Hillary Clinton: More Than Just Talk

With the critical foreign policy challenges America faces in the world today, voters will have to decide which candidate has the strength and experience to be the next president of the United States.

In an attempt to deflect attention from the fact that Senator Obama served in the Illinois state senate just three years ago and would have less experience than any president since World War II, Senator Obama and his advisors have gone on the attack. They have criticized the role Senator Clinton has played in promoting American interests during her eight years as First Lady, seven years in the Senate, and four years as a member of the Senator Armed Services Committee.

Senator Clinton as First Lady was "America's finest ambassador abroad," Madeleine Albright's office said at the time. Hillary Clinton did much more than "get picked up at the airport by a state convoy and security detail . . . . and get lunch" with an ambassador, as Senator Obama implied recently. As Newsweek reported about Senator Clinton's diplomatic missions as First Lady, "She often travels to remote regions where no presidential motorcade would venture and where no secretary of state would have time to go." Her 1995 speech at the UN World Conference on Women in Beijing, where she famously proclaimed "women's rights are human rights," remains an inspiration to leaders of the fight for women's equality around the world. Long before others, she visited countries stricken by HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria throughout the world, urging better prevention and treatment strategies, and returned to Washington to push for greater action within the US government. Her 1995 trip to India helped open the door to the transformation in relations between the world's two largest democracies. She raised awareness on mine issues in the Balkans and led humanitarian efforts on behalf of Kosovar refugees.

As Senator, Hillary has fought to ensure our troops have the body armor they need while in combat, and she has passed laws so that returning soldiers are treated with dignity when they return home. She has placed education at the center of U.S. international assistance. She has been a leader in combating nuclear proliferation and the threat of nuclear terrorism. She has championed efforts to end the genocide in Darfur and been a leading voice in calling for action to end global warming. As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, she has visited our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan three times.

By contrast Senator Obama has been in the U.S. Senate under three years. His campaign has touted his experience as chairman of a subcommittee on European affairs, which, according to Congressional Quarterly, has not held a hearing since he assumed the chairmanship nearly a year ago. Senator Obama has traveled to Iraq once, 23 months ago.

We respect Senator Obama's opposition to the war as a state senator in Illinois. But when he was actually in a position to influence policy from the U.S. Senate, he did not give a speech devoted to Iraq for 11 months, and waited 16 months to give his first floor speech dedicated to Iraq, which happened to express his opposition to Senator John Kerry's troop withdrawal plan. He said of his views on Iraq in 2004, "There's not much of a difference between my positions and George Bush's position at this stage." When asked if he would have voted for the 2002 resolution on Iraq had he been in the Senate at the time, he said in 2004, "I don't know." Since he joined the Senate, Senator Obama's voting record on Iraq has been virtually identical to Senator Clinton's. Indeed the only time they voted differently was when Senator Clinton voted against confirming General Casey, the former Commander of Multinational Forces in Iraq, to be Army Chief of Staff.

Senator Clinton is committed to ending the war in Iraq. She will bring our troops home responsibly and swiftly, and in her first term. Last July, she announced her detailed plan to withdraw our troops from Iraq, beginning within her first 60 days in office. She has voted repeatedly to bring the troops home at a pace of one to two brigades per month. Two weeks ago she voted for legislation that would require President Bush to bring combat troops home by December 2008.

Similarly, Senator Obama's campaign contends he "stood up against the march to war with Iran." They ignore the fact that Hillary went to the Senate floor last February long before Senator Obama to warn the Bush administration that they could not take any military action without congressional approval. She co-sponsored legislation with Senator Webb that denies the administration any funds for military action against Iran. And she has joined with Senator Durbin on a resolution that denies the President any unilateral authority to use force against Iran.

Senator Obama has also criticized Senator Clinton's support for a resolution urging the Bush administration to designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. But Senator Obama also supports designating the Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organization. In fact, Senator Obama cosponsored legislation in April that called on the Secretary of State to do exactly that. While Senator Obama says he opposed this resolution, in truth, he did not cast a vote. He missed the vote. He said nothing to indicate that he opposed this legislation before the vote. He was silent at a Presidential Debate that took place on the very day the vote was cast.

As Senator Obama has acknowledged, we do not know how we would have voted on Iraq if he had been in the Senate in 2002, but we do know what he did as a Senator in 2007 on a resolution he said was "dangerous." He missed it.

At this time of great international challenge, we need a President who will take a stand when it counts. We need a president who can inspire the world and win its trust and confidence. From her experiences as First Lady where she garnered the respect of people around the world, Hillary Clinton is uniquely positioned to repair the breach of the Bush Administration's foreign policy disasters, and restore American leadership in the world on Day 1 of her Presidency.

