Hillary Clinton Taking Fire From Left as Well as Right

NY TIMES ^ | 5/30/03 | RAYMOND HERNANDEZ

[Liz]

WASHINGTON, May 29 — After years of being vilified by conservatives, Hillary Rodham Clinton is suddenly facing mounting criticism from an unlikely quarter: liberals.

Core Democratic constituencies that helped Mrs. Clinton win her Senate seat in New York two and a half years ago are expressing deep disappointment in her, saying she has been unwilling to challenge President Bush and Republican leaders in Congress on issues of importance to them.

Those who have expressed disappointment in Mrs. Clinton include gay rights advocates, antiwar organizers and even advocates for children and the poor, a group with which she has been closely associated for decades.

Political analysts and critics on the left say Mrs. Clinton appears to be modeling herself on her husband, Bill Clinton, who was also criticized for abandoning the Democratic Party's liberal base to win larger political appeal. In Mrs. Clinton's case, they say, she appears to be taking for granted her liberal allies, a strong source of support, in favor of cultivating a broader audience.

"Is she playing to a national audience?" asked Anne Erickson, the director of the Greater Upstate Law Project, a group that advocates for poor people in New York.

"As a Democrat with liberal leanings, I can personally say that it is pretty disappointing to watch her stances on issues," Ms. Erickson said. "We expected better from her."

Mrs. Clinton's aides say her decisions are not part of any calculated effort to win over a wider constituency outside New York. Rather, they say, they reflect positions she has held since her days as first lady, like advocating stiffer restrictions on welfare recipients.

"This view of Hillary Clinton as a dyed-in-the-wool leftist is a caricature," said Howard Wolfson, an adviser to Mrs. Clinton. "Anyone who is surprised about her views on welfare reform and the war was not paying attention during the campaign."

Mrs. Clinton was unavailable for comment. But her spokeswoman, Karen Dunn, indicated that the differences do not make her any less an ally of the left. "She is one of their strongest advocates, but that doesn't mean that there is always agreement on how to approach every single issue," Ms. Dunn said.

The criticism from her longtime allies comes at a time when Mrs. Clinton has managed to maintain a relatively noncontroversial image in the Senate. To be sure, to her longtime critics she remains an icon of liberalism. She is often invoked in literature that conservatives use to rally their supporters.

But since arriving in the Senate in January 2001, Mrs. Clinton has been a far less polarizing figure than she was in the White House. This is in part because she has tried to avoid the mistakes she made during her White House years — when, for example, she moved rapidly toward radical changes in the health-care system and spoke of a "vast right-wing conspiracy" out to destroy her husband's presidency.

Mrs. Clinton now seems to be going out of her way to convince Republicans that she is someone with whom they can work. Only a few weeks ago, for example, she teamed with a person who, at first glance, might seem an unlikely ally: Lindsey Graham, a Republican senator from South Carolina who, as a member of the House, was a leader in the effort to impeach her husband.

Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Graham — who once said, "Bill Clinton probably did more for my career than I ever did" — co-sponsored legislation that called for increasing benefits for National Guard and Reserve members.

But some longtime supporters are beginning to bristle over many of her positions and statements.

In one of the more recent clashes, Mrs. Clinton drew fire from gay activists over the way she responded to comments made by Senator Rick Santorum, a Republican, who compared homosexuality to incest, bigamy and other illegal types of sexual behavior.

Matt Foreman, the former executive director of the Empire State Pride Agenda and now the executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, said Mrs. Clinton was slow to respond to Mr. Santorum's comments. And, he noted, she refused to join a chorus of Democrats — including New York's senior senator, Charles E. Schumer — who called on Mr. Santorum to step down from his leadership post in the Senate Republican caucus.

Mrs. Clinton's aides acknowledge that she was not quick to respond to Mr. Santorum's remarks. But when she did, they say, she offered a forceful condemnation. Responding to criticism that Mrs. Clinton should have gone further and called for his resignation, Ms. Dunn, her spokeswoman, said, "It is the responsibility of the Republican Party to choose how it wishes to be represented."

