Obama Camp: Clinton Foreign Policy A Dramatized Assertion, Clinton Calls His Iraq Plan "Just Words"

The Obama campaign has released an exhaustive memo on Hillary Clinton's foreign policy experience. They argue that Sen. Clinton's claim that she has passed a Commander-in-Chief threshold is "mere assertion, dramatized in a scary television commercial." They also detail each of the foreign policy situations -- Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Kosovo, Rwanda and China -- that Sen. Clinton has mentioned during the campaign.

Meanwhile, Sen. Clinton has sought to preempt a scheduled environment speech for Obama today. Co-opting his phrase, she calls both his environmental policy and his promise to withdraw from Iraq "just words."

Read Obama's memo (Clinton statement below):

To: Interested Parties From: Greg Craig, former director, Policy Planning Office, U.S. State Department RE: Senator Clinton's claim to be experienced in foreign policy: Just words? DA: March 11, 2008

When your entire campaign is based upon a claim of experience, it is important that you have evidence to support that claim. Hillary Clinton's argument that she has passed "the Commander- in-Chief test" is simply not supported by her record.

There is no doubt that Hillary Clinton played an important domestic policy role when she was First Lady. It is well known, for example, that she led the failed effort to pass universal health insurance. There is no reason to believe, however, that she was a key player in foreign policy at any time during the Clinton Administration. She did not sit in on National Security Council meetings. She did not have a security clearance. She did not attend meetings in the Situation Room. She did not manage any part of the national security bureaucracy, nor did she have her own national security staff. She did not do any heavy-lifting with foreign governments, whether they were friendly or not. She never managed a foreign policy crisis, and there is no evidence to suggest that she participated in the decision-making that occurred in connection with any such crisis. As far as the record shows, Senator Clinton never answered the phone either to make a decision on any pressing national security issue - not at 3 AM or at any other time of day.

When asked to describe her experience, Senator Clinton has cited a handful of international incidents where she says she played a central role. But any fair-minded and objective judge of these claims - i.e., by someone not affiliated with the Clinton campaign - would conclude that Senator Clinton's claims of foreign policy experience are exaggerated.

Northern Ireland:

Senator Clinton has said, "I helped to bring peace to Northern Ireland." It is a gross overstatement of the facts for her to claim even partial credit for bringing peace to Northern Ireland. She did travel to Northern Ireland, it is true. First Ladies often travel to places that are a focus of U.S. foreign policy. But at no time did she play any role in the critical negotiations that ultimately produced the peace. As the Associated Press recently reported, "[S]he was not directly involved in negotiating the Good Friday peace accord." With regard to her main claim that she helped bring women together, she did participate in a meeting with women, but, according to those who know best, she did not play a pivotal role. The person in charge of the negotiations, former Senator George Mitchell, said that "[The First Lady] was one of many people who participated in encouraging women to get involved, not the only one."

Story continues below

News of Senator Clinton's claims has raised eyebrows across the ocean. Her reference to an important meeting at the Belfast town hall was debunked. Her only appearance at the Belfast City Hall was to see Christmas lights turned on. She also attended a 50-minute meeting which, according to the Belfast Daily Telegraph's report at the time, "[was] a little bit stilted, a little prepared at times." Brian Feeney, an Irish author and former politician, sums it up: "The road to peace was carefully documented, and she wasn't on it."

Bosnia:

Senator Clinton has pointed to a March 1996 trip to Bosnia as proof that her foreign travel involved a life-risking mission into a war zone. She has described dodging sniper fire. While she did travel to Bosnia in March 1996, the visit was not a high-stakes mission to a war zone. On March 26, 1996, the New York Times reported that "Hillary Rodham Clinton charmed American troops at a U.S.O. show here, but it didn't hurt that the singer Sheryl Crow and the comedian Sinbad were also on the stage."

Kosovo:

Senator Clinton has said, "I negotiated open borders to let fleeing refugees into safety from Kosovo." It is true that, as First Lady, she traveled to Macedonia and visited a Kosovar refugee camp. It is also true that she met with government officials while she was there. First Ladies frequently meet with government officials. Her claim to have "negotiated open borders to let fleeing refugees into safety from Kosovo," however, is not true. Her trip to Macedonia took place on May 14, 1999. The borders were opened the day before, on May 13, 1999.

The negotiations that led to the opening of the borders were accomplished by the people who ordinarily conduct negotiations with foreign governments - U.S. diplomats. President Clinton's top envoy to the Balkans, former Ambassador Robert Gelbard, said, "I cannot recall any involvement by Senator Clinton in this issue." Ivo Daalder worked on the Clinton Administration's National Security Council and wrote a definitive history of the Kosovo conflict. He recalls that "she had absolutely no role in the dirty work of negotiations."

