Obama Team Repackaging Clinton's Foreign Policy Credentials

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

NANCY BENAC | November 29, 2008 08:28 AM EST | AP


WASHINGTON — It wasn't too long ago that Barack Obama and his advisers were tripping over one another to tear down Hillary Rodham Clinton's foreign policy credentials. She was dismissed as a commander in chief wanna-be who did little more than sip tea and make small talk with foreign leaders during her days as first lady.

"What exactly is this foreign policy experience?" Obama said mockingly of the New York senator. "Was she negotiating treaties? Was she handling crises? The answer is no."

That was in March, when Clinton was Obama's sole remaining rival for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Now, Clinton is on track to become Obama's secretary of state.

And, unsurprisingly, the sniping at her foreign policy credentials is a thing of the past.

Obama adviser William Daley over the weekend said Clinton would be "a tremendous addition to this administration. Tremendous."

Senior adviser David Axelrod called Clinton a "demonstrably able, tough, brilliant person."

Last spring, though, Clinton was targeted with a steady stream of criticism via conference call, e-mail and campaign-trail digs from the Obama camp, all aimed at shredding her self-portrait as an experienced and confident leader on the international stage. Some of those doing the sniping will be taking up key positions _ most likely along with Clinton _ in the new Obama administration.

Story continues below
advertisement

Greg Craig, selected to serve as White House counsel in the Obama administration, delivered a withering attack during the primaries on Clinton's claims that she could rightfully share in the credit for some of the foreign policy successes of her husband's presidency.

"She did not sit in on any National Security Council meetings when she was first lady," Craig insisted in one conference call. He went on to knock down Clinton's claims to influence in the Northern Ireland peace process, opening borders for refugees during the war in Kosovo, and making a dangerous visit to Bosnia.

"There is no reason to believe ... that she was a key player in foreign policy at any time during the Clinton administration," Craig wrote in a campaign memo.

Susan Rice, an Obama adviser who could land a spot in the new administration, mocked the idea that Clinton could lay claim to foreign policy credentials by marriage.

"There is no crisis to be dealt with or managed when you are first lady," Rice sniffed last March. "You don't get that kind of experience by being married to a commander in chief."

Clinton was only too happy to make light of Obama's own foreign policy credentials, suggesting his biggest selling point was a 2002 speech against going to war with Iraq. "Many people gave speeches against the war then," she said in a February debate.

Robert Gelbard, an adviser to the Obama campaign on foreign policy who worked in the Clinton administration, said in March that Clinton had more involvement in foreign policy than a lot of first ladies, but added that "her role was limited and I've been surprised at the claims that she had a much greater role."

Well, never mind about all of that now.

"That was then; this is now," said David Gergen, who has served as an adviser to both Republican and Democratic presidents. "Campaigns are ever thus."

"Generally speaking," Gergen said, "there is a recognition that campaigns bring a certain amount of hyperbole, and when it's over you try to find the most talented people you can find to work with you."

Clinton may not have been at the table when her husband made the big decisions, Gergen said, but "she's been imbibing questions on foreign policy and decision-making since 1992."

A spokesperson for the Obama transition team declined to comment on the shift in tone.

It also should be said that some of the wounds to Clinton's foreign policy credentials during the primaries were self-inflicted, most famously her inflated account of the drama associated with a visit she made to Bosnia.

"I remember landing under sniper fire," she recounted in a speech. "There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

Soon enough, video footage surfaced of Clinton's unremarkable airport arrival ceremony, where she was welcomed by dignitaries and posed for photos with children.

Clinton brought up the Bosnia trip to counter Obama's suggestion that her experiences as first lady amounted to having tea at an ambassador's house.

"I don't remember anyone offering me tea," she said of the Bosnia visit.

Clinton, in an April debate, blamed her Bosnia gaffe on campaign fatigue. But she did not back away from her claim to broad foreign policy experience as first lady.

