Carl Bernstein: Hillary Will Continue Bush's Legacy of Secrecy

Carl Bernstein: Hillary Will Continue Bush's Legacy of Secrecy
Posted October 23, 2007 | 04:21 PM (EST)


"Hillary's fear of humiliation, her fear of secrets being revealed, absolutely permeates her life," Carl Bernstein told a packed auditorium at the Nixon Library in Yorba Linda, CA., earlier this week.

Bernstein is the Pulitzer Prize-winning Washington Post reporter on Watergate, and author of a new book on Hillary, A Woman in Charge. His appearance in Yorba Linda was a historic moment of sorts, as he himself noted: if he had said in 1999, when he started doing research on Hillary, "that I would be invited to speak at the Nixon Library, and that I'd be talking about Hillary as possibly the next president of the United States, I'd be accused of smoking something - and inhaling."

The event marked the transformation of the Nixon Library from a private institution run by Nixon loyalists to a public one run by the National Archives, under the direction of historian Tim Naftali. Bernstein spoke to a full house - 300 people - including many students from nearby colleges getting extra credit for showing up.

-snip

At lunch before his talk, Bernstein emphasized Hillary's continuing obsession with secrecy. He told me he did not think Hillary would repeal Bush's Executive Order on Classification, the most restrictive ever, which has outraged advocates of freedom of information in Congress and the media. Bush's order gives the president or any former president the right to withhold the former president's papers from the public. At the time it was issued - shortly after 9-11 - it seemed intended to conceal from the public information about the presidency of Bush senior, many of whose staffers held high positions in the White House of Bush junior.



-snip

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-wiener/carl-bernstein-hillary-w_b_69583.html

What came first, Bill or the fear of being humiliated?

Or have you already forgotten the "cackle" "scandal"?

Hillary either opposes or laments every attempt at increased tranparency that comes down the pike.

So the question becomes why?

That would pretty much do it for me.

doesn't it?

out of the kitchen! Everything is "fair game" at this level of politics and no one is more aware of that than Hillary.

n/t

(She's consistant and obvious, at least.)

Has latched himself onto the caboose of this old train....

about our alleged "front runner". Kudos to Carl. He has the courage of his convictions and isn't a corporate sellout like that weasel Woodward.

It sank like a stone, of course, because there really is no appetite for this played-out vein of scandal-mongering. That he thought it worth the effort indicates very poor judgement.

about Hillary does not make it any less the truth. And it was not a "hack expose".If anything it was too kind.

It is his prediction, based on nothing but a diagnosis of inner life compared to which Frist made a well informed statement concerning the Schiavo matter....

He begins by offering a psychiatric diagnosis, concerning a person he has not met or socialized with, and which he is not credentialled to make even if he had. On the basis of this, he makes a predictio concerning future behavior.

Even I have met her.It would be extremely unlikely that he has not met her.His opinion is based on years of research and hours of interviews and is not a "psychiatric diagnosis" so much as a conclusion based on evidence, prior behavior and his own observations. All of those can provide an "educated guess" which are often most prescient.

He complained of that in his recent book tourings, at some length.

He has made a long distance psychiatric evaluation, which he is utterly unqualified to do, and made that the basis for his current guess at her future behavior. There is no opther signifigance a statement like "Hillary's fear of humiliation, her fear of secrets being revealed, absolutely permeates her life," could convey in English.

veracity of their work.Many times the subject is deceased and much must be gathered from others or writings and such. Not being granted an "interview' does not mean he has never"met or socialized" with her. And I do not consider anything he has stated to be a "psychiatric" analysis.It is merely his "guess" and I believe it is a good one.But we can agree to differ.

but he also did not make any psychological predictions either.

Lincoln was "gay".Neither I am sure "knew" or "interviewed" Lincoln.

