I consider myself a cynic. And a pretty good one at that. But my level of cynicism pales in comparison to that of our political journalists. Case in point: Today I read a posting over at truthdig.com by Eugene Robinson, a columnist for the Washington Post. Titled “What’s Gotten Into Bill,” the piece asserts that the reason Bill Clinton has become so aggressive on behalf of Hillary’s campaign is because his legacy is in the balance. Robinson’s concluding paragraph sums up the tone of the column:
There’s a battle to be fought against an upstart challenger who has the audacity to suggest that maybe the Clinton presidency, successful as it was in many ways, didn’t change the world—and that he, given the office, could do better. Some things, I guess, just can’t be allowed. Bill Clinton obviously has decided that history can wait.
Nowhere in the piece does Robinson even allow for the possibility that Bill Clinton might be acting out of love for Hillary. That he may believe she would be a great president. That he owes her his full and aggressive support after the way she supported him through two presidential campaigns and eight years of onslaughts from the media and right-wingers in equal measure. Love and loyalty don’t parse in the Washington Press, especially when it applies to the Clintons. Mr. Robinson, save your soul: Get out of Washington pronto!