Rwanda:

Last year, former President Clinton asserted that his wife pressed him to intervene with U.S. troops to stop the Rwandan genocide. When asked about this assertion, Hillary Clinton said it was true. There is no evidence, however, to suggest that this ever happened. Even those individuals who were advocating a much more robust U.S. effort to stop the genocide did not argue for the use of U.S. troops. No one recalls hearing that Hillary Clinton had any interest in this course of action. Based on a fair and thorough review of National Security Council deliberations during those tragic months, there is no evidence to suggest that U.S. military intervention was ever discussed. Prudence Bushnell, the Assistant Secretary of State with responsibility for Africa, has recalled that there was no consideration of U.S. military intervention.

At no time prior to her campaign for the presidency did Senator Clinton ever make the claim that she supported intervening militarily to stop the Rwandan genocide. It is noteworthy that she failed to mention this anecdote - urging President Clinton to intervene militarily in Rwanda - in her memoirs. President Clinton makes no mention of such a conversation with his wife in his memoirs. And Madeline Albright, who was Ambassador to the United Nations at the time, makes no mention of any such event in her memoirs.

Hillary Clinton did visit Rwanda in March 1998 and, during that visit, her husband apologized for America's failure to do more to prevent the genocide.

China

Senator Clinton also points to a speech that she delivered in Beijing in 1995 as proof of her ability to answer a 3 AM crisis phone call. It is strange that Senator Clinton would base her own foreign policy experience on a speech that she gave over a decade ago, since she so frequently belittles Barack Obama's speeches opposing the Iraq War six years ago. Let there be no doubt: she gave a good speech in Beijing, and she stood up for women's rights. But Senator Obama's opposition to the War in Iraq in 2002 is relevant to the question of whether he, as Commander-in-Chief, will make wise judgments about the use of military force. Senator Clinton's speech in Beijing is not.

Senator Obama's speech opposing the war in Iraq shows independence and courage as well as good judgment. In the speech that Senator Clinton says does not qualify him to be Commander in Chief, Obama criticized what he called "a rash war . . . a war based not on reason, but on passion, not on principle, but on politics." In that speech, he said prophetically: "[E]ven a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences." He predicted that a U.S. invasion of Iraq would "fan the flames of the Middle East," and "strengthen the recruitment arm of al Qaeda." He urged the United States first to "finish the fight with Bin Laden and al Qaeda."

If the U.S. government had followed Barack Obama's advice in 2002, we would have avoided one of the greatest foreign policy catastrophes in our nation's history. Some of the most "experienced" men in national security affairs - Vice President Cheney and Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others - led this nation into that catastrophe. That lesson should teach us something about the value of judgment over experience. Longevity in Washington, D.C. does not guarantee either wisdom of judgment.

Conclusion:

The Clinton campaign's argument is nothing more than mere assertion, dramatized in a scary television commercial with a telephone ringing in the middle of the night. There is no support for or substance in the claim that Senator Clinton has passed "the Commander-in-Chief test." That claim - as the TV ad - consists of nothing more than making the assertion, repeating it frequently to the voters and hoping that they will believe it.

On the most critical foreign policy judgment of our generation - the War in Iraq - Senator Clinton voted in support of a resolution entitled "The Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of U.S. Military Force Against Iraq." As she cast that vote, she said: "This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make -- any vote that may lead to war should be hard -- but I cast it with conviction." In this campaign, Senator Clinton has argued - remarkably - that she wasn't actually voting for war, she was voting for diplomacy. That claim is no more credible than her other claims of foreign policy experience. The real tragedy is that we are still living with the terrible consequences of her misjudgment. The Bush Administration continues to cite that resolution as its authorization - like a blank check - to fight on with no end in sight.

Barack Obama has a very simple case. On the most important commander in chief test of our generation, he got it right, and Senator Clinton got it wrong. In truth, Senator Obama has much more foreign policy experience than either Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan had when they were elected. Senator Obama has worked to confront 21st century challenges like proliferation and genocide on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He possesses the personal attributes of a great leader - an even temperament, an open-minded approach to even the most challenging problems, a willingness to listen to all views, clarity of vision, the ability to inspire, conviction and courage.

And Barack Obama does not use false charges and exaggerated claims to play politics with national security.

After seven years of an energy policy written by and for the oil companies - with help from Dick Cheney - oil has now reached $107 a barrel - and gas prices in some areas are approaching $4 a gallon.

I understand Senator Obama is talking about energy today, right here in Pennsylvania. And that's great. But talking about problems is easy. Solving problems is hard. And speeches are no substitute for solutions. Speeches won't lower gas prices, stop climate change, or lessen our dependence on oil from Saudi Arabia.

The true test comes when it's time to match rhetoric with results. And unfortunately, we've seen that Senator Obama's promises and speeches are often just words.

On the campaign trail, Senator Obama talks about clean energy. But in the Senate, he voted for Dick Cheney's energy bill loaded with new tax breaks for oil companies. When he faced a tough choice, his support for a clean energy future turned out to be just words.

