The Lies hillary Has Told Us: Dick Morris

Published on TheHill.com on March 25, 2008.

The USA Today/Gallup survey clearly explains why Sen. Hillary Rodham
Clinton (D-N.Y.) is losing. Asked whether the candidates were “honest
and trustworthy,” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) won with 67 percent, with
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) right behind him at 63. Hillary scored only
44 percent, the lowest rating for any candidate for any attribute in
the poll.

Hillary simply cannot tell the truth. Here’s her scorecard:

Admitted Lies

• Chelsea was jogging around the Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. (She was in bed watching it on TV.)
• Hillary was named after Sir Edmund Hillary. (She admitted she was
wrong. He climbed Mt. Everest five years after her birth.)
• She was under sniper fire in Bosnia. (A girl presented her with flowers at the foot of the ramp.)
• She learned in The Wall Street Journal how to make a killing in the
futures market. (It didn’t cover the market back then.)

Whoppers She Won’t Confess To

• She didn’t know about the FALN pardons.
• She didn’t know that her brothers were being paid to get pardons that Clinton granted.
• Taking the White House gifts was a clerical error.
• She didn’t know that her staff would fire the travel office staff after she told them to do so.
• She didn’t know that the Peter Paul fundraiser in Hollywood in 2000 cost $700,000 more than she reported it had.
• She opposed NAFTA at the time.
• She was instrumental in the Irish peace process.
• She urged Bill to intervene in Rwanda.
• She played a role in the ’90s economic recovery.
• The billing records showed up on their own.
• She thought Bill was innocent when the Monica scandal broke.
• She was always a Yankees fan.
• She had nothing to do with the New Square Hasidic pardons (after they
voted for her 1,400-12 and she attended a meeting at the White House
about the pardons).
• She negotiated for the release of refugees in Macedonia (who were released the day before she got there).

With a record like that, is it any wonder that we suspect her of being less than honest and straightforward?

Why has McCain jumped out to a nine-point lead over Obama and a
seven-point lead over Hillary in the latest Rasmussen poll? OK, Obama
has had the Rev. Wright mess on his hands. And Hillary has come in for
her share of negatives, like the Richardson endorsement of Obama and
the denouement of her latest lie — that she endured sniper fire during
a trip to Bosnia. But why has McCain gained so much in so short a
period of time? Most polls had the general election tied two weeks ago.

McCain’s virtues require a contrast in order to stand out. His
strength, integrity, solidity and dependability all are essentially
passive virtues, which shine only by contrast with others. Now that
Obama and Hillary are offering images that are much weaker, less
honest, and less solid and dependable, good old John McCain looks that
much better as he tours Iraq and Israel while the Democrats rip one
another apart.

It took Nixon for us to appreciate Jimmy Carter’s simple honesty. It
took Clinton and Monica for us to value George W. Bush’s personal
character. And it takes the unseemly battle among the Democrats for us
to give John McCain his due.

When Obama faces McCain in the general election (not if but when)
the legacy of the Wright scandal will not be to question Obama’s
patriotism or love of America. It will be to ask if he has the right
stuff (pardon the pun).

The largest gap between McCain and Obama in the most recent USA
Today/Gallup Poll was on the trait of leadership. Asked if each man was
a “strong, decisive leader,” 69 percent felt that the description fit
McCain while only 56 percent thought it would apply to Obama. (61
percent said it of Hillary.) Obama has looked weak handling the Rev.
Wright controversy. His labored explanation of why he attacks the sin
but loves the sinner comes across as elegant but, at the same time,
feeble. Obama’s reluctance to trade punches with his opponents makes us
wonder if he could trade them with bin Laden or Ahmadinejad. We have no
doubt that McCain would gladly come to blows and would represent us
well, but about Obama we are not so sure.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s