There is no sound medical or sexological foundation for either one. Those things are absolutely unrecoverable about the man's inner life. Worse, both statements are classic anachronisms, readings of present concerns and attitudes back into the past, where they are simply not applicable, since the categories invoked are not phsyical, and did not exist in the mental attitudes as people experienced themselves then.

NPR did a synopsis of these.

They're not exactly in the Top Ten of noted historians.

There will always be books that speculate. It help gain attention for the author. It's good for their careers. But the well-regarded historians make efforts to speculate as little as possible, and certainly not over something as unclear as what Bernstein has engaged in here.

Lincoln's Melancholy: How Depression Challenged a President and Fueled His Greatness
by Joshua Wolf Shenk
Houghton Mifflin
Copyright © 2005 by Joshua Wolf Shenk.
ISBN: 0-6185-5116-6




CHAPTER 1 The Community Said He Was Crazy


In three key criteria —the factors that produce depression, the symptoms of what psychiatrists call major depression, and the typical age of onset—the case of Abraham Lincoln is perfect. It could be used in a psychiatry textbook to illustrate a typical depression. Yet Lincoln’s case is perfect, too, in a very different sense: it forces us to reckon with the limits of diagnostic categories and raises fundamental questions about the nature of illness and health.



Was Lincoln Gay?


By RICHARD BROOKHISER
Published: January 9, 2005

THE INTIMATE WORLD OF
ABRAHAM LINCOLN
By C. A. Tripp.
Edited by Lewis Gannett.
343 pp. Free Press. $27.

THIS book is already getting noticed. In ''The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln,'' C. A. Tripp contends that Lincoln had erotic attractions and attachments to men throughout his life, from his youth to his presidency. He further argues that Lincoln's relationships with women were either invented by biographers (his love of Ann Rutledge) or were desolate botches (his courtship of Mary Owens and his marriage to Mary Todd). Tripp is not the first to argue that Lincoln was homosexual -- earlier writers have parsed his friendship with Joshua Speed, the young store owner he lived with after moving to Springfield, Ill. -- but he assembles a mass of evidence and tries to make sense of it.

Actually, I vaguely vecalled the 1st, but had forgotten the 2nd. Now that I see it, I remember the name. Brookhiser.

IMO, the 1st book explains the 2nd - Lincoln's depression left him with little sexual drive. Of course, this is speculation, so thank god I'm not a historian

"Hillary's fear of humiliation, her fear of secrets being revealed, absolutely permeates her life," is an essay into psychiatry, and quite beyond the fellow's competence as either a journalist or a biographer of a living subject.

has talked to.That is his "opinion" and it is not a diagnosis of anything.

Nothing about that statement is available to externally observed fact; it is utterly concerned with interpretation of inner life beneath and beyond observable actions. Bernstien is no better at this, and no more qualified to do and be taken seriously at it, than the clerk at my corner liquor store.

Once given that power, why would she give it up??

Under Cover: It's not likely that Clinton's papers will be public before the election
By Michael Isikoff | NEWSWEEK
Oct 29, 2007 Issue


When author Sally Bedell Smith was researching her new book about Bill and Hillary Clinton's White House years, she flew to Little Rock to visit the one place she thought could be an invaluable resource: the new William J. Clinton Presidential Library. Smith was hoping to inspect records that could shed light on what role the First Lady played in her husband's administration. But Smith quickly discovered the frustrations of dealing with a library critics call "Little Rock's Fort Knox."

An archivist explained to Smith that the release of materials was tightly controlled by the former president's longtime confidant Bruce Lindsey. Could she look at memos detailing the advice Hillary gave Bill during debates over welfare reform? Smith asked. No, the archivist said, those memos were "closed" to the public because they dealt with "policy" matters. What about any records that show what advice Bill gave his wife about her 2000 U.S. Senate campaign? Those, too, were closed, the archivist said, because they dealt with "political" matters. "He essentially told me I had no chance of getting anything," says Smith, whose book, "For Love of Politics: Bill and Hillary Clinton, the White House Years," hits the bookstores this week.

