Clinton’s Silence Grows Deafening

Hillary Clinton has been an official candidate for president for nearly a month now, and she has yet to grant the media a single interview. Surrounded by serious questions regarding her use of private email at the State Department and foreign donations to her charity, she refuses to step up and answer them in a formal manner. The question is how long the liberal media is going to give her silence a pass.

The New York Times has already begun to get restless. Unable to pin Clinton down for an interview, they have begun asking open questions in their columns, hoping for a Clinton response. That’s fine as far as it goes – it at least draws attention to her unusual secrecy – but it really doesn’t serve as an acceptable substitute for a real interview. How long does Clinton think she can avoid the questions on the minds of the voters?

If recent national polls are anything to go by, she may be justified in holding her tongue. Her numbers have only improved since a book – Clinton Cash – leaked, exposing the country to a new scandal about donations to the Clinton Foundation. Democratic voters seem to be circling the wagons in support of their girl, more interested in electing the first female president than in determining if their candidate is actually worth voting for. Clinton, perhaps having learned a lesson or two from Barack Obama’s intentionally vague 2008 campaign, might be doing herself a favor by refusing questions.

But that strategy can only sustain itself for so long. Eventually, she will have to face the music. Waiting until the din dies down is a double-edged sword. By procrastinating, she risks making the scandals headline news again just as they’ve dropped off the front page. And if more revelations come out before she addresses them, she will look as though she only sat down for an interview when she had no other options available. That’s hardly the calling card of a leader.

Of course, it could be the prospect of further revelations keeping her away from the interview chair. By staying silent, she doesn’t risk saying something that is later exposed as a lie. The other alternative – forthright, brutal honesty – might be preferred, but that’s not an option if she really has something to hide. She can’t very well admit to using her position as secretary of state to make herself rich without throwing her presidential campaign in the trash. She’s in a tough spot, but it appears to be one of her own making.

One thing is certain: the longer she waits, the better her answers are going to have to be. Vague condemnations of the right-wing aren’t going to get it. She needs to address the substance of the accusations against her, not the people making them. Then again, if liberals are so desperate for a woman president that they are willing to forgive anything, it might not matter.

Comments are closed.