Carl Bernstein says he knows Hillary Clinton but he misses the point about sexism in the campaign

Carl Bernstein appeared on NoQuarter Radio’s Sins of Omission with Paulie Abeles last Monday. Having written a book about Hillary Clinton, most listeners wondered if Bernstein would have something interesting to say about Hillary and the democratic primary campaign.

The first half of the interview centered around what Bernstein wrote in his biography of Hillary Clinton – A Woman In Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton”

The following are notes I took during the interview. It is not a transcript. I recommend listening to the show. The times are approximate.

2:25 – Abeles and Bernstein talk background on the book. It took 7 years to write and began directly after the Bill Clinton impeachment trial.

2:50 – Bernstein thought HRC was the “great story” after impeachment and saw she would run for senate.

3:40 – Bernstein feels Hillary’s run for senate was partly a “question of redemption”

5:03 – Bernstein says a great failing of journalism is preconceived notions of reporters.

5:50 – Bernstein believes the best reporting is the best obtainable version of the truth. It is important to go back to sources many times to try and get more information. He does not believe in a false “equal time” type of journalism where patently absurd arguments are given equal time just to fulfill some notion of fairness.

7:20 – Bernstein says Hillary’s relationship with her father was important, but more important was her environment. Her growing up years in general were quite tough with a very tough family life and abusive father. Her mother did not leave despite abuse.

10:18 – Bernstein says Hillary talks about her father with great love in her “so called autobiography” but that she told just enough to give a good journalist a way to get to what she would rather have withheld.

12:12 – Hillary became famous for her Wellsley commencement speech and was profiled in Life Magazine. She was more famous than Bill Clinton when they met.

13:14 – Bernstein Says the relationship between the two is not a marriage of political convenience.

13:55 – He also says Hillary first recognized Bill’s talents and worked to contain “knowledge of those compulsions” of Bill’s and hired lawyers to deal with the other women.

16:00 – He says people who know the Clintons say it is a love story.

16:40 – Bill wanted to leave the marriage but Hillary stopped that.

18:00 – Says his book is widely regarded as empathic because he told stories not well known.

18:22 – Hillary’s methodist faith is one of the two most important aspects of her life. The other is family. Many people do not know how important her faith truly is to her.

19: 44 – A strong influence on Hillary is John Wesley; and more than anything it was the understanding of John Wesley’s faith, and “a social gospel” a gospel of helping others. . . To do all the good you can whenever you can, wherever you can. Hillary took this as a kind of living faith. So few people knew about it because she did not wear it on her sleeve.

20:33 – As first lady , Hillary joined a prayer group in DC and never told people about it.

21:30 – Abeles asked if Clinton’s faith was “service in action.” Bernstein replied he thought it was true and thinks that’s part of why she chose to work as a children’s advocate early on.

22:05 – Bernstein says some people thought her religiosity was smugness or self-justification more than faith.

23:33 – Abeles asked about Hillary’s political ideology. Bernstein replied she started off with the opinions of her parents and was conservative but that she went to hear MLK speak twice when she was in school. The he added you can say about both the Clintons that “probably the most notable thing about both their lives in terms of a moral commitment to an aspect of our politics has been about black people and understanding the tragedy of race in America and the history of race in America. It is ironic that she should have run headlong into the campaign of Obama.

25:20 – Bernstein says Hillary’s desire to avoid a small embarrassment over Whitewater by playing “fast and loose with the facts” is why it turned into a larger scandal.

27:40 – Abeles asked how could she be judged fairly under that sort of microscope? Bernstein said he didn’t think that’s what it was about [being under scrutiny]. Whitewater was an example of her trying to avoid an embarrassment . Says she is not, for example, a pathological liar as William Safire once called her.

29:30 – Bernstein says the Bosnia sniper fire story was a crucial even in the campaign.

30:14 -Abeles asked why was Obama not subjected to the same standard of truthfulness? For example, his biography has large unsubstantiated portions, he touts legislation he did not participate in as his own, claims he helped Maytag employees with their jobs and said Bill Ayers was “just this guy in his neighborhood.”

30:44 – Bernstein felt Obama “was quite truthful about the relationship”. There’s too much to the notion that Obama was unscrutinized, and the new kid on the block, particularly a giant slayer, in our media culture gets a boost and then great scrutiny follows.

31:25 – Bernstein says the media reported on all aspects of Obama, creating the reporting that bloggers later latched on to.

31:54 – Says the “Ayers thing was a kind of McCarthyism.”

32: 38 – Bernstein really thinks the idea that Hillary was treated with manifest unfairness in this campaign is not true. She lost the election largely because of her own actions and did not run a good campaign. Everyone only found out how bad it was after the fact.