It's like how he talks about fixing NAFTA. But his top economic adviser assured the Canadian government that he wouldn't really follow through. His position? Just words.

Senator Obama promises to withdraw from Iraq within 16 months. But his top foreign policy adviser said he's not really going to rely on that plan. I guess that plan is just words, too.

We need a president who will solve problems. Who will fight for our families long after the speeches are over and the cameras are gone. That's the choice in this campaign: Solutions you can rely on - versus words you can't.

Comments

[jstock]

The Clinton Camp practically invented words we can't trust. Hillary and McCain lack the judgement and temperment to be good presidents. Both Clintons are concerned about one thing: The Clintons. Bill was terrible for our party, but Hillary would be even worse. And at a time when our country NEEDS more and better Democrats.

[KQuark]

The Clinton campaign's response was even more hollow and is just trying to divert us to the fact that she has minimal CORRECT foreign policy cred.

Obama has a comprehensive energy policy, you just need to go to his website to read it. The energy bill was a mixed bag of compromises but it was still a step forward.

http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/energy-bill-47121901

"Who Likes It:

* The Alliance to Save Energy called it "the most significant energy-efficiency legislation in three decades."

* The Union of Concerned Scientists, whose Brendan Bell told USA Today: "If you drive a car or if you use a toaster or heat your home, this bill is going to save you money."

* The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, which projects that the bill will reduce energy use by 7% and carbon dioxide emissions by 9% by 2030, while saving consumers $400 billion.

Who Hates It:

* Friends of Earth, whose president Brent Blackwelder said of the omnibus spending bill, "This isn't a new direction that will help fight global warming-it's a continuation of the failed energy policies of the past."

* The Grocery Manufacturers Association's Scott Faber, who told the Los Angeles Times that the boost in ethanol production "won't give us cheaper gas, but it will give us costlier meat, milk and eggs."

I now environmentalist like to slam nuclear energy but it is a much cleaner energy source in the long run than burning coal and oil. France get's 80% of it's electricity from nuclear power.

It was the McClinton campaign that told Canada to take the rhetoric about NAFTA "with a grain of salt". She has said that NAFTA has been good for America when she was in the Senate, but has changed her position during the campaign as another cynical political calculation. Truth be told I have always said both Obama and Clitnon are hedging on NAFTA, neither one of them will cancel it.

[whichchange]

Why post the full memo from Obama and yet only post a snippet of the response from Clinton? Here is the full Clinton response



Obama Campaign Attacks: Just Words

3/11/2008 12:35:49 PM

To: Interested Parties
From: The Clinton Campaign
RE: Obama Campaign Attacks: Just Words

Over the last few weeks, Sen. Obama has successfully undermined his credibility with a series of statements to reporters and voters that have been contradicted by the facts. Unfortunately, he’s doing it again today by having his campaign issue a fundamentally misleading attack aimed at glossing over the doubts Americans have about his readiness to be Commander-in-Chief. Once again, Senator Obama is proving the point that his campaign is about “just words.”

Despite making hard end-dates a centerpiece of his campaign, Senator Obama’s top foreign policy adviser said those plans are not anything he’ll rely on as president. Despite repeated denials and five different parsed statements by his campaign that have been called misleading by media reports, his top economic adviser did in fact dismiss Senator Obama’s NAFTA criticism to the Canadian government as just political rhetoric.

And now today, Senator Obama is at it again, sending a false attack memo from his campaign making claims that are contradicted by the facts. Still reeling from its losses in Ohio and Texas, the Obama campaign has come out swinging, taking aim at Senator Clinton's considerable foreign policy experience with false claims and baseless attacks. After last week’s defeats, the Obama campaign faced a choice: try to convince voters that Senator Obama is ready to take the 3am phone call in a positive way or try to tear down Senator Clinton's accomplishments.

Considering that his foreign policy advisor, Susan Rice, cited Senator Obama’s "legislation on ethics reform" when asked this morning about his foreign policy experience, it is clear that the Obama campaign is unable to make a positive case for its candidate’s experience. They have chosen to attack and today’s memo continues the pattern of statements contradicted by the facts. Given the credibility gap his campaign has developed over the last few weeks, these latest attacks today should not be believed.

There is a reason that thirty former Generals and Admirals have endorsed Senator Clinton -- they know she is prepared to lead this nation as Commander in Chief with strength and experience on day one. Here are the facts about Hillary’s experience.

Northern Ireland

The Obama campaign claims George Mitchell, the person in charge of the Good Friday acccords negotiation, supports their view that Hillary's claims about Northern Ireland are exaggerated. John Hume, who won the Nobel Prize for Peace for his work on Northern Ireland:

I can state from firsthand experience that she played a positive role for over a decade in helping to bring peace to Northern Ireland… Anyone criticizing her foreign policy involvement should look at her very active and positive approach to Northern Ireland and speak with the people of Northern Ireland who have the highest regard for her and are very grateful for her very active support for our peace process.

