Let me tell you a fable …
Your young daughter has misbehaved. So you sit her down to talk about the incident, hoping to make it a learning experience. At first she flatly denies doing anything at all. When it is obvious that you aren’t buying that, she says that maybe she did but she didn’t realize it was wrong. Patiently you point out that there are clear family rules and that doing this breaks one of them. Grudgingly she promises not to do it again, but she also points out that other family members have done almost the same thing. Obviously she is less than contrite. You aren’t really getting anywhere and your annoyance shows. She sees that and, finally, says she is sorry.
This may be a familiar tale if you are a parent. Does this process satisfy you that you now have a well-behaved child who won’t easily and thoughtlessly break the rules again?
If you haven’t already picked up the point of this fable, the child represents our leading Democratic candidate for President in 2016, Hillary Clinton. How can she have played out the e-mail controversy in exactly this way? It seems at best imprudent and at worst childish. If not Hillary herself, surely someone in her entourage would have noticed that over the last six months. Or is it possible that she has no one around her who can provide adult guidance when it is needed?
This relatively minor circumstance speaks significantly to me when I try to visualize Hillary at the helm of our country, making crucial decisions almost daily. Perhaps the other candidates are equally flawed, but here we have a concrete example of her decision-making and the quality of her close confidants. It isn’t good.