33:05 – He talked about the Marc Penn memos, particularly one where Penn said Obama should have been pictured as un-American and Hillary should have fired him on the spot.

33:31 – Abeles notes Clinton did not pursue that [Penn's] campaign

33:44 – Bernstein replies it is time to quit fighting the battle. He says both sides overstate their case. Was there unfair and sexist coverage? Absolutely. But the determinate factor? No.

35:46 – Abeles asks about a statement by Mike Barnicle and some by others describing Hillary as shrill, nagging. Bernstein replies that’s outrageous [unacceptable]. Abeles mentions Tucker Carlson and his crossing legs remark. Bernstein replies that kind of remark comes from a sexist responses. We have all kids of isms in this culture but she benefitted as well as got hurt by being a woman, Obama got the same.

37:03 – Neither Obama nor Clinton was a victim.

At this point callers were allowed to ask questions.

39:38 – Caller said on the “Bosnia thing” that she didn’t think Clinton intentionally lied about sniper fire. When challenged, Hillary seemed frustrated and said “I got it right in my book.” Bernstein replied, all I know is what she said and she paid a big price for it. Caller said she thought it surprised everyone the level of sexism against Hillary during the campaign.

41:20 – Caller talked about how she initially didn’t like Clinton and realized she had inadvertently taken in some smears about her from right-wing media as someone who is “divisive” and “bitchy” and caller couldn’t believe that left wing people were saying the same. Bernstein said there is some truth to that. Clinton was a great foil to the right-wing and they created a caricature of her, but some of it was based on her own actions.

43:50 – Bernstein believes Clinton is one of the five greatest celebrities of our time.

44:37 – Vitriol against the Clintons was partly because Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton ended the dominance of the right-wing in politics.

45:15 – Caller agreed Clinton’s campaign in WA could have been stronger. There was no effort in WA to make sure caucus goers got to the caucus, for example.

45:44- Bernstein said he just doesn’t think sexism made the difference in this election, perhaps affected it, but was not decisive.

46:38 – Bernstein wrote an article on Sarah Palin and how McCain broke a promise to America by choosing her. He said McCain promised he would only act on principle, but he picked Palin knowing she was unqualified and unprepared. This choice bordered on abandoning his own standard of putting his country first because it was endangering the country and its national security. But because he thought it would be a winning move he did it anyway.

48:56 – Bernstein said he did not recognize McCain during election.

49:10 – Abeles asked but what about John Edwards and his lack of experience when he ran as Kerry’s vp? Wasn’t Palin subjected to a different standard? Bernstein replied he thinks the idea of “barking up the tree of sexism whenever you get a situation like this is really a mistake. This is not about sexism.” . . .

49:58 – Abeles tried again, what accounts for the discrepancy [in treatment]? Bernstein replies he doesn’t think there’s a discrepancy. He thinks sex [gender] comes in because Palin was s political pick to get Hillary voters.

50:47 – Abeles asks, wasn’t there a class bias about Palin? No, that’s silly.

51:29 – Bernstein asserts Palin’s record and how she was chosen accounts for her treatment.

52:10 – He says the interview is getting abusrd.

52:20 – Abeles says Palin’s mistakes were attributed to her being unprepared but Biden’s were not. Bernstein disagrees and says the reporting of Joe Biden’s mistakes “could fill my study” and yet he is competent in public life over a long period of time.

52:51 – He does say Palin was a bit proficient but we learned aspects of her record that were bad (like Troopergate).

53:19 – Responding to Abeles, Bernstein says, “you’re too interested in comparing and looking for victims all the time here” i think that the idea that people don’t succeed because they are criticized because they are necessarily the victims of racism or sexism is silly.”

53:44 – Sarah Palin was chosen because she was a woman – that was the only reason.

54:00 – Abeles asks, where was this outcry and media ire when Kerry chose Edwards. He had little experience.

54:27 – Bernstein replies that Edwards’ failings turned out to be personal failings – he was an adequate senator and was an attractive pick and there were lots of stories about him in every newspaper. And, by the way, it’s too easy to demonize trial lawyers.

55:50 – He says the press is not a monolith – the idea that THE PRESS is out to somehow smear one candidate and not examine another is preposterous.

56:42 – Caller said she was sickened by Bernstein’s blindness to hate crimes against Clinton, mentioning c–t t-shirts, nutcracker, etc. Bernstein says it is disgusting but not why she lost the election, maybe a factor but as the reason she lost the election absurd. Caller started to point out Obama contributions to the campaign environment. Bernstein said to refight the campaign is counterproductive because it doesn’t tell you anything.

58:50 – Again, he said the bad comments are not determinate but reflective of society.

