Clinton Says Nothing
Issue 96 -November 21, 2007
by Jeffrey Folks

In the recent Democratic debate, Hillary Clinton revealed her true colors. That is to say: she revealed almost nothing.

In the much reported give-and-take with NBC commentator Tim Russert, Clinton avoided giving a direct answer to every question that she was asked. Would she prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon? Her answer: we should "put pressure" on President Bush. Then maybe he'll do something. But if he uses force to do something, that's wrong. "We should not be doing that. But we shouldn't be doing nothing."

That sounds like a great way to defend this country from terrorism. We should not be applying force, but we should be criticizing our president, no matter what he does. We should not be gathering electronic intelligence through surveillance, but we should be gathering information through surveillance. We should not be waterboarding terrorists, but we should be coercing information from terrorists. How would she do that? She'd have to think about that. She can't really say until after the election.

Given this approach to foreign policy, imagine what Hillary could do for the economy. Does she support higher payroll taxes to pay for Social Security? She does not, but she might. She would have to think about it. Gee, I thought presidential candidates a year into the primary campaign would have thought about issues like taxes. Maybe she doesn't consider raising taxes on the American people to be a big deal. In any case, she doesn't think the American people have a right to know what she thinks about taxes.

Does she agree with Rep. Rangel's plan to raise taxes on the "rich" to reduce the effect of the Alternative Minimum Tax? Her answer: It sounds like something we need to "address." But do you agree with raising taxes? Her answer: she'd have to "consider" that. She can't answer any questions on raising taxes until after the election.

One of Hillary's characteristic rhetorical moves is to deflect a question by commenting on the actions of somebody else. It is like the playground bully who gets caught smacking Bill (well, maybe not Bill in this case-or maybe so) and immediately cries out, "Did you see Bill smacking Bob, only harder?"

According to the principles of logic, what Hillary is doing is called "introducing a red herring." Hillary has used this tactic so often that, by now, there are dozens of red herrings lying around, none of them smelling very pleasant. Hillary was asked in the debate whether she supported the New York state plan proposed by Gov. Spitzer to offer driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, and thus, in practice if not in law, to extend voting rights to them. Her answer was yes, no, probably, well not really. Finally, she came out with the "clarification" that "I did not say that it should be done, but I certainly recognize why Governor Spitzer is trying to do it."

Yeah, most observers also recognize why the governor is trying to do it: to extend de facto voting privileges to a population that can be counted on to vote for Democratic candidates.

It's strange that Hillary is not taking a position on this important issue, just leaving it to the wisdom of Gov. Spitzer. I thought that she was a citizen of the state of New York and would have an opinion. Come to think of it, I believe she is the junior senator from the state of New York. But she has no clear opinion on this or any other controversial issue facing the state of New York or the nation.

If Hillary is behaving this way during the primary election-we're still almost a year away from the presidential balloting-how would she act if she were actually elected president? Harry Truman said, "The buck stops here," and everyone admired him for it. What maxim would Hillary have sitting on her desk in the Oval Office?

Since Hillary seems to have been a bit tongue-tied (or at least tongue-forked) in the recent debate, I thought she could use some help with this. Here are a few suggestions for that paper-weight on her desk:

"For me to know and you to learn."
"All quiet along the Potomac."
"Ask me no questions, I'll tell you no lies."
"Ask Bill."

Or for a woman who finds herself habitually astride all issues, there's always, "My kingdom for a horse." Only, in this case it's not her kingdom that's at stake, it's ours.

Dr. Jeffrey Folks taught for thirty years in universities in Europe, America, and Japan. He has published nine books and over a hundred articles on American culture and politics in national journals and newspapers. He is currently writing on issues in American literature, media, family, and education.