Following up on an item from a few weeks ago, crying has come a long way in politics. In 1972, Ed Muskie wept outside the offices of the New Hampshire Union Leader, and it was, at the time, a political disaster. Americans just weren’t ready to tolerate grown men in leadership positions emoting like this in public.
But that was decades ago. Now, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) feels so strongly about his support for Bush’s Iraq policy that he cried on the House floor in November. And in May. And in February. OK, so the guy cries a lot.
The point is that tears are no longer particularly controversial. At least, it shouldn’t be. And yet, for reasons that I don’t quite understand, this has become the biggest political story of the day.
Exhausted and facing the prospect of losing the second test of her primary campaign, Hillary Rodham Clinton fought back tears as her voice broke at the close of a sedate event in a Portsmouth coffee shop.
She expressed the sheer difficulty of heading out to the trail each day — “It’s not easy,” she said — and suggested she faced “pretty difficult odds.”
And with audible frustration and disbelief, she drew the contrast between her experience and Sen. Barack Obama’s that suggests that her campaign’s current message — the question of who is ready — matches her profound sense that she alone is ready for the job.
“Some of us know what we are going to do on day one, and some of us haven’t thought that through enough,” she said…. “Some of us are right and some of us are wrong. Some of us are ready and some of us are not. Some of us know what we are going to do on day one, and some of us haven’t thought that through enough,” she said.
As the video shows, this was obviously very emotional for Clinton, who shed quite a few tears during her answer, just as she did last month at an Iowa event with some of her constituents and childhood friends.
But ABC’s headline on this strikes me as wildly unfair: “Can Clinton’s Emotions Get the Best of Her?”
“Get the best of her? These candidates, all of the ones who are really giving it their all, are enduring a grueling, painful process, with very little sleep, poor nutrition, and intense, constant pressure. Given how exhausted these folks are, I’m actually surprised more candidates don’t cry more often.
What’s the charge here? That Clinton got emotional? There’s nothing wrong with emotion. That she’s faking it? Nonsense; she’s not that good an actor. That’s she’s cracking under pressure? That’s just absurd.
To be sure, Clinton’s comments might have been a little more touching if she hadn’t launched into her anti-Obama talking points through her tears, but given the circumstances, I’m willing to cut her all kinds of slack.
On a related note, I was disappointed by Edwards’ reaction.
John Edwards was asked in Lakeport about reports that Hillary had teared up.
“I really don’t have anything to say about that,” he said. “I think what we need in a commander in chief is strength and resolve, and presidential campaigns are a tough business, but being president of the United States is also a very tough business. And the president of the United States is faced with very very difficult challenges every single day, difficult judgments every single day. What I know is that I’m prepared for that, and I’m in this fight for the middle class, for the future of this country, for the long haul.”
If this is an accurate quote, it’s a surprisingly cheap shot. Clinton wept, so she lacks “strength”? She teared up, so she’s unprepared for “tough business”? He’s more “prepared” because he didn’t cry?
If this really was Edwards’ response, I have to admit, I’ve lost some respect for him.