"I was not as accurate as I have been in the past," she said. "But I know, too, that being able to rely on my experience of having gone to Bosnia, gone to more than 80 countries, having represented the United States in so many different settings, gives me a tremendous advantage going into this campaign."

Well, maybe not in the campaign, as it turned out.

But maybe, just perhaps, as secretary of state.

WASHINGTON — It wasn't too long ago that Barack Obama and his advisers were tripping over one another to tear down Hillary Rodham Clinton's foreign policy credentials. She was dismissed as a com...
WASHINGTON — It wasn't too long ago that Barack Obama and his advisers were tripping over one another to tear down Hillary Rodham Clinton's foreign policy credentials. She was dismissed as a com...
 
Comments
704
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (10 pages total)

You can put lipstick on a pig.............

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:26 PM on 12/02/2008

""What exactly is this foreign policy expertise?"

Oh, so I want her to be in charge of US foreign policy.

Man, what a hypocrite!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:10 PM on 12/02/2008

Disappointment after months and months of working for and contributing to Obama is a tough pill to swallow....I really did believe him and in him and in what he had to say. I guess they are all lying pols.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:42 AM on 12/02/2008

So, all you people who voted for Barack Obama and are bashing his choice of Sen. Clinton for Secretary of State: Have you lost faith in him already? I can only assume you have decided, in retrospect, that he is naive, gullible, and not able to make a good decision.

How cynical. The honeymoon is over, and the Electoral College hasn't even met.

Well, I for one haven't lost faith in Barack Obama. I voted for a man I expected to pick the right person for the job regardless of the expectations of others, and, so far, he has not disappointed me. He said today that he selected a group of people for his national security team that shares the same core values and vision as he has. And I believe him.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:38 PM on 12/01/2008

WHERE WERE THE CRITICIZERS OF HILLARY CLINTON AS SECSTATE WHEN IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE OPTIMAL TIME TO HEAR FROM THEM?

Note to future skeptics of appointment possibilities:

HAVE COURAGE. When you know someone is not right for the job, and as SOON as their name comes up for a post, please dare to speak out -- at that very moment -- even if you are the first or the only. (Remember the courage of Anita Hill.)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:15 AM on 12/01/2008
photo

They were all hear barking up a storm the moment it got announced--guess you weren't. Contrary to the narcissistic bloggers' beliefs--they do not have a any say (thankfully) over who a president picks for his cabinet.

They have a say to try to get their voices heard on the ISSUES during his term. They have a say in 4 years to dump BO if they don't like him, but they have no say on the cabinet and no amount of public outcry is going to change that.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:27 AM on 12/01/2008

This is a useful article, full of quotes from people who knew or worked with Hillary Clinton 'when', denying she had any or much connection with the 'foreign policy experience' she has brought up again and again in the last two years. She outright lies. When she doesn't lie she exaggerates. It is curious, if not frustrating, if not infuriating, that this woman, who should have been sidelined for her outrageous claims long before this, should be now touted by some of the very people who spoke about her realistically in the past. It is still beyond me how Barack Obama could think she would be a good Secretary of State. How could he think he could control her language, which, in the past, has been heavily on the side of going to war, goading and getting provoked by blustering by such as Iran. A diplomat, especially a head diplomat, needs to have more control than she has evidenced, character-wise, and not allow herself either to get provoked or to provoke other countries' leaders into anything close to war. She needs to somehow retract her statement that, 'NOTHING is off the table!', by which she seemed to mean at the time, We can use even nuclear bombs on Iran -- that is insanity. She even threatened to 'obliterate Iran'. These are comments that, coming from a senator, should have kept her from getting anywhere near being a potential Secretary of State,

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:13 AM on 12/01/2008

I think it (Hillary) is a fresh, unique, brilliant choice and all these frenzied liberals ought to take several deep breaths, walks, live your life, wait for Obama to get in and let things happen. Naysaying at this point is overkill and a symptom of the need to constantly find something wrong with everything.
We are already 10 zillion times in a better, more positive state of affairs just in voting the man in!
I truly believe the best is yet to come. We will be looking back at these times from a superior position--all of us in the not to distant future and Hillary will have ample chances to prove why she is a masterful pick. Just relax!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:02 PM on 11/30/2008

Hillary Clinton has over forty years of experience and astounding results. That's a fact.