The response Smith got isn't unusual. Nearly three years after the Clinton Library opened—and more than 21 months after its trove of records became subject to the Freedom of Information Act—barely one half of 1 percent of the 78 million pages of documents and 20 million e-mail messages at the federally funded facility are public, according to the National Archives. The lack of access is emerging as an issue in Hillary's presidential campaign: she cites her years of experience as First Lady as one of her prime qualifications to be president. Like other Democratic candidates, she has decried the "stunning record of secrecy" of the Bush administration; her campaign Web site vows to bring a "return to transparency" to government. But Clinton's appointment calendar as First Lady, her notes at strategy meetings, what advice she gave her husband and his advisers, what policy memos she wrote, even some key papers from her health-care task force—all of this, and much more documenting her years as First Lady, remains locked away, most likely through the entire campaign season. With nearly 300 FOIA requests pending for Clinton documents, and only six archivists at the library to process them, Archives spokeswoman Susan Cooper says it is "really hard to predict" if any of this material will be released before the election.


-snip


http://www.newsweek.com/id/57351

AFTER YEARS OF BUSH CHENEY SECRECY, I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT OPEN GOVERNMENT IS CRITICAL IN A DEMOCRACY.

Are there any right wingers you won't believe?

Because, god knows, they're hungry.

You might as well cite Linbaugh or Coulter for confirmation.

You do not mean it seriously, and cannot expect anyone to take it seriously....

diminished and called a "hack" because he has the temerity to not paint a syncopative portrait of the front runner. That Sir, is beneath your accustomed standards.Hillary is not without her flaws. Her relationship with Murdoch is well known.

When Bernstein criticizes Hillary, it's a Good Thing. When Magistrate criticizes Bernstein it's "How dare you!!"

Long ago I was an admirer of hers.The more educated I became as to her actions and votes the more disgusted I became with her.I have many times explained the reasons for my lack of support for her. You of course may disagree as that is your prerogative but I place no equal standards on Hillary and Bernstein.

Sounds like people who respect * and think it's treason to criticize him

but I happen to disagree with you.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

All that is in question is precisely what convinced him third-string slanders of Sen. Clinton would be a paying proposition at this time.

:thumbsup:

Where I come from, that's not a very nice expression. :evilgrin:

Carl should have hung it up 15 years ago.

We cannot allow this. Not again.

It's not like you're having a revelation. LOL!

disappoints that way.Just another reason to not support her. No WH transparency.Maybe she will have secret meeting with oil companies too. It would not be unlikely.

I would never give her such an easy out. She is responsible for her actions. it isn't like she doesn't "know" what she is voting for, or who she hires.

This I just gotta see.

about McGovern, and you think expediency is a bad thing?

Oh, the irony

Look under your bed and ask that boogeywoman.

Fearfulness is a symptom. At least in this case, unlike when you called McGovern senile, you'd have a symptom to justify your smear

responsible for her decisions.

For some reason, you don't want to hold McGovern responsible for his endorsement of Hillary

But you know that.And he is 85, so it is possible. It may not be so.However, I would never make any such excuses for Hillary.

Calling them "senile"

Just to accept that Sen. McGovern actually considers Sen. Clinton the best choice for the office out of the available field, particularly since there is not a shred of evidence available to indicate his faculties have been diminished.

human and has made a "mistake".I do not "respect" his choice.I respect his right to make it and my own to think he is wrong . I obviously gave him too much credit years ago.I was mistaken. His endorsement is not consistent with who I thought him to be.

I won't bring it up anymore now that you acknowledge how unfair it was of you to make that accusation

I am very disapponted in McGovern. Perhaps I was unfair,but I would much rather this was NOT his fault.

but they are all human. They all do bad things at times. We all do bad things at times.

Bush

Clinton

Clinton

Bush

Bush

Clinton

is such a bad idea. The two houses end up covering up for the other.

TC

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You do still have free will, don't you?

