Of all the charges made against Clinton surely none is so fatuous as the claim that she is "calculating." This pejorative cliche is continually popping up here in diaries and postings about her. It is also a staple of press reports trawling for negative comments about her. Do those using this expression know what they are saying, do they understand that they are betraying a deep lack of understanding of not only how the political process but indeed how life works. It's usage here among the anti Hillary crowd has become so pervasive it perhaps worth a few moments to consider why far from being a disqualification it's an essential requirement for the pursuit of the presidency: who invented it's pejorative and seemingly unique use against Clinton since Edwards or Giuliani never seem to get castigated for being "calculating": and finally who stand to benefit if the democrats nominate a less calculating candidate than the Republicans.
For isn't the truth that we are all calculating to a greater or lesser degree. The law student who hopes to land a $150,000 job as a first year associate at a top law firm. The office worker in his cubicle who is figuring out how he can get the managers job. The baseball manager planning his hiring schedule. Calculation, guileful reasoning is another way of describing it, is as natural as breathing. And in few walks of life is calculation more essential to survival and success than in politics. All the most successful rulers in history have been master calculators whether they were men or women. From Elizabeth 1 to FDR guile and calculation have been key elements in their success. US politics is not softball. It is an immensely brutal process something of which all too many posters here seem totally oblivious. It's acknowledged master in 2007 is Bill Clinton a deeply devious and calculating politician. The charge against Hillary seems to be that when it comes to calculation she is Bill on steroids. Do the anti Clintons really believe that multi millionaire trial lawyer John Edwards is not calculating. Not really. What they don't like is that she's better at it than him. Incidentally I've seen the same charge made against Schumer and Rahm Emmanuel. It's usually twinned with slime, sleaze, disgusting and similar nouns/adjectives. This seems to me completely backwards when we should be rejoicing that we have the best team. Would you rather own the Socks or the Orioles. What the Clinton haters are missing either deliberately or because of a deep naivete is that politics is a very nasty fight about power in which no holds are barred.
Now as to the genesis of this pejorative and its unique application to Clinton. It is of course out of the question that Obama, Giuliani, and all her other male competitors are in the least calculating. It must be a woman thing. It doesn't seem likely the tag was invented by democrats to describe one of their most succesful representatives. The press, could be they like hanging labels on people. Or the most likely culprits the Republicans and their shills in the press who want to pigeonhole their most formidable opponent in a negative way. I have to recognise that they have been somewhat succesful because even her opponents on the left are picking up this Republican meme. Impossible these folks would say we'd never be taken in by something as obvious as that. I'm afraid they are underestimating the ability of the Republican noise machine to frame discourse in this country. In 2004 there was a perfect demonstration of this capability when they turned the draft dodging malingerer Bush into a wronged war hero and the real hero Kerry with five years of service, wounds and a chest full of medals into a lying coward. Don't underestimate its power because it's more than capable of persuading strongly partisan Obama and Edwards supporters into unwitting propagators of its rather silly myths that are ultimately damaging to the democratic cause.
Finally, we need to ask ourselves who benefits if we field a less calculating candidate than say Giuliani. Who benefits if we put in our second team. Why are Rove and so many others so anxious to dupe Democrats into a less guileful and yes less "calculating" contender than Clinton. They love us to nominate hapless dupes like Mondale and Dukakis or to put it more kindly less calculating politicians than they do. That way there is far less risk that someone like Clinton will clearly demonstrate what a nasty, thuggish, bombastic little man Giuliani really is. Send us Mondale they say or one of his 2007 clones. Someone we can parody because of trivial bs about haircuts or as St Obama. Winning elections, particularly presidential elections, involves being one of the most calculating, devious and guileful hardasses in the books. This a simple truth that seems to elude far too many posters here. Hillary fits the job description to a T. And I glory in it as should any democrat with an ounce of commonsense.
Calculation is good! Particularly when it's employed in the interests of the Democratic party.