Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
As Hillary Clinton is gearing up for another possible run at the presidency, Politico has written an in-depth story regarding Clinton’s love-hate relationship with the media. And it is mostly hate, as one of Clinton’s advisers is more than happy to admit: “Look, she hates you. Period. That’s never going to change.” I am more than willing to believe those words, and they point to why Hillary Clinton should never be president of the United States.
We are still being governed by an administration that claims to have been the most transparent in history, even though the record is clear that it is anything but. And this is an administration with relatively good relations with the media, featuring a president who has basically been a media darling ever since he burst on the national and international stage. If an administration with this many advantages when it comes to being able to charm the media still sees fit to make a mockery of transparency, what makes anyone think that in a future (Hillary) Clinton administration, there will be anything resembling more transparency, especially when one considers Clinton’s often-difficult history with the press?
Yes, there were times when this relationship improved, but those improvements never lasted Additionally, when one considers that Clinton has always had troubled relations with the White House press corps and with reporters on the presidential campaign trail — and when one reasonably anticipates that those troubles will resurface if Clinton runs and gets elected — one can also reasonably anticipate that a Clinton White House will indeed be even less transparent than the Obama White House has turned out to be.
“But Hillary Clinton has been victimized by the press,” I hear you cry. Perhaps. Here’s my response: I don’t care. Shall we run down the list of the many, many, many Republicans who have gotten a bum rap from an ideologically driven press corps? Was George W. Bush treated well by them? Look, if you want to be the most powerful man or woman in the world, you are going to have to put up with some nonsense along the way. A hostile press corps may well be one such bit of nonsense, and if a hostile press corps is too off-putting to the likes of Hillary Clinton, then her dilemma is easily solved: Hillary Clinton shouldn’t run for president. There. Problem solved. No nonsense to put up with.
But it will not do for either Hillary Clinton — or for any other presidential candidate for that matter — to do what she very clearly wants to do: run for president without all the hassles of being transparent. Presidential candidates –especially heavily favored ones like Clinton – should not be allowed to have it both ways. Either she is going to have to learn how to play nice with the press, have to remain open with them – and with the American public as well. There can be no middle ground.
Yes, there are some matters that can be secret; even presidential candidates have personal lives and zones of privacy. But Clinton’s history of hostility with the press raises the legitimate concern that she will withhold information that the American public deserves to know simply to spite the media. And that kind of situation is intolerable.
If a disingenuous middle ground is sought by a future Clinton campaign — one in which Clinton is allowed to withhold vital information while pursuing (and perhaps coasting to) the presidency — then the American public should stand ready to reject her campaign, just as it did in 2008. We have had enough of faux-transparency from a White House that could have used the admiration of a fawning press corps to deliver real transparency to the American people. The last thing we need is a president with a history of enmity towards the press, which would end up being even more opaque than the Obama administration has been.