Like JFK, like LBJ, Gary Hart had multiple affairs. The one that really plagued him was with a bookish actor/writer named Donna Rice. Hart and Rice spent some time on a boat--the "Monkey Business"--and Rice was photographed on top of Hart's groin. Hart then said he hadn't had any kind of dalliance with Rice; the two were just talking about possible job opportunities.
During damage control, Rice asked Hart's people not to leak her name. She also disclosed an embarrassing moment from her past--a semi-nude photo--imagining that this was just a topic for her brief phone call. Hart's people immediately threw Rice under the bus, volunteering her name and the details about her past, hoping that this would put out the fire. For years thereafter, Hart made no effort to contact Rice. (He did eventually call her to apologize.)
Given Rice's formidable brain power, a second act was inevitable. Rice became an important crusader against child pornography. Hart had a rockier epilogue. He pleaded with Clinton for a professional gig; Clinton was (typically) wishy washy. Hart did (does) have extraordinary talents; he eventually wrote a trenchant report on stateless terrorists. Two years before 9/11, Hart warned, in print, that large numbers of Americans would die in a terrorist attack--likely on American soil. Dubyah ignored the report.
Matt Bai's excellent narrative covers Hart's life--but it also reaches surprising conclusions. Bai says that the Hart affair permanently altered journalism and politics; Newt Gingrich began to understand that the way to take down opponents was not through electoral strategizing. Just find a scandal, invent a purity test, and the politician will have to resign. Bai says that not one president since the Hart era has been notably impressive or effective. He includes Obama in that damning statement. Now, you are judged successful not because you are a visionary, but because you can survive ridiculous attacks in the tabloids.
What, exactly, did Obama believe? What vision of governance guided his thinking, and what new argument did he bring to the arena? This was hard to know, then and later. His twin mantras were HOPE and CHANGE, the rhetorical equivalent of rainbows and unicorns. There were those who spent time with him, myself included, who came away thinking he was a pragmatist who disrupted orthodoxies of the last generation. There were others who assumed that he was in fact a doctrinaire liberal. In office, Obama made a practice of disappointing both groups. He reacted ably to near cataclysmic events, but his grasp on the machinery of government often seemed tenuous. With the exception of his party's health care law, he did little to change the global or economic trajectory of the country.
The truth was that Obama had neither the time nor the inclination to work out his ideas or master the intricacies of governing before ascending to the Oval Office, and we in the media hadn't been interested in that side of him, anyway.....
Dazzling writing.
Comments
Post a Comment