Hillary's Bosnia Boast -- Not a Big Deal

Jesus, give her a break.

C'mon, she's been a good mother to Chelsea; she hasn't killed anybody, including her philandering husband; she's been an effective senator for her adopted state of New York; she's smart as hell and knows all the ins and outs of public policy, ranging from her hard-won expertise about what will and won't work on healthcare reform to how to deal with tyrants and dictators and the globalized economy, and she even knows how to do Saturday Night Live and Stephen Colbert.

OK, so she tried to make it look like she braved incoming on her trip to Bosnia, and that she helped settle the Israeli-Palestinian problem and that she's the only one who can handle the 3 a.m. crisis phone call and that she deserves the Democratic nomination because she's won the big states that matter, committed delegates be damned.

Listen, I'm suffering from Clinton fatigue as much as the next person, and I think Barack Obama is the real deal. But as a yellow dog Democrat, I think both of them would make a good president.

The fact is, the presidency is the ultimate existential job; nobody knows how a president will do until he or she is actually in the Oval Office. George W. is a case in point and so was his father and so was Jimmy Carter. And so was Ronald Reagan, who was dismissed, by Clark Clifford, as "an amiable dunce" and by others as a third-rate actor but was able to convince voters they could do anything they wanted if they believed that it was morning in America.

And who hasn't embellished their credentials while running for president, except for John McCain, who has a biography you can't argue with? Obama hasn't exactly been a Ted Kennedy in the Senate, and he can't pretend that he was a leader, either in Washington or Springfield or South Chicago. Like John F. Kennedy, his power stems from his inspirational oratory and his promise of bridging the country's historic racial divide, and not from his accomplishments in the legislative arena.

Hillary doesn't do inspirational speeches. She's meat and potatoes to Obama's four-star political cuisine. So she tried to hype her credentials while under fire in Bosnia. So what? They all do it. It's certainly better than Vice President Cheney's cavalier dismissal of the public's opposition to the war in Iraq. Hillary says she came under fire in Bosnia? So? Does that disqualify her as a presidential candidate? I don't think so.

As my friend Bill Press writes, Obama and Clinton are "are providing us with the most exciting primary contest in our lifetime, and the end result will be extremely advantageous to Democrats. Whenever it's over, and whoever wins, Democrats will have built a ground operation in every state, including states and congressional districts they never bothered to campaign in before. And Democrats will have created a huge new historic pool of dedicated voters to help them to victory."

Let's let Hillary off the hook for her Bosnia boast and judge her for what she is, and not for what she sometimes says she was.

Comments

[BlueAsh]

This piece of essay is unacceptable. It seems that author is having trouble differentiating facts from opinion and has lost his moral compass.

For those of you who are interested in *facts*, here's an essay written by Christopher Hitchens, a reporter who was there and who had access to top officials in the Clinton administration:

"The Tall Tale of Tuzla" http://www.slate.com/id/2187780/

[Denni]

The Clintons really set a low bar. Maybe that's why they need to go. Their behavior gets lower and lower and those who've become immune to it shrug off everything they do. Thanks, but no. It's as important how she handled the lie that tells you about her management style. Not good.

[GoodGuysandBadGuys]

"Hillary's Bosnia Boast -- Not a Big Deal"

-----------------------------

you're kidding, right?

so what does it say about america when the idea that 'everybody lies or embellishes' has become acceptable? really, where do you think that's going to lead? do you think greatness can come of that?

when something is built on fraud (lies) it always fails in the long run. I get so tired of people trying to justify low standards, it has become rampant.

[lisakaz]

By itself, if it were a "one off" event probably, but given the pattern here is unmistakeable (the N Ireland claims, the "experience" claims these are supposed to illustrate), including lies about her opponent (the "not a professor" lie is particularly galling and ridiculous to me -- some partisan said "he just taught a class" -- meaning what? -- he taught 3 classes a year for 12 yrs). All this together says her lies must be discovered and aired. She has the tendency to puff herself and lie about her opponent. Enough reason to me.

[Georgiadude]

To suggest that we should just forget that Mrs. Clinton told us a pre-mediated lie on at least three occasions, her staff having to know the story was not true, is asking to much. Mrs. Clinton could have come forward with a press release stating that she had made a mistake before the video appeared, but only when the video appeared did she come forward, then lied to us in her explanation, Mrs. Clinton tells us that she just made a mistake, no real apology.

Perhaps her explanation could have been believable if the story was told once with some minor errors, no big deal. But to say that she had snipers shooting at her and then just blow us off with the claim that she made a mistake is unacceptable.

Maybe we are to believe that on a number of occasions that she did had snipers shooting at her as she departed planes, but the Bosnia trip was in fact not one of those times, this doesn't appear likely. I ask the readers to recall the last time they have had snipers shooting at them as they departed a plane, that is an event one would never forget or could imagine happened.

Mrs. Clinton insults us with her arrogance and has demonstrated her arrogance before, namely with her refusal to admitting that her vote for the war was not a mistake.

In my opinion Mrs. Clinton should stop her campaign now, she is not viable.

