Hillary and Rudy: The Coming Funfest
            

            Dear Walter,

            If you know so much about the New York Senate race, then please tell me who
is going to win.

            Speaking of playing dirty, don't misquote me. I wrote that Giuliani was a
"more complex and appealing guy" than your cartoonish description dictated. And
I only praised Giuliani's press strategy for instilling the kind of staff
loyalty that Al Gore so desperately needs; I duly noted that it's "overly
suspicious and vituperative."

            Walter, have you read and written so much about the Clinton-Giuliani matchup
that you've become inured to its potential drama? C'mon, it's so basic: male
vs. female, local politician vs. national figure, technocrat vs. idealist. Both
are trying to recast themselves dramatically: Hillary from her post as a
political spouse and amateur policy wonk, Rudy from his job as hands-on city
manager. Does the idea of a first lady winning elected office not intrigue you
at all? And even you admit to some interest in how Giuliani might possibly
re-fashion himself into a good party soldier.

            It sounds like you've already imagined this campaign down to the suits the
candidates will wear in their commercials. But no one really knows how these
two will perform, or how voters will receive them. They're both familiar
figures yet somewhat unknown quantities (Hillary as a candidate, Rudy as
anything but mayor). Sure, this suspense may evaporate with the first round of
stumping and baby-kissing--it could become Giuliani-Messinger redux, or
D'Amato-Schumer writ larger and uglier. But right now, it's all
anticipation.

            Does it trouble you that Hillary is running as a first lady? It troubles me
that so many pundits are so troubled by it. During the week after JFK Jr.'s
death I heard a slew of talk-show hosts praise "the Kennedy family, our
nation's premier political dynasty" in one breath, and condemn Hillary's
candidacy in the next, on the grounds that she is cynically leveraging her
husband's name and connections to get herself elected. How did the Kennedy kids
or the Bush boys win office? What about Mary Bono and Lurleen Wallace, wives
who stepped directly into their husbands' positions? If Hillary used White
House funds for travel or other campaign-related needs, then we'd have an
ethical lapse to discuss (and a lapse of common sense. Given her history of
financial scandal, she'd be a fool to do anything improper). Nepotism is unfair
by definition, but it's even less fair to level those charges selectively.

            Until tomorrow,
Jodi

            P.S.: On the death announcements: Maybe some families are indeed too
disconsolate to write meaningful prose. But plenty of eulogies contain good
copy. So I still don't see why death announcements can't honor the departed in
the same way.