George Mitchell, who is cited in the Obama memo as an authoritative source, told Katie Couric last night that Hillary played "a helpful and supportive role" in Northern Ireland that ended up making "a difference in the process." He described what Hillary has said about her role as "accurate."

More on Hillary's work in Northern Ireland HERE.

Kosovo

Concerning Kosovo, the Obama memo – citing their own advisors and supporters -- falsely claims that Hillary played no role in the larger effort to open the border to more refugees. Richard Holbrooke, the architect of the Dayton Accords, lays out the facts:

It was dire in May 1999 when Hillary Clinton arrived in Macedonia. The government of Macedonia had slowed the flow of refugees from Kosovo to a trickle. After visiting refugees and gaining a first-hand assessment of the situation, the First Lady had intense talks with President Gligorov and Prime Minister Georgievski. In these talks, one in the Presidential Palace, another in the residence of the American Ambassador, Christopher Hill, Mrs. Clinton pressed the Macedonian government to fully open the border so that Kosovar Albanian refugees could flee the war zone to safety. She also committed herself to work with the government and people of Macedonia who also faced an emergency because of the threat to their own safety and stability. Hillary Clinton promised to take action to help the Macedonian economy. Returning to Washington, she pressed hard in the administration for action to support the Macedonians. She even contacted American business executives to ensure that American textile contracts in Macedonia were not canceled. There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of those people I worked with in the Balkans at the time – that her intense efforts resulted in easing a crisis of significant dimensions and contributed to saving many lives.

Hillary’s trip to Kosovo in May 1999 took place during the air war over Kosovo. Despite concerns about security, she traveled to the international border on the edge of the war zone, and visited with refugees. More, including more testimonials, HERE.

Bosnia

The Obama campaign has resorted to mocking Hillary's trip to Bosnia in 1996, belittling it as a U.S.O. tour and saying there was no danger. But Hillary toured the frontlines of the international peacekeeping mission. CNN reported:

At a second outpost, Camp Bedrock, Mrs. Clinton visited a M.A.S.H. unit, the only full-service U.S. Army hospital in Bosnia. The three-hour tour of the frontlines of the international peacekeeping mission were filled with the gritty reality of a military operation, a far cry from traditional first lady photo opportunities, and Mrs. Clinton seemed more than comfortable with that. [CNN, 3/25/99]

A day later, the Charleston Gazette reported that "Protected by sharpshooters, Hillary Rodham Clinton swooped into a military zone by Black Hawk helicopter Monday…This trip to Bosnia marks the first time since Roosevelt that a first lady has voyaged to a potential combat zone…"

China

The Obama campaign diminishes Hillary's historic speech in Bejing as meaningless. But her speech at the conference – where she famously declared "women's rights are human rights" spurred real action. The AP reported:

Brazil has promised free cancer-screening exams for women. The United States is spending $ 1.6 billion to try to end domestic violence. South African President Nelson Mandela is setting up a unit in his office to monitor the status of women. A year after 189 states pledged to make equality of the sexes a reality in the 21st century, many governments are crediting the conference for their latest steps to help women. 'The momentum is on - and this momentum is not only by women but even by governments and by men,' said Gertrude Mongella, secretary-general of the Fourth World Conference on Women that adopted a 150-page plan to achieve women's equality. Inspired by last September's U.N. conference in Beijing, five Mongolian women ran for parliament in June and won, bringing the total number of female legislators to seven out of 76. Women's groups in Zaire joined forces to try to change laws that bar women from traveling or opening bank accounts without their husbands' permission. [AP, 8/25/96]


Rwanda

On Rwanda, the Obama campaign is eager to diminish Hillary's advocacy. Hillary visited Rwanda in 1998 and made forceful public statements about the administration's failings. This is how she described the trip and the administration's followup in her book, Living History:

Expressing great regret for genocide in Rwanda and our legacy of slavery sent a message of concern and respect to Africans who confront the intertwined challenges of poverty, disease, repression, starvation, illiteracy and war. But Africa needs more than words; it needs investment and trade if its economics are ever going to develop. That requires both significant changes in most governments and a partnership with the United States. That's why the African Growth and Opportunity At, which Bill proposed and Congress passed, is so critical. It creates incentives for American companies to do business in Africa." [Living History, pg. 457]

The Obama campaign spends considerable time trying to "prove" that a private conversation between Hillary and President Clinton never happened.

[riverhouse]

What's interesting is the author of this memo disqualifying Hillary from her grandly claimed foreign policy experience, is Greg Craig, a friend of the Clintons since Yale and Bill's attorney when he was being impeached for perjury and sued for sexual harassment. Craig is a long time loyalist to the Clintons. For him to feel the need to so firmly dispute Hillary's claims as fraudulent says quite a lot.

[awb]

There cannot be a mail vote in Florida for a nominating contest: see state statute below
(causcus anyone?)