[lisakaz]

Excellent post, regardless of typo. If it were an honest "mistake" why did she denigrate Sinbad who called her out? She thought she could talk her way outta it, which is arrogance personified (and Bu$h-like).

[Georgiadude]

Correction: Mrs. Clinton insults us with her arrogance and has demonstrated her arrogance before, namely with her refusal to admitting that her vote for the war WAS A MISTAKE.

It's getting late.

[Georgiadude]

We have been lied to by Bush/Cheney for almost eight years and before Bush, Bill Clinton lied to us on more than one occasion, only owning up to his lies when he was cornered. I'm afraid that the Bosnia story is only a preview of a Hillary Clinton presidency.

The American people, currently, do not have a strong voice in Washington, we must have a president that has earned our confidence, we simply cannot afford any more lies. There are too many serious problems that are going to confront our next president and that president is going to need our confidence, if we are to repair the damage done by Bush/Cheney.

[mydogshakespeare]

This just proves she's another crapola politician, as bad as Bush, who thinks she controls the message because the truth has been buried. But every once in a while the truth returns!

This is just the tip of a deep a jagged iceberg. Not only will I not give her a break, I won't give her a vote, either.

[tanbec]

This just goes to show you how stupid the entire Clinton family thinks we all are. I didn't inhale........I did not have sexual relations........I support my mother and am honored to have been there with her......sniper fire.........35 years experience. The whole family including Little Miss Innocent Chelsea are nothing but a bunch of liars and I for one am disgusted and offended by their insulting our intelligence. There were videotapes tapes for crying out loud. How did she really think she could pull this lie off? Or is she so used to lying she doesn't even know the truth herself?

[MaineMike]

I have two issues with this whole mess:

#1 Clinton said "if a place was too small, too poor, or too dangerous, the president couldn"t go, so send the First Lady." If the trip were really dangerous, would the President really send his wife and only child? That doesn't make sense to me.

#2 Around March 11, Sinbad said that the Bosnia trip was no big deal and wasn't dangerous. That was about two weeks before this story really hit. A reporter asked Clinton about Sinbad's comment and Clinton's answer was "He's a comedian." So even after the media questioned Clinton about the "dangers" of this trip, Clinton still continued to tell the story as if it were true.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/11/sinbad-speaks-out-on-trip_n_90974.html

[standforpeace]

Remember the last time a candidate lied about his "military" service. Right, we ended up with George Bush who stepping up to the plate and proved he could outlie the best of them when he lied us into the war in Iraq. Now we're being asked to believe Hillary Clinton's assertions that she is somehow more qualified to be president because she came under enemy fire in Bosnia. Not this time. It's time that the voters realized that when you vote for lying ass candidates you end up with lying ass presidents. And we have no one but ourselves to blame.

[slank]

Would it not be an international lncident if the First Lady of the United States came under fire anywhere at anytime? Why did she think this could possibly happen with nobody knowing about it? It is just so strange.

[Georgiadude]

Excellent point!

[Alox]

Al, you have missed the story line. Hillary's message throughout the campaign has been her "experience"....She has declared herself the best candidate based on it. So, when her supposed experience is trumped up, like Bosnia, it is a real story!

If you really wanted to help the country, you would spend your time uncovering her other "experience " claims, like how she also negotiated the Irish peace agreement! Or you could aske Hillary why she has done a 180 on Michigan and Florida...the simple fact, she is a liar....and that should be the story you are sharing with the readers.

Really poor logic on your part.

[Spookcatcher]

Part of hillary's problems stem from her not being more of a w and yet having to had to and still having to wage the fight for equality in not only a dominant man's world of politics, law, and business. When she told this tall tale, yarn, lie, or whatever you want to call it, it is reminded me of how many people tell lies of events in their life that happened, especially whenever it revolves around competion/sports, war, or sexual exploits. If i had a nickel for everytime I heard someone tell me, especially in various drinking establishments, that they served in Vietnam, or how many times they got laid or who I was supposed to believe who they say they laid, I could bail out our economy. This does not excuse Hillary by any means, in fact, it shows she has spent to much time around the Boys Club. Barack has the same problem with his Reverend and Church Association. What you do and who you choose to associate for decades, whether in politics, religion, or Taverns, or anything else, it must obviously be appealing to you, and whether you deny it or not some of it becomes engrained and part of you.

[ljmck]

If I were going to keep up with HRC's lies, I'd have to sit in front of the computer in my jammies all day.

And if HRC is elected only jammies and a pillow over my head will get me through it.

Don't think I can bear to live it. So, PLEASE, do not give her a break.

The lies, the lies.

[S1m0n]

"nobody knows how a president will do until he or she is actually in the Oval Office. George W. is a case in point"

I don't know who you think got surprised, but President Bush's performance in the White House was easily and accurately foreshadowed well in advance by his business record: he's just as much 'success' in the White House as he did at Harkon Energy.

[lisakaz]

Exactly. I didn't expect much. He was worse than I feared, but it didn't surprise me, except for how ppl swallowed his bilge.

