Patrick O’Hannigan over at the American Spectator wonders about the recent fawning profile in the Washington Post on the “Gatekeepers of Hillaryland.” He comes to the conclusion that it isn’t a good sign:
Which brings us back to the question of why these staffers ever made it to page A01 in the first place. With some newspapers and some campaigns, this profile is the kind of thing that would fill the news hole on a slow day. But Hillary Clinton’s campaign is invariably described as a well-oiled and impressively disciplined machine, which means several people in it had to sign off on talking to the Washington Post before anyone would return a reporter’s phone call. Hillary and her crew wanted this story out there, and I suspect it’s because they wanted to scare Democratic rivals with the size and experience of their organization.
Another thing the story does, however, is prove that Bay Buchanan was right. In her recent book, The Extreme Makeover of Hillary (Rodham) Clinton, Ms. Buchanan describes the junior senator from New York as a bright and ruthlessly ambitious student handicapped by a lifelong lack of political vision, for which she compensates by seeking advice from as many trusted people as she can find. Buchanan backs that assertion by pointing to Hillary’s commencement address to the Wellesley College graduating class of 1969, and to the doomed health care reform campaign she spearheaded in 1993 and 1994. Both efforts foundered in part because Hillary indulged in her mania for consultation, missing (again) the distinction between management and leadership.
[. . .]
If the size of a celebrity’s entourage is inversely proportional to his or her sense of self-worth, then you can be sure that Hillary Clinton has no business even aspiring to a position where she controls missile launch codes and can nominate the next Justice of the Supreme Court.