Florida Election Law on Mail Ballot Elections101.6102 Mail ballot elections; limitations.–

(1)(a) An election may be conducted by mail ballot if:

1. The election is a referendum election at which all or a portion of the qualified electors of one of the following subdivisions of government are the only electors eligible to vote:

a. Counties;

b. Cities;

c. School districts covering no more than one county; or

d. Special districts;

2. The governing body responsible for calling the election and the supervisor of elections responsible for the conduct of the election authorize the use of mail ballots for the election; and

3. The Secretary of State approves a written plan for the conduct of the election, which shall include a written timetable for the conduct of the election, submitted by the supervisor of elections.

(b) In addition, an annexation referendum which includes only qualified electors of one county may also be voted on by mail ballot election.

(2) The following elections may not be conducted by mail ballot:

(a) An election at which any candidate is nominated, elected, retained, or recalled; or

(b) An election held on the same date as another election, other than a mail ballot election, in which the qualified electors of that political subdivision are eligible to cast ballots.

(3) The supervisor of elections shall be responsible for the conduct of any election held under ss. 101.6101-101.6107.

(4) The costs of a mail ballot election shall be borne by the jurisdiction initiating the calling of the election, unless otherwise provided by law.

(5) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the use of a mail ballot election in a municipal annexation referendum requiring separate vote of the registered electors of the annexing municipality and of the area proposed to be annexed. If a mail ballot election is authorized for a municipal annexation referendum, the provisions of ss. 101.6101-101.6107 shall control over any conflicting provisions of s. 171.0413.

[ivana]

change that typo to "debatable" ;-)

[AKJM]

They are discussing personalities not issues. Neither looks ready to trust with the Presidency.

[whichchange]

The Facts: Hillary and Kosovo

3/8/2008 4:15:28 PM

Hillary has done the work of real diplomacy, visiting the front lines, meeting with world leaders, and working behind the scenes to make change.

In the midst of the air war over Kosovo, Hillary Clinton arrived in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia on May 14, 1999. Despite concerns about security, she traveled to the international border on the edge of the war zone, and visited with refugees. She met separately with Prime Minister Georgievski and President Gligorov, accompanied by U.S. Ambassador to Macedonia Christopher Hill, to emphasize America’s support for the stability and security of Macedonia. She discussed refugee policy in these meetings. Before she arrived the Macedonian government had an inconsistent policy that frequently severely restricted the flow of refugees. Indeed in the days leading up to her visit, the flow of refugees had slowed greatly. Hillary pressed these leaders to embrace a border policy that would open the way to allow many more Kosovar Albanians to escape the war zone. After talks between Hillary Clinton and the Macedonian leadership, which included the announcement of two million dollars in aid, the government opened the borders much wider, thereby saving many, many lives.

As a Senator, Hillary Clinton championed prompt recognition of Kosovo’s independence in the context of full protection of minority rights, especially for the Serbs. She has supported the full integration of the Western Balkans into Europe and the transatlantic community.

Testimonials:

Statement of Richard Holbrooke, architect of the Dayton Accords, and former permanent representative to the United Nations.

“It was dire in May 1999 when Hillary Clinton arrived in Macedonia. The government of Macedonia had slowed the flow of refugees from Kosovo to a trickle. After visiting refugees and gaining a first-hand assessment of the situation, the First Lady had intense talks with President Gligorov and Prime Minister Georgievski. In these talks, one in the Presidential Palace, another in the residence of the American Ambassador, Christopher Hill, Mrs. Clinton pressed the Macedonian government to fully open the border so that Kosovar Albanian refugees could flee the war zone to safety. She also committed herself to work with the government and people of Macedonia who also faced an emergency because of the threat to their own safety and stability. Hillary Clinton promised to take action to help the Macedonian economy. Returning to Washington, she pressed hard in the administration for action to support the Macedonians. She even contacted American business executives to ensure that American textile contracts in Macedonia were not canceled. There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of those people I worked with in the Balkans at the time – that her intense efforts resulted in easing a crisis of significant dimensions and contributed to saving many lives.”

Statement of Susan Braden, Director of Central and Eastern Europe, National Security Council, during Clinton Administration

“I was the Director of Central and Eastern Europe at the National Security Council, with responsibility for the states on the front-line of the conflict with Serbia, including Macedonia. The First Lady traveled to the region to bolster these fragile states at a precarious time. In May 1999, working with the Macedonians, we arranged meetings for Hillary with the Macedonian leadership for the purpose of demonstrating support and, in light of the growing refugee crisis, to persuade the government to allow in more Kosovar Albanian refugees. Hillary successfully pressed the Macedonian government to allow in many more refugees. This trip was enormously important in resolving this immediate crisis. It also reassured the Macedonian government, and other states in the region affected by this crisis, that America would support them.”

