Posts Tagged ‘Hillary Clinton’

Hillary hoves into view again.

Monday, March 9th, 2015

Hillary Clinton is another radical lefty on the same pattern as Obama. She has been around longer and is better known so she may have less success even with the automatons at HuffPo. That piece is about six levels below the top at the reliably left wing blog. Even so, it may presage trouble.

The decision to address the issue comes amid mounting criticism of her use of a personal email account, which did not comply with State Department regulations issued in 2005 governing email used for official business. Reports in the New York Times and the Associated Press detailed how Clinton used a private server, housed in her suburban New York residence, to channel her emails, which are supposed to be maintained as part of a federal agency’s historic record.

Examples of some hacked e-mails from that server are here and are interesting.

That’s pretty tame and the HuffPo attention right now is on a letter sent by Republican Senators warning Iran that an agreement that is not ratified by the Senate is not a treaty and can be reversed by the next president.

Their action is a brazen, breathtaking attempt to sabotage U.S. foreign policy and stampede America into another war in the Middle East.

While U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is trying to negotiate the most critical elements of a deal to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons and avoid war, the Republicans are actively trying to undermine his efforts to get a deal.

Can you imagine the reaction if members of Congress had sent a similar letter to the Soviets urging them not to sign an arms control agreement because the United States would not keep our end of the bargain?

The heavy breathing does not include mention of numerous actions by Democrats to subvert actions by Republican Presidents.

(more…)

A pretty good profile of Bill Clinton

Monday, June 2nd, 2008

Bill Clinton has been a mixed blessing for his wife’s campaign this year. He draws crowds of Democrats and he is without doubt a brilliant man, but he has been clumsy and, as the author of this Vanity Fair piece says, “he is the bride at every wedding he attends and the corpse at every funeral.” Vanity Fair has declined as a useful publication since the editors got a terminal case of BDS but they are still the best at gossip. Read and enjoy.

Hillary, Bosnia and Iraq

Monday, March 31st, 2008

Christopher Hitchens has some strong feelings about Hillary’s laughable Tuzla story. He doesn’t think it is funny, however, and says why. What is forgotten in the Democrat’s rush to abandon Iraq is how we get into these things in the first place. Saddam invaded Kuwait, imitating the Japanese who united the USA in 1941 by attacking Pearl Harbor. Had they nibbled away at Malaya and the Dutch East Indies, which is what they really wanted, they might very well have gotten away with it as we focused on Europe. What is different today is the influence of television.

We went into Somalia because CNN was showing thousands of starving Somalis and got out when Clinton’s attempt at nation-building caused casualties.  Why did we go into the Balkans ? CNN was showing the massacre of Bosnian civilians by Serbs. We had no strategic interest in Somalia or Bosnia. In fact, the first Bush administration made the decision to stay out of the war, a decision criticized by Bill Clinton during the 1992 campaign. After he was elected, he dipped a toe in the water a couple of times and finally decided to bomb Serbia from high altitude to avoid casualties. The Serbs eventually got out but the example set by Clinton probably encouraged Saddam in his ambitions toward Kuwait.

What would happen if Obama were to be elected and a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq resulted ?

Zbigniew Brzezinski thinks he knows:

Contrary to Republican claims that our departure will mean calamity, a sensibly conducted disengagement will actually make Iraq more stable over the long term. The impasse in Shiite-Sunni relations is in large part the sour byproduct of the destructive U.S. occupation, which breeds Iraqi dependency even as it shatters Iraqi society. In this context, so highly reminiscent of the British colonial era, the longer we stay in Iraq, the less incentive various contending groups will have to compromise and the more reason simply to sit back. A serious dialogue with the Iraqi leaders about the forthcoming U.S. disengagement would shake them out of their stupor.

So, a pain-free withdrawal happens. Fine. What if he is wrong and genocide results ?

Kevin Drum is not concerned:

there’s no point in denying that U.S. withdrawal might lead to increased bloodshed in the short term. It most likely will. But it’s highly unlikely to lead to a catastrophic regional meltdown of the kind that the chaos hawks peddle on cable TV. What’s more, Brzezinski is also right that the risk of increased violence is inescapable at this point and, in fact, probably grows the longer we stay in Iraq. The events in Basra over the past week ought to make that clear.

What neither of them address is what happens when the TV networks show massive genocide of Sunnis followed by a Sunni intervention by the Saudis to avoid an Iranian takeover ?

They don’t say.

Obama in a clumsy interview says he would have a “strike force” ready to do whatever…. That sounds like “Blackhawk Down” all over again. If I were an Army ranger who had been yanked out of Iraq just as we were on the verge of winning, what do you think my attitude would be about being ordered back ?

Especially by a wimp like Obama ?