Well, interesting. I think Bernstein sees Clinton as a complete person. I think he sees positives and negatives in her and tried to be as objective as possible. However, Bernstein did say Clinton was one of the top five CELEBRITIES of our age. Celebrity? She’s been a working woman for at least forty years. “Celebrity” is not a word applied to serious people. If you don’t believe that, just cast your mind back to the terrible kerfluffle over John McCain’s campaign commercial (see More People Think Obama’s Comments Racist than McCain’s Britney ad. .. .) daring to suggest Obama was more celebrity than substance (see Obama God or Senator Britney). And, let’s not forget Bob Herbert. Please see Larry’s piece: (Bob Herbert and Keith Olberman Don’t Know Dick.)

Where Bernstein really failed, in my opinion, is in examining the atmosphere surrounding the primary campaign. He believes sexism and racism are reflective of some small aspects of society in general. I wouldn’t disagree with that.

But I would call his attention to the fact that so much of that “small aspect of society” seems to reside in the press. Want some evidence for this? Below are some NQ stories from nearly a year ago listing many press knuckle-dragging statements from “elite” journalists. Statements that appeared ON TV and IN PRINT.

Keith Olbermann – Useless
John Lennon, Meet Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin
Special Comment for Keith Olbermann

And these things could never be said in those venues with a racial tint rather than a sexist one. Not gonna happen. Never did. You couldn’t even say Obama’s middle name without being called a racist. And don’t forget that “celebrity” kerfluffle or Bob Herbert’s “penis vision.”

And Bernstein, like Evan Thomas the week before, seemed surprised to be presented with examples of extreme press bias. Either he was not aware of this stuff when it happened and so doesn’t consume much media, or he was aware of it and thought it unimportant.

Neither option speaks well of Bernstein. If journalists are selling their perspicacity and higher order thinking skills to the rest of us, then we can certainly call them on it if they don’t exhibit the same. I would expect him to be aware of what’s going on in his field.

And while Mr. Bernstein says time and again that sexism “wasn’t a factor” in the election, he misses the point. I don’t know anyone who thinks sexism is the ONLY reason Clinton lost the nomination. But I do think press sexism, in particular, poisoned the well. And they haven’t owned up to that yet. Shame on them.

Some of my takeaways

* Ironic that Bernstein says a great failing of reporters is preconceived notions when he says the strong influence of Clinton’s methodism went unreported. So many depictions of Clinton as hard and unsympathetic and “willing to do ANYTHING” to get elected were based on a preconceived notion that she did not have a moral core.

* While Bernstein’s belief that all opinions don’t merit equal time is easily defended, he uses that to dismiss opinions he disagrees with, such as the sexism question.

* On the one hand, Bernstein talks about how important service and faith are to Clinton, how that has informed her choices. But he calls her a celebrity. In today’s society, calling someone a celebrity serves to reduce them.

* Bernstein says that Biden’s many screw-ups are not important because of his long tenure in Congress and because he is a smart man. Palin’s screw-ups were because she was, at best, uninformed (a low information voter?).

* Clearly, Sarah Palin’s experience at being a mayor and popular (what does that mean anyway?) governor is less than being a former short time state senator who served 1/3 of his first term in the US Senate before running for president. And he completely rejects the notion of any class bias in discussing the merits of those experiences.

* Bernstein believes “barking up the tree of sexism whenever you get a situation like this is really a mistake.” Of course it’s a mistake. He doesn’t believe it existed. He has no clue. When pressed with examples of sexism, he says the interview is “getting absurd.” He completely missed the point that the same arguments were used against two very different women.

* The Bosnia sniper fire story was somehow more important than the Selma story although it can be argued that both were (inadvertent) exaggerations.

* Bernstein said reporters vetted Obama. On earth? Did Andrew Sullivan do a story about his balls? Did anyone demand a DNA test on whether his daughters were really his? Or did they merely question his lack of scholarly writings? (Trick question.)

* Bernstein believes that “dog whistling” went on during the Clinton campaign but when asked about Obama campaign dog whistles (and fingers), he exasperatedly says it’s time to move on.

* McCain’s choice of Palin was a fundamental break with all McCain stood for and was only a political stunt. When the host pointed out Kerry’s choice of Edwards could also be considered quite shallow, Bernstein defended that pick. Well, I guess XX chromosome shallow is MUCH worse than XY shallow. (The penis confers extra seriousness.)

* The choice of Palin brought gender issues up again because she was picked solely for her gender. However, he completely misses the point that the slurs against Hillary were simply recycled to Palin by the same people. (Except for the womb reports.)

* Bernstein must be related to a trial lawyer; he’s concerned about their image.

What are YOUR thoughts?