am examining her rather closely. It seems Bernstein is doing the same thing. I will have to pick up his book to decide for myself.

[ElizabethDC]

19. No, you just got your facts about her becoming a Democrat incorrect. n/t

[rinsd]

24. Ahh yes getting called out for thing that are not true = not looking at warts

:eyes:

[Cleita]

25. Is it not true that she lied about why she voted for the IWR?

I'm not pulling this out of my ass. Other liberal pundits have said the same thing about her answer on the debate last week. Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath. Yes, we all know it was a BS impeachment but it doesn't alter the fact that they lie and it's very uncomfortable for me. I just can't buy into the premise that all politicians lie so it's okay. I would like the politicians I back to tell the truth no matter how hard it may be at the time so when it's verifiable that they lie, I'm sorry I am going to notice.

[rinsd]

29. So its ok for you to lie because rwers do?

Its ok to repeat something that is flat out untrue, that Hillary became a Democrat for Bill, because the douchebags on the other side may do the same?

[rinsd]

23. Ummm they met at Yale law in '70. She became a Democrat in '68-'69

Here is her statement on meeting Bill - http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/choice/bill/bekavac1.html

But hey its always good to have a smear repeated with NO EVIDENCE.

[Cleita]

27. I read the book about Hillary back in the days when I 100% supported

her and that's how I remember it. However, in my original post I said I HAVEN'T READ IT yet, so I offered an opinion as to why maybe Bernstein said those things. That's what my real post was about, not when Hillary became a registered Democrat. I assume if he is a legitimate journalist, he will have ample sources to prove his allegations, so go read the book and so will I before you roast and barbecue me.

[rinsd]

30. No you deserve roast and BBQ

Because the heart of your attack is the same old same old that a woman needs her husband for direction.

Its insulting beyond the fact that it simply is not true.

[Cleita]

36. You sure made some leaps of assuming what I think.

I never said a woman needed her husband for direction and what if Bill influenced her? There's nothing anti-feminist about that. I was influenced by other liberals who led me to the liberal table to eat and drink. If a woman's boyfriend influences her because she likes what he thinks, why not? I also have known conservative men who were influenced by their wives to become Democrats too. It goes both ways and it has nothing to do with domination, except maybe for Republicans. I have know Republicans who tell thier wives how to vote but never a Democrat.

So let's say the book I read almost ten years ago was right about Bill influencing Hillary. Is there anything wrong with that? She might have liked what Bill believed in and came to her own thoughts on switching parties. It doesn't matter how you come to your political views or under whose influence. My problem with Hillary is that she still is pro-corporate and only a little bit left of center. That's what I don't care about in her politics and she will not get my vote in the primaries.

[rinsd]

31. No you deserve roast and BBQ

Because the heart of your attack is the same old same old that a woman needs her husband for direction.

Its insulting beyond the fact that it simply is not true.

[ElizabethDC]

32. The Bernstein book isn't out yet

which is probably why you haven't read it.

The stuff about when Hillary became a Democrat isn't new information - it has long been known that she was the president of the Wellesley College Republicans but gave up the post before completing her term because she had decided to leave the Republican party (you can read about it at Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton#Early_life_and_education). In her famous Wellesley commencement speech, I believe she was pretty firm in her disagreements with Republican leadership. As has been said, she didn't meet Bill until later, when they were in law school.

[Cleita]

38. And as I said over and over that I read a biography of Hillary

almost ten years ago. Since this was not the main theme of my post, I posted what I remembered, and maybe I remembered it wrong or the biographer was wrong, but it's not even relevant to what I was really trying to say, so everyone decided to nit pick this one issue, when she met Bill, when she registered as a Democrat instead. It's not important. What's important is why is Bernstein saying these things TODAY and WHY. My opinion was that the Clintons, especially Hillary are still very conservative and I gave examples, the backing of conservative ideas about health care, the lying that they have been caught in, so when the book comes out we will all have to read it and then will be the time for discussion and barbecues, not now.

[ElizabethDC]

40. Do you recall which biography it was?

Just wondering. Also, I can't speak for others obviously, but I don't want to barbecue you, just wanted to get the facts straight. Personally, I think Hillary's past as a Republican has little to do with her centrist views - after all, Bill is also a centrist, and he's been a Democrat his whole life.

