In any race for a presidential nomination, a certain amount of mudslinging between candidates is to be expected. What's not to be expected, however, is mudslinging between a candidate and another candidate's spouse.
Former President Bill Clinton's participation in his wife's campaign has become significantly more apparent as the primaries have progressed. Instead of distancing himself, as would be appropriate, he has been an ever-growing presence.
He was notably present during the Nevada primary, making multiple media appearances in which he insinuated that his wife's biggest competitor, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), supported the Republican platform. His involvement extended even further in South Carolina, where he took over campaign duties while his wife was out of state, prompting Obama to say that he couldn't tell who he was running against.
The situation came to a head over the weekend, when the former president made a blatant, unprompted comparison between Obama's South Carolina win to Rev. Jesse Jackson's wins there in 1984 and 1988. The comment appeared to be an attempt at emphasizing Obama's race.
Clinton's aggressive presence in his wife's campaign has spurred intense criticism from many in the media, leading Time Magazine to refer to Clinton as "his wife's attack dog." In a recent appearance on the CBS show "Face the Nation," Sen. Clinton (D-N.Y.) was asked whether her husband was "out of control."
Bill Clinton's behavior is not only unbecoming of a former president; it is also hurting both Hillary Clinton's and Obama's campaigns - and damaging the Democratic race as a whole.
Primaries should be decided based on a healthy dialogue between the candidate sthat highlights their strengths and weaknesses - not based on a biased third party's interpretation of their records.
Bill Clinton's media presence in the Nevada primary - and the attacks on Obama he made during his appearances - were attributed by many as one of the reasons for Clinton's win in the state. In South Carolina, on the other hand, exit polls showed that about 60 percent of voters were influenced by Bill Clinton's presence in the race - but only 37 percent of those voters supported Clinton. Just as the former president helped his wife win in Nevada, he helped her lose in South Carolina.
He shouldn't be doing either - Bill Clinton is not the one running for president, after all. His role in the race should be to provide moral support for his campaigning wife.
Instead, the former president is inappropriately affecting the focus of the race in a way that is detrimental to the entire political process. Instead of focusing on the issues, Hillary Clinton now is forced to spend interviews apologizing for her husband.
The same goes for Obama: The media has wasted time and focus asking him how he feels about having to campaign against two Clintons instead of one, rather than pressing him to elaborate on his political plans.
The former president's presence is a distraction that prevents voters from focusing on the candidates and their positions. Hopefully, Saturday's misstep in South Carolina will teach him a much-needed lesson, and from this point forward, Bill Clinton will keep his mouth shut.