I guess it means I hate the Democratic Party, and want the repubs to win.

But I do not intend to cast a vote for President next November, if Hillary is the one I'd be casting it for. Sorry, ain't gonna happen.

If that makes me somewhat responsible for a repub victory, so be it. I just don't give a shit anymore.

Just don't pretend that you give a shit

I'm suspicious of people who make baseless accusations

Now tell me again how progressive Giuliani is

Woodward is the turncoat, Not Bernstein.

ps: I'd pick Bernstein over Woodward any day of the week.



* Freaks, circa 1932.

I can see why some did in the past.

In the past, I could have believed him. No longer

I want one!

with the article that said Clinton would look at/consider rolling back some of the powers Bush stole. A whole lot of weasle words in her talk on that issue. How about just saying, "Everything Bush grabbed, Congress and the People get back. Period." How hard is that? :shrug:

As for her need for secrecy, she is a classic Scorpio -- being exposed does NOT make them happy campers.

and it's one of the things i find troubling about Clinton. I believe she does have a tendency not just toward secrecy but toward a siege mentality. i'm not saying i don't understand where its coming from, but i don't think it's a positive trait in a president.

Are there any right wingers they won't believe?

ecom

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3632907

Gotta beef up those numbers, eh Carl?

how sad.

is not unkind or biased against Hillary. But you would rather call him a "hack" Maybe we no longer have good journalists in this country because we don't desrve them. I have heard Rather called a "hack" as well. Our derogatory treatment of good journalists is what is sad.

Maybe it is just that carl doesn't have books bought in "bulk" ?

of the top priorities now is to achieve as much transparency in government as is feasible - otherwise, how will we even begin to
uncover all the crimes that have perpetrated during the Bush years?

If it's true that Hillary's desire for secrecy will result in her allowing the current policies to
continue, then I'd say that's really bad news and should be a major consideration for any voter.

I didn't think Bill was that secretive?

and I'll never buy his fucking dressing again!

she's a Scorpio! Hah..I knew that would shake up the true believers.

"But in the Senate "she became self-confident in a way she had never been since she met Bill." Her old combativeness "is gone." As for the senators who voted to convict her husband in his impeachment trial, Bernstein said, "she joined their prayer group."

I'm so glad hillary has her "prayer group" to give her sustenance in all her time of need.

"Finally, does Carl Bernstein think Hillary going to win the presidency? He replied, "The night the Supreme Court voted to make Bush president, I said on TV I thought he would be a compassionate conservative, reach out to Democrats, and govern from the center. So don't turn to me for predictions about politics."

Oh boy..that's interesting..even I knew a coup wasn't gonna govern from the fucking center.

Especially where it concerns Hillary. His last book was a smear of Hillary, no matter how you spin it.

He used "confidential sources" on the book and defended them as he did with Nixon's "confidential sources".

One problem, though. Hillary has NEVER been accused of crimes against the constitution.

I consider his attention to Hillary about the same as Dick Morris'. An irrational, vaguely misogynistic diatribe.

cohort, but still not top drawer anymore. Has he come out against this administration and its war, war and more war? Until he does, he is no one to me.

I am surprised so many here are dissing Bernstein, because he has been outspoken all along about what the Bushies have been up to and the Iraq invasion. He is on our side -- he has not drunk the Kool-aid.

It is WOODWARD who has become a Bush ass-kisser until very recently.

had an article on classified documents.

Clinton released tens of millions of classified documents, far more than any other President.

He also reached the lowest point of actually CREATING classified documents of any other President in recent history.

George W. Bush has entirely reversed those numbers.

I see nothing to indicate that Hillary Clinton isn't more like Bill in this matter than George W.

What did she do on the Board of Wal-Mart for 6 years?

Why don't we know anything about this...SECRECY!

records? How odd.

Wal-mart which has it's headquarters in Fayetteville, Arkansas.

Arkansas home of the Clintons.