Advertisement

The disappointment among gay rights advocates only deepened after Mrs. Clinton refused to say publicly whether she plans to support the promotion of an Army general who commanded a base where a gay soldier was beaten to death.

Several gay rights groups, chiefly the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, have been calling on the Senate Armed Services Committee, where Mrs. Clinton holds a seat, to block the promotion of Maj. Gen. Robert T. Clark, who was commander of Fort Campbell, Ky., in 1999, when a soldier beat Pfc. Barry Winchell to death in his barracks.

The organizations contend that Private Winchell's slaying was a hate crime that reflected a larger climate of homophobia at the base. But Mrs. Clinton's advisers say she wants to review concerns raised by the family and gay rights advocates in an executive session that she has requested.

Beyond that, Mrs. Clinton refused to meet with Private Winchell's family when they came to Capitol Hill a few weeks back to discuss the matter with members of the Armed Services Committee, said Steve Ralls, a spokesman for the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. "The family is disappointed," he said.

Mr. Foreman went further. "We are an unbelievably loyal, generous and significant part of her base," he said. "But what we have been met with is a reluctance to stand up for us."

Her aides say that before meeting with the family, Mrs. Clinton, a new member of the committee, wanted to confer with its most senior members and gather more information from them. They say that having done that, Mrs. Clinton is now willing to meet with the family.

Among her other critics are antiwar Democrats, who are angry that she did not challenge the case President Bush made for war in Iraq, even as other prominent Democrats did.

Mrs. Clinton has also angered advocates for the poor, whose ties to her go back decades to when she was chairman of the board of the Children's Defense Fund.

The disagreement involves the president's proposal to increase the number of hours that welfare recipients must work in exchange for cash assistance and other benefits. Many advocates for the poor regard this as one of the biggest issues Congress will take up this year and have been lobbying Mrs. Clinton and other Democrats to oppose such requirements.

But Mrs. Clinton has joined a group of moderate and conservative Democratic senators in supporting a bill to increase the work requirement to 37 hours a week, a significant increase over the current 30 hours and only slightly less than the 40 hours Mr. Bush would require.

Mrs. Clinton's advisers say that no one should be surprised by her position, noting that she supported the bill her husband signed in 1996 overhauling the nation's welfare program, despite opposition from many of her liberal allies. In addition, they say, Mrs. Clinton has insisted that any additional work requirements be tied to billions of dollars in child-care financing.

Philip Friedman, a Democratic operative in New York, said that criticism over these positions was not likely to hurt Mrs. Clinton, who is not up for re-election until 2006. Mr. Friedman said the state's sizable liberal base would ultimately stand by her, just as liberals stood by her husband, despite their complicated relationship with him.

"It's not going to mean anything," he said. "Democrats love the Clintons, and that's why her husband was able to get away with going off the reservation now and then."

[Liz]

Political analysts and critics on the left say Mrs. Clinton appears to be modeling herself on her husband, Bill Clinton, who was also criticized for abandoning the Democratic Party's liberal base to win larger political appeal. In Mrs. Clinton's case, they say, she appears to be taking for granted her liberal allies, a strong source of support, in favor of cultivating a broader audience.

Never thought it possible, but maybe even dumbo liberals can see the light. Maybe they are waking up to the fact that they bought a pig in a poke electing Hitlery to office. Yet it's doubtful they will abandon her. They're stuck with each other.....which is good.

[Mr. Mojo]

Political analysts and critics on the left say Mrs. Clinton appears to be modeling herself on her husband, Bill Clinton,

Well, I wouldn't put it quite that way. Probably the last time she "modeled herself on her husband," Chelsea was conceived. ....It's been a while.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Incredible.

Liberals actually feel that the Baba Yaga of the left isn't left-leaning enough... :)

[backhoe]

"Has that clinton "legacy" made you feel safer yet?"

