Lessons From the Master

Is Hillary Clinton Slytherin’s heir? Mark Kleiman, a U.C.L.A. public policy professor who writes at the academic group blog The Reality-Based Community, says Clinton’s campaign is “Rove’s disciple” for its attacks on Barack Obama.

“The Clinton campaign, both the candidate and the surrogates, have been going after Barack Obama hard and personally,” Kleiman writes. “He’s ‘naive” and ‘irresponsible,’ too inexperienced to trust as Commander in Chief.”

Now the Clinton campaign is “accusing Obama of ‘attack politics’ ” for his counterstrike. Kleiman objects, “The lie, and the projection, are transparent. But that’s not to say that those tactics won’t work. After all, they elected George W. Bush, didn’t they?”

In the Democratic field, Kleiman says, “it’s not hard to figure out which campaign carries the DNA of Karl Rove.”

On the other hand, David Frum wrote on The Times op-ed page on Tuesday that “much of the Democratic party, and especially its activist netroots, has decided that the way to beat Rove Republicanism is by emulating it.” If the Democratic base admires Rove, then criticisms like Kleiman’s might make Democratic partisans like Senator Clinton more, not less.

Chris Suellentrop



***********************

Turned Off by Giuliani’s Foreign Policy

Foreign Affairs has published Rudy Giuliani’s foreign policy manifesto, “Toward a Realistic Peace.” (The magazine has published similar essays by Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, and John Edwards, with more to come from “the top U.S. presidential candidates.”)

Conservative blogger James Joyner, writing at Outside the Beltway, calls Giuliani’s essay “dangerously stupid”: “It is not particularly realistic — let alone Realist — and certainly does not contemplate peace.” He adds, “Indeed, it seems he intentionally picked out the worst parts of the foreign policies of George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Jimmy Carter.” Joyner, a onetime Giuliani fan, also writes:

For a time, Giuliani was my favorite of the 2008 candidates. He’s got serious executive experience, is a charismatic leader, and sufficiently moderate on the social issues that I thought he had the chance to put together a 60 percent coalition to break the polarization that has so poisoned American politics in recent years. While I disagree with him on abortion and some other issues, I was able to put that aside for a variety of practical reasons.

Unfortunately, the more I learn about Giuliani, the less I like him. His chief advantage, the sense that he’s a grown-up who will take a pragmatic but aggressive role in fighting the Islamist terrorists, is undermined by his unserious pandering.

The alarm first sounded for me with his politically astute but disingenuous attack on Ron Paul for his suggestion that al Qaeda hates our foreign policy, not just our freedom. I chalked that up to the necessities of politics rather than a lack of understanding of the most important national security issue of our time. The more I hear and read, though, the more I think Giuliani is either a charlatan or a simpleton. Either he’s lying to us and we therefore have no idea what his foreign policy will be or, worse, this is what he really thinks. Either way, it’s not good.

Chris Suellentrop