Et Tu, Chucky?
Tags: Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Charles Schumer, Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Sarah Palin
Thanks to Game Change, political gossip is currently more fun than the celebrity kind. The book about 2008’s presidential campaign has created a remarkable stir before it’s even for sale, as everyone on the outside who’s interested in politics eagerly anticipates reading about what life is like backstage at Earth’s wonkiest beauty pageant.
The authors make contentions across the spectrum, provoking denials from Sarah Palin’s camp and apologies from Harry Reid, who’s quite a few decades behind when it comes to both racial terminology and his patronizing view of the electorate. At least he looks tolerant compared to Bill Clinton, who also apparently proved the notion that people never, never change.
Importantly, there’s telling New York dirt, too: we’ve also allegedly learned thanks to the book that there’s nothing more dangerous than a smiling Chuck Schumer. The parties involved have dismissed the accounts. But the authors want us to believe that, if the senator tells you he’s on your side, back away while maintaining eye contact (h/t Carmen McCormick):
Sen. Charles Schumer “betrayed” Hillary Rodham Clinton by working with other senators to make sure a Democrat would win the White House in 2008 — actively recruiting Barack Obama to run as an alternative to his New York colleague, an explosive new book claims.
At least he has a good reason to sink his coworker. Namely, he thought she would be crushed due to her obvious shortcomings. For the record, “good” is not necessarily a synonym for “pleasant:”
Schumer and the others were concerned about Clinton’s political vulnerabilities — and New York’s senior senator hedged his bets to have the strongest possible Democratic ticket for the fierce general election, the book claims.
A couple not precisely known for fidelity on any level was appalled to feel what it was like to be the victim of duplicity:
Clinton and husband Bill Clinton learned of the wily party leader’s move months later — and the “incipient betrayal of Hillary by her colleagues in the Senate . . . would hit them like a ton of bricks in their psychic solar plexus,” according to the book on the 2008 presidential race by Mark Halperin and John Heilemann.
On top of that, Schumer purportedly didn’t think Hillary needed to know that he thought she’d be a rotten candidate:
“Although Schumer was careful to signal that home-state decorum would prohibit him from opposing Clinton publicly — ‘You understand my position,’ he would say — he left no doubt as to where his head and heart were on the question,” the authors write.
It’ll be our secret. The authors also claim he indulged in some metaphorical tough talk regarding how the other candidates should have treated his New York senatorial counterpart. In another life, Chuck Nasty might have been the WWE’s Intercontinental Champion:
The book’s authors also write that during the heat of the primaries, “Chuck Schumer was up in arms, telling fellow senators that Obama needed to take a two-by-four to Hillary.”
Why all the scheming? It supposedly came down to how he envied her showing up later than him before catapulting to fame over him. Poor, poor Chuck:
According to “Game Change” Schumer had a deep rivalry with Clinton, who started overshadowing him the second she ran for her Senate seat in 2000.
“Schumer’s relationship with Hillary had always been fraught with rivalry and tinged with jealousy; though she was technically the junior member of the New York team in the Senate, she had eclipsed him in terms of celebrity and influence from the moment she arrived on the Hill,” Halperin and Heilemann write.
So, he didn’t like being the Ralph Malph to her Chachi. To be fair, Hillary doesn’t believe the charges, and Schumer “vehemently denied the account over the weekend.” Unfortunately for the Secretary of State, there’s no spiteful political SWAT team attempting to discredit every single charge made against the Clintons anymore.
The reporters use unnamed sources extensively throughout the book. Consequently, one’s belief in each account’s veracity may come down to how one views the respective politicians. It’s crucial to think about whether the individual in question has worked on behalf of the citizenry or tended to wallow in partisanship. Observers should take into account an officeholder’s demeanor and established pattern of behavior. And we should consider if the person comes across as calculating by nature and hungry for both power and camera time. So, with the book out this week and his career in mind, who trusts Chuck Schumer?
Anthony Bialy is a freelance writer and “Red Eye” Conservative in Western New York. He also blogs at Smart Girl Nation. Follow Anthony on Twitter.
1 Comment »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment
I don’t get Chuck’s problem with Hillary… she’s light skinned and void of “negro dialect.”