Statement from Melanne Verveer, Former Chief of Staff to First Lady Hillary Clinton

“As her chief of staff, I traveled with Hillary to Macedonia and sat in on her meetings with the Macedonian leadership. The situation in Macedonia was fragile. There had been demonstrations against the U.S. Embassy, the Macedonian economy was faltering, and there were growing rifts in the Macedonian population over the conflict. In Macedonia, Hillary met with the President and Prime Minister, pushing them on the need to allow Kosovo refugees to flee to safety inside Macedonia. As a result of these talks, they changed their policies, and allowed in thousands of refugees. She spoke to the Macedonian people at the same time and told them that the United States stood with them, that we were grateful for their sacrifices, and she brought with her economic assistance to help Macedonia through this difficult period. Hillary’s diplomatic efforts averted a major refugee crisis and, at the same time, produced benefits for the people of Macedonia.”

News Reports:

Hillary met with the Macedonian President and Prime Minister offering an economic development package. (Hillary) "Clinton heard her story Friday morning on her trip to Macedonia, which was aimed at highlighting the plight of ethnic Albanian refugees from Kosovo and assuring the poor Balkan nation that the United States understands the stress the influx has placed on it. Aid officials say Macedonia has taken about 233,000 of the nearly 800,000 refugees. Clinton met with Macedonian President Kiro Gligorov and Prime Minister Ljubco Georgievski. She announced the release of the first $ 2 million in a $ 21 million economic development package for Macedonia that is designed to help the fledgling democracy create new small businesses." [Chicago Tribune, 5/16/99]

Hillary met with Macedonian officials 'trying to diffuse any anti-American sentiment and to bolster Macedonia's fragile coalition government. "Hillary Rodham Clinton swept through Macedonia on Friday on a visit that illustrated the Clinton administration's continuing struggle to balance the diverse strands of its Kosovo policy…Ethnic Macedonians, who make up roughly two-thirds of this country's population, generally oppose NATO's bombing of Yugoslavia. They also fear that if ethnic Albanians -- who made up roughly one-third of Macedonia's population before the crisis -- continue to pour in from Kosovo, Macedonians will be reduced to a minority in their own country. So although Clinton spent the morning addressing the suffering of the refugees, she spent the rest of the day trying to defuse any anti-American sentiment and to bolster Macedonia's fragile coalition government, a mix of Macedonian and Albanian parties." [Austin American-Statesman, 5/15/99]

The Washington Post: "First Lady Brings Publicity, Aid to Macedonia:" First lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, the first high-ranking American to visit here since the Kosovo crisis began, brought two messages to Macedonia today. Touring a refugee camp of 18,000 people, Clinton urged Americans not to become "immune" to the plight of more than 740,000 Kosovo Albanians expelled from their homeland since NATO began its air war against Yugoslavia on March 24. "We are trying to do everything possible to make these lives and stories real, not to let them fade into the background," she said… And she soothed the irritated government of Macedonia, which has taken in the refugees only reluctantly and at the price of more foreign aid. Clinton today added another $ 2 million to the pot -- the first installment of a $ 21 million reallocation of funds for Macedonia… Even as Clinton toured the camp, a few refugees were entering Macedonia from Kosovo. For 10 days, almost no one has crossed the frontier -- initially because Macedonian border guards were blocking refugees, then because Serbian authorities were not allowing them to leave… After her camp tour, Clinton met with Prime Minister Ljubco Georgievski, parliamentary president Savo Klimovski and local aid officials, and her message could not have been more straightforward: "I want to clearly express our appreciation to the government of Macedonia for the efforts they have made. It has been an incredible burden on Macedonia." [Washington Post, 5/15/99]

[ObamaEdwards]

That's right, they're just WORDS. Like "I do." I can see why Hillary Clinton doesn't think words matter.

[AndrewInToronto]

I am going to post this one more time. It is the statement from the Canadian Consulate in Chicago which states that they contacted Obama's campaign and not the other way around as well as that there is consistency between his public and private positions on NAFTA.

Statement by the Consulate General of Canada in Chicago

Chicago, IL, March 3, 2008 — The Canadian Embassy and our Consulates General regularly contact those involved in all of the Presidential campaigns and, periodically, report on these contacts to interested officials. In the recent report produced by the Consulate General in Chicago, there was no intention to convey, in any way, that Senator Obama and his campaign team were taking a different position in public from views expressed in private, including about NAFTA. We deeply regret any inference that may have been drawn to that effect.

[The position was reiterated by the Canadian Embassy in Washington.]


http://geo.international.gc.ca/can-am/chicago/menu-en.asp
http://geo.international.gc.ca/can-am/washington/menu-en.asp

[whichchange]

It is irrelevant who contacted who. The fact remains that Obama says one thing in public and a different one in private.

[AnninCA]

Everyone knows now that he lied. The only idiots still trying to insist it was Clinton are nuts on the internet. They have no credibility at all on this issue.

