"My Life"

I have been reading "My Life" (Bill Clinton’s book.) It is gigantic, but I don’t find it difficult reading. And I don’t usually stick with a book if it doesn’t hold my interest. I’m only about a third of the way through it, because I don’t spend a lot of time curled up with a book in summer. And since I’m going into a period where my business will be doing events for the next seven weekends in a row (whew!)…well, I probably won’t get to the end of the book until the end of the summer. 

Mr. Clinton's memoir is, so far, a book about a smart kid, from anything but an aristocratic background; who sought out and took advantage of opportunities available to him.  A kid who, from a very young age, wanted to be in politics.  When other kids were aspiring to be doctors, astronauts, scientists...Bill Clinton set his mind on the political path.  He got a great education, lived in Europe for two years, came back home and jumped into Arkansas politics.  And became governor of the state at the age of 31.  Can you imagine?

The book has taught me a lot of things I didn’t know about politics, and about the south—Arkansas, at least. I don’t know if the tradition continues to this day, but it seems that, back in the sixties, when Mr. Clinton got his start in the political arena, politics was a fact of everyday life for people in Arkansas. Political tradition ran back to the Civil War, and beyond. Even the tiniest backwoods hamlets in the Ozarks had regular political meetings in local diners, billiard halls, or feed stores. Politics was as important a part of life as religion. By contrast, in suburban Chicago, where I grew up in the sixties and seventies, the attitude toward politics was that Mayor Daley was doing a fine job running "the city that worked," (and arguably, the entire state of Illinois), and everyday citizens didn’t need to worry about it. At election time, you lined up, cast your vote for the incumbent, and then went about your business.

In rural Arkansas, being a candidate meant getting out to the farthest corners of your electorate, reaching out your hand, and personally asking people for their votes. Showing up at those little political meetings in the one-horse towns, and getting the tiny power-wielders of those districts to get their followers in line behind you. And when a voter told you that he "wouldn’t piss in your ear if your brain was on fire," you looked him in the eye and asked him why. Bill Clinton learned how to listen to the voters, and how to create a deep, far-reaching political organization, during a decade and a half of running for office in Arkansas. He put that knowledge to work to help propel him to the presidency in 1992.

He also learned about negative campaigning. I know this is something we all hate about politics today, and I won’t accuse either party of being the first to draw blood. Suffice it to say that Clinton learned that if your opponent was going to hit below the belt, the only response was to hit back…HARD. Democrats, like me, would like to think that our party is above that. But you CAN’T be. Not if you want to win the office. Clinton became convinced of that, early on. He never ran for an office he didn’t want to WIN. You can only be a force for change if you WIN the election. This is one way the book has changed my perspective on politics. I'm not for viciously slandering another candidate, or doing anything illegal in order to "dig up dirt" to throw. But I understand now that, though I would have it otherwise, negative campaigning is a fact of life in this country, and a game that BOTH parties have to play to win.  I only wish that they would stick to facts--exploiting a candidate's record or business associations.  It seems to me that you could dig up enough TRUE dirt in anyone's background, without having to resort to lies or name-calling. 

I’m probably showing my massive naivete by writing this. I haven’t spent a lot of my time studying, or being involved in, the political process. I’ll digest the rest of this book, and then perhaps I’ll try to find a book written from a more conservative perspective, to contrast and compare.  Not that it will cause me to switch parties...but I think it's healthy to at least attempt to get a balanced point of view. If anyone has any suggestions what my next read should be, let me know.