Ah, Hillary, Hillary, Hillary. Unlike Nancy Pelosi, Hillary knows how to get a good profile. In this case, Dan Balz did the honors. There’s no mention of Hillary’s sagging chin, her wardrobe, her shrill voice. Balz doesn’t mention how much Hillary is worth. He doesn’t mention how Hillary acted or gestured or stuttered during their interview, and there is no mention of curly fries. He doesn’t compare her to Jesse Jackson or call her a New York liberal fifteen times. Pelosi got worked over by Liebovich. Hillary got treated like a serious politician by Balz.
The difference between the two profiles couldn’t be more stark. I’m not sure how to explain why Pelosi was mocked and Hillary respected. Is it because Pelosi is an unapologetic liberal and Hillary is a pro-war member of the DLC? Is it because of the idiosyncracies of the writers, or the editors? Is it because former First Ladies get a little deference? Is is because Hillary has earned more respect? I don’t know. But I do know that how a reporter chooses to present the facts makes a big difference in how a politican comes off in a profile. Pelosi is portrayed as competent, but hypocritical, out of the mainstream, and weak with the press. Hillary is portrayed as a force of nature, but one with an ill-defined ideology. Pelosi gets the usual treatment that women must endure: talk about her looks and dress. Hillary doesn’t get any of that.
Also of note, Markos gets a quote in Balz’s column:
Markos Moulitsas, whose Daily Kos Web site often attacks the Democratic establishment, ridicules her as a leader who is “afraid to offend.”
I’d put it differently. She’s not afraid. She’s wants to be attacked by the left because her biggest obstacle to getting elected is her legacy as a big government liberal that tried to give us national health care. It’s not that Americans don’t want health care, but the image of Hillary as a big-spending liberal is one that is hard to change. Her job as Senator is to change it. It’d be more accurate to say she is not afraid to piss off the left. And she is doing that quite nicely.
If Pelosi got a bad review, she needs to go back to “Interview 101”. At least Clinton has that part down fairly well – years of experience. And I don’t think she’s pissing off the left so much as attempting to grab that (roughly) 20% of the electorate in the middle. Jury’s still out on that one.
Right. But she is trying pick up the middle by pissing off the left. The more she is attacked from her left, the more moderate and acceptable she appears. It’s already working, as Balz’s article makes clear. She’s a pragmatic centrist, non-ideological in nature. How far is that from Rush Limbaugh’s talking points?
And there’s the rub.
No matter what the ‘liberal’ NY Times says about her, Rush’s audience (i.e. the 35% rabidly RW in the US) will always view her as an evil liberal… hell, they still think Bill was the most left-wing president the US has had. Nothing the Times says will change that.
So instead, an article like this in the grey lady reinforces to us lefties and left-leaning independents and moderates, that Hillary would sell out her principles in a second to gain power. And no matter male or female, that just ain’t an attractive characteristic. Whereas the Pelosi piece gives the right even more ammunition but doesn’t really hurt her from the left (except for the DeLay nonsense).
The NY Times sure seems out to screw the base of the Dem party once again. Tell me again how they are part of the ‘liberal’ media?
Still think she’s a few steps away from Limbush.
“She’s a pragmatic centrist, non-ideological in nature.”
Bingo. The definition of a politician.
Oh, what I could write about her!!!!
why Hillary got a “good” article. The right-wing/corporatists want her to be the Democratic candidate. Clinton hatred will rally their base to vote against her and for whoever the Repubs put up.
As an added bonus, they get to tear her down during the campaign. They’ll raise her up until she’s the candidate and then attack mercilessly after the Dem convention. That’s their plan anyway; I hope it doesn’t work. I’d rather vote for Gore or Feingold or Wes Clark even.
But at least Pelosi is called by her surname like the guys in Congress.
Nice heads up on the profile.
The NYT kicks out the “poison pen” for Democrats like it’s going out of style.
Try to recall if you’ve ever read that kind of talk about Frist or Hastert. It doesn’t happen….not in the NYT.
“The middle” of the corporate right is the 20% she is trying to grab.
Al Gore knew interviewing 101 too. Anyone can be in a conversation and then make snark hay out of it. I suspect HIllary talked about Newt, and how they work together now.