[Cleita]

45. That was my point Elizabeth.

That she didn't stray that far from her Republican roots and contrary to what I have been accused of here, she may have influenced Bill more to a conservative position than he influenced her. I know what it's like because I was also raised in a Republican household, but when I made the switch it was because I was a Latina and I didn't have the cozy white bread background Hillary had so I swung really far to the left. I'm a social democrat in ideology really.

Anyway I really can't remember the name of the book. It did have Hillary Clinton in the title though and it was published around 1997. It was before the Monica affair so there was nothing about how she dealt with that betrayal. It focused more on her college days when she met Bill and when they became a couple and eventually got married. It wasn't a hit piece and showed her as the bright, young woman that she was back then.

[papau]

34. Correct Hill was a Dem in college - read the Wellesley Grad speech - note the ACLU volunteering n/t

n/t

[rinsd]

8. That is insutling and not true.

"In 1965, Rodham enrolled in Wellesley College. She became active in politics and served as the president of the Wellesley College Chapter of the College Republicans. In her junior year, Rodham was affected by the death of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., whom she had met in person in 1962.<2> She attended the Wellesley in Washington program at the urging of Professor Alan Schechter, for whom she would write a senior thesis about the tactics of radical community organizer Saul Alinsky<6> that later became the subject of mystery. Around this time, she decided to join the Democratic Party. In 1969, Rodham graduated with departmental honors in political science. She became the first student in Wellesley College history to deliver their commencement address.<7> According to reports by the Associated Press, her speech received a standing ovation lasting seven minutes.<8> She was featured in an article published in Life magazine, due to the response to a part of her speech that criticized Senator Edward Brooke, who had spoken before her at the commencement.<2>"

Do we really need sexist BS like this where Hillary is merely a shadow of her husband?

[DURHAM D]

9. Oh please, she was a Goldwater Republican in

junior high. So was I. We were both still teenagers. Have you ever looked at the makeup of the Dems/Rep national parties back then. For a midwesterner being a Dem at that time would have meant you were associated with national officer holders who were racist and southern.

The parties changed - they grew up. We both grew up. Some people never do.

[Cleita]

14. So why is she still acting according to conservative ideology

like including the for profit health care insurers in her disastrous health care plan. Why did she believe that it was okay to invade Iraq? Who is she backing in this one. I have so many questions.

[DURHAM D]

21. Actually Hillary is a knee jerk liberal.

That would be impossible for you (and most not socialized in the same time period) to figure out. The reason she included insurance companies in her plan was to give it a change of passing - it didn't matter. Do you remember the early days of the Clinton administration?

She squirms around in the middle to get elected, re-elected to the Senate and perhaps to be elected Pres. Why do you think the Repubs hate her so much? The noise machine gets what you don't.

[MonkeyFunk]

22. You think

a nationalized single-payer plan that eliminated insurance companies would've had a better chance of success?

She was trying to accomplish something, not satisfy the purists. That's hardly a conservative position. It reflects the fact that she knows how things work.

It constantly amazes me how people who claim to be interested in politics seem not to know the first thing about it.

[Cleita]

28. The insurance industry, private for profit HMOs and PHARMA

are what got us into this health care quagmire. Any health plan to fix this problem will have to eliminate them. But if you look at Hillary's PAC money she is well supported by these industries as other Democratic candidates are not even given one penny from those same industries, so who is being bought by whom?

[MonkeyFunk]

54. you didn't answer the question

do you think a nationalized single-payer system that eliminated insurance companies would have had a better chance of passing in '93?

Yes or no?

[Captain Hilts]

37. She NEVER said it was 'okay' to invade Iraq. Like Bush, you see only B&W. nt

[Cleita]

39. She along with some other Senate democrats including my

senator Dianne Feinstein voted for the Iraqi War Resolution. This was what Bush needed to invade Iraq with, and he did. You can't change history. It's something I will never forgive our Democrats for doing.

