I have to thank the good people of Alfred A. Knopf for my biggest surprise chuckle in recent memory. I was walking into my local Barnes & Noble yesterday when something leaped out at me from the new non-fiction table. It was a handsome hardcover book whose title and author combo stopped me in my tracks: Giving, by Bill Clinton. After composing myself, I spent the next hour or so coming up with additional titles in what I envisioned as a series of books pitched by some guerilla ironist working under cover in the offices of Knopf: Acting, by Keanu Reeves; Davening, by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad; Bending, by George W. Bush; Abstaining, by Keith Richards; Hiding, by Oprah Winfrey; Swinging, by Al Gore . . . You get the idea. Coming up with them is almost too addicting. But the list of titles wouldn’t be complete without Believing, by Hillary Clinton. For it was yesterday that I also first heard of Senator Clinton’s unofficial appointment of Sandy Berger (Disclosing) as a campaign advisor. This tawdry development is evidence of the Senator’s immunity to conviction.

Berger, Bill Clinton’s national security advisor, was found guilty of stealing and destroying classified terror-related documents from the National archives. The case has never been treated with the seriousness it demands. Berger destroyed the documents specifically to keep them from the eyes of the 911/Commision – a body charged with reviewing all materials relevant to the September 11 attacks and making recommendations on the defense against such attacks in the future. The destroyed documents presumably painted the Clinton administration in an unflattering light. The most troubling aspect about the insouciance with which the Berger case was handled is that it never allowed for a proper inquest which may have told us something about Bill Clinton’s culpability or consent in the destruction of classified terror-related material. One assumes that Clinton and Berger at least spoke about what Berger was supposed to do when looking though the National Archives. I can’t imagine I’m alone in wanting to know more about the nature of such a conversation.

As I see it there are two arguable positions on the character of Hillary Clinton. The first: Yes, she’s a cynical, calculating, insincere politician but at the end of the day she understands the threats facing the U.S. and for all her anti-Iraq War pandering she’ll do what needs to be done when it comes to fighting the bad guys. The second: She’s a cynical, calculating, insincere politician who, in fact, doesn’t see the importance in anything other than an opinion poll or a valuable sound-byte, and if elected she will revert to the popularity politics that characterized her husband’s two terms. The more I’m exposed to Senator Clinton, the more firmly I find myself in the camp of those who argue the latter point. Involving Sandy Berger in her campaign is a sure indication that she’s not a serious person in the realms of foreign policy, national security, law and order, ethics, or much else.

Today I read Senator Clinton’s defense of Berger’s involvement in her run: “He has no official role in my campaign. He's been a friend for more than 30 years. But he doesn't have any official role.” Good luck figuring out the difference between “official” and “non-official” in Clintonese. I’m still stumped on “is” and “sexual relations.”

And frankly, it’s the friend for more than 30 years part that I find most distasteful. We all know that politics is a pragmatic game of compromise, and that people are assigned to “official roles” for all sorts of calculated reasons. But who would defend a friendship with someone who’s stuffed his pants with critical documents pertaining to national defense? This speaks to the old Clinton bugaboo: character. Senator Clinton, who’s recently accused General Petraeus of whitewashing the war in Iraq, has now embraced one of this country’s most dangerous whitewashers. And I suspect she’ll get away with it. There’s a sea of Americans with a selective gullibility on all matters Clinton. What’s worse is that the Clintons never fail to exploit it.