Hillary Clinton's new memoir "Hard Choices" is being savaged by critics for being overly cautious and, as a result, uninteresting.
1. 'Hard Choices' is a newsless snore," Politico's Mike Allen wrote in his Monday-morning newsletter. He went on to describe the book "written so carefully not to offend that it will fuel the notion that politics infuses every part of her life."
2. The New York Times' book-review section seemed to agree with Allen's assessment. "There is little news in the book," The Times' Michiko Kakutani wrote Sunday.
3. The New Republic's Isaac Chotiner didn't think Kakutani was hard enough on Clinton. In a piece criticizing The Times' review, Chotiner panned "Hard Choices" for its "dullness and lack of critical energy." Slate's John Dickerson called it "the low-salt, low-fat, low-calorie offering with vanilla pudding as the dessert. She goes on at great length, but not great depth."
The list goes on.
But it's not clear if pleasing reviewers was a priority for Clinton, who still claims to be undecided about a future run for president. Allen suggested this may have been a case where no publicity was bad publicity and Clinton may have mainly been concerned with getting a high volume of press for the collection of bland statements.
Perhaps Hillary has been so accustomed to having the media prop up whatever she says or does that she thinks her book will be hailed a smashing success and she can bask in glowing accolades that will help launch her presidential run in 2016.