Obama 'ran a good campaign.' And..? Why is that all anyone ever says about this man? Perhaps it's because he has never shown any talent or skill for getting the job done. That is why he struggled to win the presidency, because he HAS NO RECORD.

And yes, he won the presidency but only because Hillary Clinton and her voters worked their butt off sealing that deal for him!

Now he's recruiting the vast political talent, cultivated by the Clintons, including Hillary herself, to do the job for him and take the heat while he plays with his hypo-allergenic puppy and gives glossy speeches to his non-reading, video-watching, fawning, "People" reading audiences.

If that's "change you can believe in?"... way to go america!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:35 PM on 11/30/2008
photo

On this site, HRC haters (and that's what I call 'em--because they are irrational and that's the term they deserve) call us "ditto heads" even if we may know the granuality of HRCs accomplishments. Yet when talking about experience, HRC haters can only point to BOs presidential campaign. Irony at it's finest.

HRC supporters (and yes I voted for BO in the GE) have known all along that elections are mere political theater. That all candidates say what they need to, to get elected. They all start out with the truth but in the heat of any battle they will distort or heighten rhetoric to try to win. HRC did it (and was crucified) and BO did it (and it's easily explained away).

Now I am proud of our new POTUS and happy to have voted for him, but has this lesson in political science ended now and can all of the HRC haters take a step back and grow up and realize what campaigning is all about. As long as you follow through on your ISSUES based agenda (which HRC HAS ALWAYS DONE) the public should understand how overblown stuff can get in the primary---and NONE of it was damaging to BO or our country--so get a grip haters.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:59 AM on 12/01/2008
photo

NOW THE STORY CHANGES...GO FIGURE :)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:31 PM on 11/30/2008



Disastrous !!!! and we all know it.....

Tomorrow will be a sad day ........

Clintons cannot be trusted , so let's not go there

Obama will regret it..........

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:41 PM on 11/30/2008

We all know it -another lie by a Clinton hater-we all do not think like you and the Clintons are very trustworthy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:26 PM on 11/30/2008

First time I ever heard of the Clintons being trustworthy ("trustworthy" is an absolute that doesn't need the qualifier "very"; one is either trustworthy, or one is not).

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:22 AM on 12/01/2008
photo

Bill Clinton started the politic of uprooting africans (Congo) for their mineral wealth (Coltan) by supporting a mono-ethnic Rwanda. Bill was working for multi-nationals (Big corporates); will Hillary continue the politics of uprooting defenseless congolese from their land to install Canadians and US companies for coltan's mining?

We have a charity operating in Latin America, Africa, Eastern Europe and South East Asia; from what we are gathering, HRC as SOS is frightening africans who hoped for an end to wars for control of mineral fields!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:47 AM on 11/30/2008

Sure....I believe that....uh-huh..

As to who started the " politic"?..... of uprooting Africans or any OTHER indigenous people in pursuit of mineral wealth....one would have to go ALOT farther back in time than Bill Clinton (or his great-great-great grandfather, for that matter)

Africans have plenty of folks to be frightened of.....Bill and Hillary Clinton are not among them.

"supporting a mono-ethnic Rwanda"....Surely you don't suggest Pres. Clinton SUPPORTED ethnic cleansing in Rwanda or anywhere else, do you?