[Captain Hilts]

43. READ the IWR. It does not advocate an invasion. The war is Bush's fault...

not Feinstein's, not Clinton's, not Edwards', not Kerry's.

Bush would have invaded no matter what.

The IWR advocates going to the UN, etc. Bush did not negotiate in good faith.

[Cleita]

49. I have read it.

I have an apologetic letter from my senator for signing it and she said the same thing you did, however, Bush would have pushed for war even if they hadn't signed it. The problem I have is that they gave legitimacy from our side of the aisle to pursue this bogus war, which we all knew was bogus in every way. There shouldn't have been one Democrat who agreed to this. There was plenty of evidence that BushCo was lying about WMDs. So it made me wonder why those Senators did so and I think you get your answer when you look at their campaign money from PACs. It was payback time. This in my mind makes them corrupt or at least liable to corruption in the future.

[ElizabethDC]

2. She's had so many hit pieces written about her over the years

I wonder if he'll come up with any new revelations and, even if he does, will they stick? Who knows. It'll be interesting.

[Karenina]

16. Robin Tolmach Lakoff, in her book

THELANGUAGEWAR (Chapter 5) really covers the "Hillary thing" quite well. It was publeshe in 2000 by the University of California Press. I recommend it highly.

[Captain Hilts]

35. GREAT book. nt

[Karenina]

52. Indeed. She covers a lot of territory...

"Exnomination"

Thomas vs Hill

Apologies

Framing...

[illinoisprogressive]

4. I dont' care for Hillary but, I really hate hit jobs on our own - dems.

[AZBlue]

18. I hate them too - but unfortunately we see them everyday here on DU.

Especially on Hillary. She could cure cancer and AIDS, bring about complete and lasting world peace, fly every soldier home on her own dime AND end poverty for all time and many here would still question her politics and practices. They aren't happy unless they are bashing Hillary. I'm not saying everyone should be a fan of hers - of course not. But there's a different between thought-based criticism and a lot of the emotionally full, rationally empty stuff that's spewed here.

[Captain Hilts]

53. I like ALL the candidates [including Gore and Clark] and haven't made up my mind...

I'm just enjoying the process this year.

My faves are: Clark, Dodd then a jumble.

[Cleita]

41. Yes, takes me back to days when I criticized Joe Lieberman

and was slammed down with the same you can't criticize our Dems, meme. Yep, the good old days.

[Cleita]

42. Yes, takes me back to days when I criticized Joe Lieberman

and was slammed down with the same you can't criticize our Dems, meme. Yep, the good old days.

[paulk]

10. from reading the article

it seems they're making a big deal about revelations concerning her relationship with her husband and lying about her knowledge of his affairs.

Personally, I don't think the dynamics of their marriage is relevant, and I hope voters won't be basing their votes on... not being publicly honest about such things.

[saracat]

12. Wow but the majority of posters are obsessed with trashing Hillary!

[Geek_Girl]

15. It just occurred to me I really don't know much about Hillary's background

where she was born and what kind of background she had growing up. It's funny how the media only focuses on her as a senator and former first lady.

[msongs]

20. bernsteins is IN IT for the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ - whatever sells best nt

[loudsue]

26. Bernstein is a GREAT liberal, and has been at the side of Sibel Edmonds since the

first of her ordeal.

Woodward went to the dark side after the Watergate fame. Bernstein never went to the dark side. He's been fighting the repuke takeover as hard as anyone.


:kick::kick::kick:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

44. If Bernstein's not pushing facts, then they can be debunked.

If he is, more power to him.

[avrdream]

46. Let's just wait and see.

We are getting in a tizz (sp?) without even knowing the contents of the book.

And, actually, does it really matter WHAT is written in the book? Once the MSM reads some review (because few will actually read the whole book), they will report on whatever juicy tidbit supports their current opinion. And THAT is what regular Americans will hear.

Sucks,doesn't it?

[karynnj]

47. I have never heard of Bernstein being anything other than an honest journalist

It could be that it is an objective book at a time when "soft focus" books would be appreciated. I would NOT expect a "soft focus" book from an emminent journalist. It is rare when a historian of a good journalist portrays a person as they would like to be shown. It's kind of like being seen without makeup.