They were deluded by Huff, in a way. She tried to bury the stories.

But voters are not goofy nuts.

They get it.

I don't think real voters ever bought his "pie in the sky" crap. They always knew he was a politician, so that's why this story has not destroyed his campaign.

And the nuts? They couldn't get out of denial if you held a gun to their head.

But they are a small percentage of his true coalition. Thank god.

That's why the exit polls are indicative of sanity. His supporters will also support Hillary.

Except for what I call.........the "nut" factor.

Huff's a site for the "nut" factor. But she always has been a bit on the edge, right?

Makes sense. Apparently, she's not going for mainstream.

[KQuark]

Thanks for the links. I saved them and will refer to them every time the Clinton camp lies.

McClinton has her lie and she's going to stick with it all the way to PA because she believes this is what stemmed Obama's momentum in Ohio. Most McClinton supporters are what you call low information voters who only listen to what candidates say on the stump. So she figures she can continue to say this lie as long as these type of voters listen.

[mpflinn]

I lived in Canada for 10 years because of my position as CEO for an international NGO. I continue to follow both the French and English media. There is a STORM in their parliament over the so-called NAFTA-gate that seriously affected the March 4 primaries. According to the reports in the Canadian press, the prime minister's chief of staff in remarks to journalists FIRST mentioned the CLINTON campaign contacted officials to downplay the seriousness of her anti-NAFTA speeches. So she was condemning Senator Obama for what her campaign also did. No doubt this cost Senator Obama many votes, especially in Ohio. This is Clintonian politics and it should be exposed and countered by Senator Obama's campaign. It is truth-telling, not negativity, to expose such hypocritical move on the part of Senator Clinton; words matter! I hope the U.S. media will pay attention.

[abot]

it seems that the MSM doesn't report that the Canadian Government said there was no wink-wink from the Obama camp.

[LaVieEnRose]

So, when does the “Hillary Tribute Tour” get started?

It seems that many (if not most) supporters still clinging to the Clinton candidacy are doing it out of some sense of nostalgia—a focus on what should have been or could have been. A talented woman who SHOULD have been able to do great things; a woman who COULD have been the first “woman” president. But, what we’re finding out is that nostalgia is not enough to elect someone as President. We, the voters, are looking behind the curtain and either don’t find very much (e.g., experience) or don’t like what we find (e.g., character, integrity, ethics). We are simply refusing to elect Hillary because it is “owed” to her or because she “waited in line” or simply because she is female. Imagine that, we’re actually trying to elect the best candidate...on merit, nonetheless. Oh, the horror.

[inwonderland]

This post is priceless..genius, gentle and sensible.

I am a female, and so I have no problem calling the blindsighted, ageing feministas, whining about the Hillary victimization....calling them The Vagina Monolgues. I'd rather see the play than this play
out in our politics.

If a candidate gets momentum from a tv sketch or two.....then it's really pathetic. But, Hillary will
take whatever she can for as long as she can, using any weapon she can.

It's as bad as Bush...just more covert. The entitlement, the tone, the divisiveness, the polarization,
the smear and fear, the war vote, the Iran mongering...is the Bush moniker..but wait, Hillary has all the same traits.

Don't let a skirt fool ya. The way she skirts the truth.....take a good look at all that.

[curthess]

OK Obama, you've made the point. To the extreme. Congrats, we are impressed.

But (and don't you always hate the buts?), you've made a serious strategic mistake: You revealed all at once, to the press and the public, and we all KNOW that there is no way it will be comprehended by anyone but the most dedicated. That excludes all MSM.

This stuff must be released one-every-third day for the next 3 weeks. Every day, the public/press gets to bite into each of her exaggerations/fibs/lies one at a time. Every few days, someone gets to do a followup: Yo Hillary, that peacemaking you did in Ireland...tell us again exactly how you did that. The experts are saying you are overstating by miles...you wouldn't lie to us like your husband has been known to do, would you?

Come on team...this is serious stuff, and she'll keep on making stuff up and we'll all remember just how wonderful those 8 years really were.

[suntzu]

I am sure Sen. Obama would appreciate your advice, but I am sure that he will not let this be the only time he refers to what can fairly be called "Hillary's Fables Of Excellent Presidential Experience." I am sure he and his team will be referring to these revealing histories again and again. And the people will learn that she is the sort of person who dips her toes in the ocean on Dover Beach and then claims to have swum across the English channel. In other words, in all her claims there is a pattern: she begins with a grain of truth ("I visited Belfast") to spinning an untruth ("I negotiated the truce in Ireland.") That she can lie with such a straight face is evidence of pure genius....or maybe in her fevered mind she really thinks she accomplished everything she claims.