Lots of people are simply not SANE on the subject of the Clintons, I swear
tm

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:57 PM on 11/30/2008

The Secretary of state needs to follow the agenda of the President -We have seen Hilary Clinton do that.
The part I like about the nomination is that it puts a leash on Bill Clinton and puts both of them under a microscope because each is responsible for the other positionally -You can't be married to the secretary of state and run around the globe making deals contrary to policy ,and you cant be a former first lady and undermine the president . It's also possible that one Clinton can act as a go between for another Clinton
so I think it is a good idea.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:17 AM on 11/30/2008

That's exactly what I have been thinking. I think it brings some much needed accountability to both Clintons. And HRC will do a good job. She's a workhorse and has b@lls of steel. There will be a lot of drama with it, but I think there would be if she were left to her own devices in the Senate as well. I think it's a good compromise.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:06 PM on 11/30/2008

The second part of your theory: "There will be a lot of drama with it," contradicts the premise that they--Clintons--will behave because of their accountability. You can't tell me Bill especially as well as Hillary will not challenge Obama, like constantly, given their smugly condescending view of him during the primary. David Gergen brushes it off as simply campaign rhetoric, but I'm not buying it. Hillary has been waiting her entire life to be president, they went into the race with an assumption of entitlement, and I don't think they can control themselves because they didn't exhibit they could during the primary. Bill Clinton? Suddenly controllable?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:29 AM on 12/01/2008
photo

You're right; she's been a good team player for this current administration; no reason to believe she won't be for the incoming one.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:15 PM on 11/30/2008

Mike Allen of Politico.com said: "Who knows if she misremembered, misspoke, exaggerated, whatever. It makes the case for Sen. Obama that all this experience that she's been talking about is at least partly in her imagination."

Hundreds of thousands have viewed the video online in just the past few days.

There's a saying: Never let your memories be greater than your dreams.

When you're running for president, maybe it should be: never let your memories be greater than the video

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:27 AM on 11/30/2008

Politico .com has a right wing agenda i and is completely unreliable

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:10 PM on 11/30/2008

"I went to 80 countries, you know. I gave contemporaneous accounts, I wrote about a lot of this in my book. You know, I think that, a minor blip, you know, if I said something that, you know, I say a lot of things - millions of words a day - so if I misspoke, that was just a misstatement," she said.


Clinton further clarified her remarks in an interview Tuesday morning with CBS Local Radio Station, KDKA Morning News host Larry Richert.

"The military took great care of us. They were worried about taking a first lady to a war zone and took some extra precautions. Last week for the first time in 12 years or so, I misspoke."

A spokesman for rival Barack Obama's campaign questioned whether Clinton misspoke, saying her comments came in what appeared to be prepared remarks for the Iraq speech. His campaign's



"She meant that there was fire on the hillside around the area when we landed, which was the case," said Clinton campaign aid Lissa Muscatine.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:25 AM on 11/30/2008

"I went to 80 countries, you know. I gave contemporaneous accounts, I wrote about a lot of this in my book. You know, I think that, a minor blip, you know, if I said something that, you know, I say a lot of things - millions of words a day - so if I misspoke, that was just a misstatement," she said.


Clinton further clarified her remarks in an interview Tuesday morning with CBS Local Radio Station, KDKA Morning News host Larry Richert.

"The military took great care of us. They were worried about taking a first lady to a war zone and took some extra precautions. Last week for the first time in 12 years or so, I misspoke."

A spokesman for rival Barack Obama's campaign questioned whether Clinton misspoke, saying her comments came in what appeared to be prepared remarks for the Iraq speech. His campaign's statement included a link to the speech on Clinton's campaign Web site with her account of running to the cars.

Clinton's campaign said what is on the Web site is not the prepared text, but a transcript of her remarks, including comments before the speech in which she talked about the trip to Bosnia.

Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor said in a written statement that Clinton's Bosnia story "joins a growing list of instances in which Senator Clinton has exaggerated her role in foreign and domestic policymaking."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:23 AM on 11/30/2008
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (10 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in  or  Connect