Lest Americans ever forget why the clintons, and all their enablers need to be hectored, hounded, and harried into silence, until "clintonese is only spoken in Hell," look here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/765080/posts

The Clinton Files
various links | 10-08-02 | The Heavy Equipment Guy

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/723210/posts

Liars-- and Sleaze, Incorporated... ( my files on the clintons and friends )
various links | 7-27-02 | The Heavy Equipment Guy

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/611951/posts

Hodgepodge O' Hillary
various links | 01-20-02 | backhoe

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/771000/posts

The Atomic Genie- what we have about North Korea's Nuclear program
various FR posts | 10-17-02 | The Heavy Equipment Guy

There are, of course, what I consider my "most damaging" set of hard-core links:

The Cost of Life (Clinton/Gore Sellout of Security for Campaign Contributions) **FR EXCLUSIVE** #2

CIA Officials Reveal What Went Wrong – Clinton to Blame

Is Bill Clinton Responsible for September 11?

Catastrophic intelligence Failure - Clinton's Bin Laden GATE

-Murder, Inc.--

-The number of "suicides" for people linked to this and other Clinton-related cases--

-ATTENTION BLOODHOUNDS--

-Women in the Clinton Era: Abuse,Intimidation and Smears--

-SEND JUANITA BROADDRICK VIDEO TO THOSE WHO WANT CLINTON TO SPEAK--

Nothing phony about response to Hillary at fete

Hillary's delegates spit on and taunt Police Honor Guard at her Convention

-Hillary Clinton-What America Needs to Know--

-Sen. Hillary Clinton--NewsMax.com Hot Topics--

Boo Hillary! The Video***

[ChadGore]

What an absolute lap dog puff piece.
Is Jason Blair still writing for the NYT ?

[friendly]

I love the smell of crispy fried self-destructing 'Rats in the morning.

[Liz]

LOL.....now that's funny.

[Conservative4Ever]

If my memory serves me...Clinton ran as a moderate democrate...a new democrate as it were...so as not to alienate to many voters. Hillary is using the same tactics, IMHO. Taking the middle road until..so she thinks...she is elected President, then the distruction will begin {continuation of Clinton} behind the scenes. She is too smart to show her true colors out front. She found that to be disasterous at the beginning of Clinton's administration. Never under estimate this woman..she is evil.

Red

[Free ThinkerNY]

"Democrats love the Clintons..."

The Clintons have almost single-handedly destroyed the Demonrat Party. Is the average Rat a complete moron? Why else would they continue to follow these Pied Pipers of Sleaze to their doom?

[Liz]

Watta they want her to do? Secede NY from the union and declare it to be a socialist enclave?

[Liz]

Terminal stupidity.

[bjcintennessee]

Mrs. Clinton was unavailable for comment.

So what's new?

[Liz]

The NY Slimes dares not utter a discouraging word ......political correctness lives (puke).

[friendly]

The Clintons have almost single-handedly destroyed the Demonrat Party. Is the average Rat a complete moron? Why else would they continue to follow these Pied Pipers of Sleaze to their doom?

Shuussshhhh!!!!

I think at this point we not advertise the obvious! The Clintons are the Republicans secret weapon!!!

[Liz]

Probably too busy wondering what she's gonna do about all those unsold books.

[Liz]

The two Clintons connivers are first and foremost rank opporunists. They will say or do anything they think will advance their political ambitions. Nothing more. Nothing less.

[Lancey Howard]

Careful....
This story sounds like the Clinton-sponsored opening salvo of a propaganda campaign to redefine Bride of Scumbag as a "moderate", and therefore a viable candidate for the Presidency.
I do not trust the New York Times and I do not trust this story.

[nathanbedford]

What an absolute lap dog puff piece.

Absolutely right. These kind of articles used to come out about once a week when Slick was in office.

The NY Times looks fair and balanced.

McCurry could then allude to it to assure middle America that Bill and Hill were really one of them and not communists. Their ratings stayed strong

The committed lunatic activists on the left could motor along secure in the knowledge that every federal burocracy was being subverted according to schedule. They were sophisticated enough to know they could not win the numbers game quite yet.

All three sides are in on the gag and the laff's on us.

[Liz]

I don't doubt it for a minute........

[nutmeg]

bump