 |
From: News and Views | Opinion | Robert F. Kennedy was a "self-seeking outsider," fumed the Republican Senate candidate in 1964. RFK was also conducting the "most arrogant campaign New York State has ever witnessed" and was "temperamentally and intellectually unfit" for the Senate. "He's on to you," Arthur Schlesinger Jr. quotes Kennedy brother-in-law Steve Smith saying in response. Thirty-five years later, New Yorkers are wondering if Rudy Giuliani is on to Hillary Rodham Clinton. Is she a fake or the real thing? Like Kennedy, Hillary Clinton has stood in the shadow of an elected relative and has been said to pull strings behind the scenes. Both came to New York seeking their own political birthright. RFK found it here — can HRC? Let's compare the two candidates: In 1964, voters embraced Robert Kennedy as the brother of a martyred President. In 1999-2000, they're getting an actual martyr. Score one for Hillary? Probably not. Her husband, for all his trying, is no JFK. Score that one for Bobby. When Robert Kennedy set his sights on New York's Senate seat, he was hardly welcomed to the party. In those days, Kennedy was perceived as ruthless, and his past as an aide to Joe McCarthy and enabler of J. Edgar Hoover still rankled New York liberals. Hillary, on the other hand, is being welcomed by the party as a saint. Double points to Hillary. Thirty-five years ago, Robert Kennedy announced his Senate candidacy and, swept up in a kind of political Beatlemania, was elected 10 weeks later. Hillary may be able to summon similar passions, but she's taking those 10 weeks and adding a year. While it would be wonderful to go back to three-month campaigns, to win today you need to be a marathon runner — and fund-raiser. Point to Hillary. RFK deflected the carpetbagger label by pointing to his childhood in Bronxville. "Indeed," as Schlesinger observed in his book "Robert Kennedy and His Times," he "had lived nowhere longer." Hillary may love New York, but score this one for Bobby. But Schlesinger also writes that "of the two senators succeeding to Robert Kennedy's seat, the first lived in Connecticut, the second in Massachusetts." In a footnote, the historian identifies them as James Buckley and Daniel Moynihan, and he reminds us that in 1972, "the Democrats nominated Ramsey Clark, who had spent most of his life in Texas. In none of these campaigns was carpetbaggerism an issue." I'm no Arthur Schlesinger, but my reading of history tells me Rudy won't be able to make the interloper charge stick either. The carpetbagger issue will give way to who's a dangerous liberal and who's out of step with New Yorkers, if I may telegraph the two candidates' eventual ad campaigns. Being from out of town won't matter — so point to Hillary after all. Far more important is why someone wants to be senator. Are they looking for a good gig after an old job runs out? There's nothing inherently wrong with that. Ask former UN Ambassador Moynihan. Everyone comes to politics with baggage, but a deft politician can deflect personal attacks by focusing on the issues that motivate voters. Character is one, but so are financial security, health and happiness. Both Clintons are skilled at talking to voters on their own wavelengths. And
Hillary knows how to get the attention of the Kmart shoppers who just might
provide the winning edge in this election.
|