To see a once interesting writer fade before our very eyes into a bizarre, incoherent rambler is very sad. The truth is, I’m almost beginning to feel sorry for the New York Times’ Bill Safire.
Here’s a man who was a successful speechwriter for Richard Nixon, a best-selling author, and an almost-legendary newspaper columnist for decades. Now, he’s just another conservative with paranoid fantasies about Hillary Clinton. What a pity.
Today’s Safire column, for example, details Safire’s vision of the 2004 Democratic convention. Predicting a brokered convention in which no candidate enters Boston with a majority of delegates, Safire imagines a divisive intra-party conflict.
“But wait — what’s that call booming out over the loudspeakers, reminiscent of the 1940 ‘voice from the sewer’ of F.D.R.’s third-term conclave?” Safire writes. “The chair has lost control of the floor and delegates are snaking through the aisles, shouting, ‘We Want Hillary!’ All deals are off; we have the politicians’ nightmare and the pundits’ dream — an open convention!”
This might be mildly amusing were it not for the fact that Safire has talked about little else for nearly a year. The man is a jukebox with only one record — the one that dreams of Hillary Clinton’s non-existent presidential campaign, this year or in 2008.
Today’s column was, in fact, just the tip of the iceberg. Consider, from just the last four months:
* September 22, 2003 — Safire’s NYT column explains that the Clintons are behind Wesley Clark’s campaign as part of an elaborate ruse. “[Clark] is the Clintons’ most attractive stalking horse, useful in stopping Dean and diluting support for Kerry, Lieberman or Gephardt,” Safire opined. “If Bush stumbles and the Democratic nomination becomes highly valuable, the Clintons probably think they would be able to get Clark to step aside without splintering the party, rewarding his loyalty with second place on the ticket.” Safire also speculates that Clark is running a “muddy-the-waters candidacy” to give the Clintons “their ticket back to the White House in 2004 or 2008.”
* November 12, 2003 — Safire explains, without proof or sources, that the Clintons are orchestrating the Dems’ demise for their own purposes. “It is in the Clintons’ interest for the 2004 Democratic nominee to lose respectably, not in a landslide, laying the basis for a 2008 comeback that would be impossible if Dean were in the White House,” Safire writes.
* December 8, 2003 — Safire writes an eerily similar column less than a month later, explaining that the Clintons want Bush to win in 2004 to boost Hillary’s chances in 2008. “Thus, envision this G.O.P. whispering campaign soon directed to women, liberals and the legions of centrist, semi-hawkish, non-angry Democrats: If you want the Clinton Restoration to the White House in ’08, the only way to make it happen is to stay the course with Bush in ’04,” Safire explained.
For those keeping score at home, that’s four Safire columns in four months about Hillary Clinton’s presidential aspirations. Unfortunately, Safire has shared similar fantasies on television, as well.
* June 1, 2003 Meet the Press — Safire notes that there’s “no doubt” that Bill Clinton is planning to run, somehow, for a third term. Safire ads that the only problem is that it might “block Hillary” from running her own presidential campaign.
* September 21, 2003 Meet the Press — Safire explains that Clark’s campaign is a giant set-up for Hillary’s campaign. “This is the way to stop Howard Dean. Now, why does Clinton want to stop Howard Dean? Could it be that he wants to wait and see and perhaps Hillary will get into this with General Clark as her vice president? Will he prefer to let someone else run and lose and, thereby, have a clear field for Hillary Clinton to run in 2008? What’s going on underneath the coverage? It’s just terrific.”
* October 19, 2003 Meet the Press — Safire returns to the subject, calling Clark a “stalking horse for Hillary Clinton.”
* January 4, 2004 Meet the Press — Safire explains that Bill Clinton may force Howard Dean to accept Wesley Clark as a running mate in order to help Hillary’s 2008 campaign. If Clark turns down Dean’s offer, Safire said, Dean would have only one choice. “You pick up the phone, you call Bill Clinton and say, ‘Hey, get this guy on the ticket because that’s the only way we’re going to bring the party together, and that’s the only way I’m going to support Hillary in 2008 if I don’t win.'”
It’s really not healthy to have this kind of obsession. Hillary’s not running, the Clintons are not mysteriously orchestrating political events, and the party will not be dismissing its field of candidates in 2004 simply to hand over the nomination to Hillary. None of this is based on any reporting, sources, or investigations. It’s just Safire popping off, repeatedly, with absurd speculation.
How does this guy even keep his job at the nation’s most important newspaper? Safire has essentially become Dick Morris with good grammar.