Opinion
Keep Hillary far, far away
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Jack Craver:
- Ice ice baby, crimping my style (December 10, 2008)
- Prisons reveal Legislature's betrayal (December 3, 2008)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
With the press slathering over the likely appointment of Hillary Clinton to be Barack Obama’s secretary of state, it’s important to not only highlight the deficiencies of Clinton’s record but also to reflect on the eight years her ex-boyfriend (and current husband) spent at the helm of American foreign policy.
Bill Clinton, according to mainstream analysis, had a relatively successful presidency in the realm of foreign relations. His Middle East legacy was a stunning success compared to the travesty of the most recent eight years, but for those of you who have read something in the last decade besides Bill Kristol’s weekly column in The New York Times, that’s not exactly a compliment worthy of a plaque in the presidential trophy room.
Although
In
In the Balkans,
Perhaps the biggest foreign policy embarrassment of the
Ultimately,
Nevertheless, it’s unfortunate that Hillary Clinton is being considered the top candidate to represent that type of level-headed foreign policy in the Obama administration. All the hands Hillary has shaken, all the books she’s read, all the contacts she’s made — they’re all overshadowed by the egregious foreign policy decisions she made during her time in the U.S. Senate.
Her record in public office has at best been deferential to the neo-conservative agenda of “peace through barbarism.” First, she signed off on the authorization to use force against
In all fairness, Clinton was likely — no, definitely — tacking to the right on foreign policy for political reasons, hoping to position herself as a hawk when campaigning against whatever war-monger the GOP would put up in the general election. Remember, despite John McCain’s belief in an imaginary Iraq-Afghanistan border, the senator from Arizona was the only Republican candidate whose positions on international relations did not forecast World War III or, in the case of Mike Huckabee, the third Crusade. Therefore it may have been politically intuitive for Clinton, who at one point assumed victory in the primaries, to meet the GOP’s thirst for Arab blood half way.
However,
Jack Craver (craver@badgerherald.com) is a junior majoring in history.
13 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Herald Blogs
The Beat Goes On
Brother Ali makes an ‘Exclusive’ stop
Muckrakers
Report: Barrett to make decision by the end of the week
Extra Points
Top Classified Ads (view all)
HOUSES FOR Fall 2010. All houses are on W Dayton or N Bassett. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8 bedrooms. All have parking. madisoncampusrentals.com
521 W Dayton 4BR/2BA. Marble showers, dishwasher, completely updated! madisoncampusrentals.com
1, 2, or 3 bedroom apartment available for spring 2010. meltzer@wisc.edu if you are interested!
Hillary is a proven liar. She “dodged” sniper bullets in Bosnia.
Do the Americans want someone who is already discredited for such an important job? Is he going to dodge bullets again in some other country?
What a confusing argument! Are you comparing Hillary to Bill, Bill to Obama, or Hillary to Obama?
Obama will make the foreign policy decisions, not Hillary. She works for him. If the Secretary of State is as important as you suggest and individually accountable, then you should have at least pointed the finger at Warren Christopher and Madeleine Albright.
P.S. Why would you quote somebody on the word “machetes”?
I’d rather have Clinton dealing with the Russians or Iranians than wuss-meister Kerry, although Kerry does have that expeience of treating with the North Vietnamese while we were at war and he was supposed to be a USA armed foreces officer.
The article lacks focus. Cut out all the stuff about Bill and the neo-cons and focus more on what you want to write about Hillary.
the third Crusade. hahahahahahahaha.
Jack…a terrible article. How can you conflate Bill’s past with Hilary without ever explaining the connection?
“the Bush administration considers problems in Africa fundamentally unsexy if there are no WMDs to be fabricated.”
Untrue. Bush is actually hailed as a hero in much of Africa for his work on disease prevention. Say what you want about how he fucked up every other aspect of US poilcy, his Africa work is commendable and perhaps has done more to improve Africa than any President in US history
You can also add our involvement in Somalia in the early 90’s and its effect on the country today as one of Bill’s many foreign policy successes.
it’s easy to rip on someone’s foreign policy record when you don’t have one…cough, obama, cough.
Your hostility completely discredits any point you are attempting to make. This article is not very well written and your political immaturity is obvious.
I quoted her in the “” for sarcasm.
I am not pointing fingers at Madeline or anyone else because Hillary is up for the job and not them. We are discussing her after all.
To the one who says they would rather have Hillary deal with the Russians. Do you want to start WW3? How do you think she would deal with the Russians any better than Kerry? Would you support her in starting a war which this time would harm America as much as it would harm Russia and the entire world?
Think about what you’re are advocating.
love the use of “deliciously”; shout-out to Cory Booker
The only thing that is “pathetic” is this article.
Yeah, send Kerry to be a modern day Nevile Chamberlain with Putin, maybe he’ll bring back peace in our time.
Si vis pacem, para bellum