[mounthoodliberal]

the fact is that Hillary has repeated this same exaggerated Bosnia story since last year....3 times and counting. once and I could probably forgive the slip. in her latest retelling of the story, she starts off by saying that she certainly remembers it well. she's being exposed not for a slip, but for a lie she has been repeating for months. this strikes directly at the heart of her argument of why she should be trusted....she can't... sure, people fluff up their resumes all the time...but the resumes for this job are the most important in the world.

[natx]

There is a big difference betwen an embellishment and telling lies.

An embellishment is hyping something that actually did happen. The only way that saying you came under sniper fire would be an "embellishment" is if there was some sort of gunfire in her general vicinity... or at bare minimum someone threw a rock at her.... but there wasn't even that.

She made something up. No basis in truth whatsover. And for what?

We have just lived under 8 years of people who are willing to make up things that acheive their political ends. We have lived with a politics where the ends ALWAYS justify the means. Do we really want another 4 or 8 years of that? It doesn't matter to me that I agree with every one of her policies.

To discount this as innocent embellishment is exactly why a majority of people in this country liberal and conservative have lost faith in their government.

Say what you want about Obama. He has not been perfect at every turn - and has not always lived up to standards he has set up for himself.... but that's the difference. He is at least tring to set a new standard. He is at least trying to do something different. He is at least trying to move us forward.

It may be true that Hillary and Obama are historical candidates... but only one of them is running a historical campaign.

[CheekyMommy]

Very eloquent and exactly on point.

[rikoriki]

"Let's let Hillary off the hook for her Bosnia boast and judge her for what she is, and not for what she sometimes says she was."

You are not thinking very clearly: Her lies were very recent and she told them repeatedly. She still is a liar. It's a part of her character structure. If that's what you want , go ahead and support her. Some of us prefer honesty and decency.

[FullChat]

We are judging her for what she is - a liar!

[nazgul]

You're right. Her adoption of Bush's lie about the Iraq War. THAT was a big deal.

[cjo30080]

This blogger writes, "And who hasn't embellished their credentials while running for president?"

Clinton's S-CHIP, FMLA, NAFTA, Ireland and Bosnia stories are not embellishments. They're lies.

Truth and honesty are progressive values and if they're not Democratic values too, then our party is no better than that of the so-called conservatives.

[WretchedEtcher]

Hey it's cool if my friend embellishes and is "full of shit." It's not cool for the President to be "full of shit."

[DennyCrane]

Give her a break?! Are you kidding me? She lied about her experience. Would you hire someone who lied on their resume about a past job? If any other candidate got caught lying about their experience, they'd be booted out of the race. But Hillary Clinton is somehow held to a different standard.

[cmrosko]

Finally the Huffington Post lets through a voice of reason on the Hillary Bosnia aircraft landing distraction.

I agree, big deal. Clinton recalled the scene as being a bit more cautionary than it was. As with all VIPs flying into an active combat zone an emphasis is made regarding the threat of sniper fire aimed at the landing aircraft. This absolutely is not a very big deal except for outside the sniping minds of those predisposed to inflame and degrade Clinton's character.

Blog entries form a majority of the Obama supporters on the Huffington Post overwhelmingly speak and exaggerate from the gutter yet they criticize gutter politics.

[combatveteran]

I think of myself as a reasonable person, but there is a difference between exaggeration and distortion.
And I believe her exaggeration is grotesque distortion for political gain. Whether I am going to vote for her or not , is not going to based on her "mis-speaking". No, but should it go into the formula, of course it should. Lets put it in perspective, it was meant to undremine another candidate who is lacking in combat experience, who doesn't know what it likes to hit the tarmack with bullets flying. She said she did. Thats the point, this would mean alot less to me if it was not in that context. From someone who has found themselves in less than desirable conditions in war, the last person I want to be my commander is someone who talks tough, is a bullshitter, and hasn't walked the walk. Give me someone who is smart and thinks.

[DavidK08]

Something that you have to respect is, just because you believe that it was a slip up in memory, Others think it was an out right, calculated lie. I am not saying that you're wrong. Just that it isn't something you can disreguard as neither of us really knows. Only she does.

[S1m0n]

"Hillary doesn't do inspirational speeches."

There's lot that Hillary doesn't do. In fact, the list of what she does do is shorter. She fights hard.

and, uh, that's it. She fights hard but she also fights stupid. In fact, she can't keep herself from fighting even when it in no one's interest that she do so. It's her only move, so all she has is "workin' it".

[combatveteran]

I agree, she is a fighter, and with Clinton thats what we will get, fighting.

[nazgul]

"I ducked sniper fire" and "I didn't vote for War" are not the same as "I was a law professor (instead of lecturer" or "I put forward legislation (that I supported, but didn't write)." OK?

HRC not only voted for the war, she legitimized it by being the ONLY Dem in the Senate to actually voice the administration's bogus party line on al Qaeda and Hussein, WMD's, etc.

[nazgul]

Turns out he was a law professor!

[lisakaz]

As a PhD and college instructor, I cannot stand HRC's role there, either. They HAD to know it was a lie. Did they not go to college? Anyone teaching on the college level is a professor. It is BS than only tenured faculty are professors, What, tenure track assistant profs don't count? I don't consider that an honest mistake or misunderstanding.