[warren76]

I think curthess makes a great point here. They have to game the news cycles a bit and have all that information slowly and methodically call her claims into question until the CW is basically that she's untrustworthy. Scratch that.......that she's a LIAR. He needs to basically out her in terms the general public would understand......not that she "engages in dramatized assertion".......but that she's a damned fink liar! She understands that game better and uses sharp attacks like "Just Words". C'mon Barack.....call her exactly what she is and come out and say "Liar Liar...pant suit on fire!"

[Rhouse]

As always, facts are open to interpretation and I thnk these words are stronger since they're spoken by the people of Northren Ireland and not filtered through the British news media:
http://www.irishecho.com/search/searchstory.cfm?id=18626&issueid=563
Link from Ben Smiths' blog over at the Politico.

[HaveyouPerspective]

Irish Echo Newspaper

11 Hanover Square
New York, NY 10005
Tel: [phone]
Fax: Fax: [phone]
or [phone]

Methinks you're going to get as much slant from the Echo as the Times... or any other American newspaper.

[Tankan]

Did she talk to the men of war? - No

Her influence on the peace process was cosmetic!
She talked to groups who had NO input or influence to the process!
If she's such a great peacemaker, have her go talk to Hamas or Al Qaida!
But she won't, will she?

[jp5472]

I actually started to believe this until I saw this..."The USA's most widely read Irish American Newspaper". Is it really an Irish newspaper one then asks? ...and then one investigates and finds this, "Based in New York City the Irish Echo is the oldest and largest Irish-American newspaper."....hardly a local paper being reported on by non-partisans in the heart of Belfast!

[coonce]

How come nobody's ask THE question of Hillary? You remember the one. They asked Barack Obama during the last debate something like, "What if Al qaeda goes back into Iraq after he pulls our troops out, will he feel ok with sending them back in?"

John McCain came out the next day attacking Obama with, "Al Qaeda are IN Irag Obama, that's why they call it, Al Qaeda In Iraq."

What would Hillary's response to this question be?

[Gogetter]

Another question that someone needs to ask Hillary Clinton is this:

If Barack Obama wins the nomination, will you support him in the general election?

With all of her talk about she and McCain having passes through the Commander-in-chief threshold, I'd love for her to have to answer this question straight on.

[AnninCA]

She, as usual, gave Obama the answer. He finally lined up.

You withdraw gradually. One briggade at a time.

I have said this before. I repeat. Bush lied to us, but he's not as stupid as people think. He's built up the forces there in anticipation of a Dem. win.

The Democrat who wins will be able to follow through on promises without blowing up the situation.

But for those thinking Obama will withdraw?

You're in la-la land. Even I give him more credit.

[KQuark]

Hillary's response was she does not answer hypothetical questions.

Of course based on McClinton's ZERO principles smear and fear campaign it's OK to use hypothetical arguments to her benefit. Like say ringing a hypothetical phone at 3am to answer a hypothetical nation security crisis.

[aquarius2001]

I realize that some of Hillary's supporters may be a bit disenheartened or disappointed by this memo. and will choose to vent that frustration at Barack and his supporteers. But remember, she is the one who opened this can of worms. Why in the world would she try to claim direct involvement with all of these major events as First Lady? Did she honestly think no one would check? Imagine if she went to the GE, and this "vetting" had not been done? The repubicans would EAT HER ALIVE!!!!! Barack...keep pointing out the truth. (Sometimes, unfortunately, the truth hurts).

[AnninCA]

Not at all. I've read the real testimonies from people involved. It's just too boring to be defensive.

He's playing off of sexism. She was JUST a wife, right?

A woman's only role is in the kitchen or the bedroom.

Sorry........that narrative just won't work for Hillary Clinton. She pissed people off because she didn't play that "woman's role."


So his crap is just that..........silly crap.

[KARE]

If Barack was pointing out the truth, that would be information we all need. But he is way off base on this one and those who support him should encourage him to stay away from these types of remarks. Leaders from all around the world are speaking out to the strength and importance of Hillary's participations in their countries. 32 Military Admirals and Generals are lining up behind her. Obama might be able to sell this line of crap, but if he does it furthers the belief that his followers are cultish. If one is a responsible voter, you would have to give Hillary the one up on foreign policy experience. Sorry Obama, you lose on this one.

[LAJonathan]

You don't think her "photo opp" this week with the generals was CREATED to influence YOU? THIS IS THE GAME she is playing with everyone. From the photo opp to the suggestion of vice, to ignoring Obama and aligning with McCain, she is creating ILLUSIONS of her in the role of president. Do you know this "commander in chief threshold" we have been hearing about this week? How Obama hasn't crossed it? You know who created the term in the first place? Do you know who the only judge of this "commander in chief" threshold is? HILLARY CLINTON. How else can you explain her supporters/lawyers/analysts on these political shows answering questions in a way that everyone in the room laughs because the answer is so blatantly absurd? DO you want to align yourself with a candidate who's press people practically get blown out of the water on national television because they can''t answer a simple question like a normal person?

[soulstressed]

funny you should use that phrase.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/Truth_Hurts/index.html