Comments

[ConcernAmerican]

Babyboomers like me, use our heads; we dice, slice, chop, dissect everything politicians say. We're not easily jaded with empty rhetoric and ideas, we want TRACK RECORD for verification. Hillary Clinton has it, Obama doesn't.

[zull2]

Ugh, there is nothing that irks me more than this kind of journal. It's just totally wrong on so many levels.

If you think that political experience is the key to fixing the country, then why oh why are you supporting Hillary Clinton? Why aren't you supporting someone like Joe Biden, or Richardson, or Dodd? They've all got FAR more relevant experience politically, and are willing to submit all the documentation to prove it.

Here's an analogy about claiming your time as a First Lady as political experience. It's like if I decided tomorrow to go hang out with my sister and tell her how to do her job all day, maybe carry a few things or fetch some stuff from her car, then went home and put that experience on my resume. Sure, it's good training, but it's not official. There's no accountability, and you're not the one making the tough decisions and being ultimately accountable. That's the problem with Hillary claiming her time in the White House as First Lady as political experience. If she were to be elected, I'd laugh if Bill decided his time as First Husband was political experience too. Sure, you're advising someone, but you're not accountable for the real decisions. THAT is experience.

[THP]

Can we all agree that a lack of reality has characterized these disaterous 7 years? Please, let us be realistic. Look at our choices. Kuccinich, Dodd, Biden and others have lost by now and we are left with Clinton and Obama with Edwards as far-fetched possibility, so let us decided between the first two. Stop all the whining about Hillarys lack of purity and the politically expedient things she has sometimes uttered (because she is a realist and can't get elcted without straddling some issues...it is like gravity...gotta accept it...and I love her for it because we so need reality now.)
Look at what she has done and what she stands for, consider the immensely important policy role she played all those years with Bill, look at how well she was able to play with the big boys in the Senate on both sides of the aisle and earned their respect which goes to her ability to be realistic and diplomatic, look at how she has not wavered for decades on her core issues (children, health care, environment, support for UN and diplomacy, education....).
Obama is great...but his lack of experience is just plain dangerous.

[zull2]

And yet, all these "experienced" leaders that you talk about weren't able to make one bit of difference...and even worse, are probably to blame for guiding this country in the wrong direction.

The problem with experience in this day and age is that political experience comes with a lot of baggage. What is political experience? Voting on a lot of bills over the course of time? Or making lots of lobbyist connections? Getting in tight with corporations? Because that's pretty much what separates a junior congressman from a senior congressman. Governors have regional experience, but don't necessarily have country-wide experience or foreign policy experience...and yet, that's where most of the Presidents of this era come from.

Being tight with corporations and lobbyists isn't going to fix the problems of today. What is Hillary's real experience? It's just a couple more years (years spent toadying to the Republican majority, no less) than Barack Obama in the Senate...and then as a First Lady. She claims that she was "in politics" all through the 90's, but her administration won't open up the documentation and prove how much of an influence she was (or wasn't). If she was just giving advice to Bill, then that's hardly real political experience...and it's certainly not the best political experience. If Bill Clinton had been truely effective, then why, why did he play a game of "follow the Republican agenda" throughout the 90's? All he did was counter Republican measures with more moderate measures. All the while the country was continuing to slide down the tubes with Hillary right at his side. Apparently, "advising" him all the way, as she keeps pointing out.

[CyrusBeaucephus]

Hillary is the worst possible candidate for this crucial point in our nations history. She has plenty of experience at being an unprincipled centrist who will say anything to get a vote. Flag burning is a crime? Voting not only to go to War with Iraq, but with Iran also? She is as bad or worse than Bush in her own unique way, and is the poster child for what is wrong with our political system. The Iraq War, and the Corporate takeover of our Democracy are the two biggest issues. Any "reforms" she will propose will be written to benefit her corporate donors, and she will keep us in Iraq. No thanks buddy. I'd rather crawl naked over broken glass than vote for her, and if she gets the nomination I will vote for a progressive third party candidate. A lot of others feel this way too. I have a feeling that this election is going to be like going to a restaurant that serves only Sh*t sandwhiches but you get to choose what kind of bread it comes on. I'm not that hungry, and there are millions of Americans just like me

[NoPCZone]

Excrement.
'They have criticized the role Senator Clinton has played in promoting American interests during her eight years as First Lady, seven years in the Senate, and four years as a member of the Senator Armed Services Committee.'

First Lady is not a policy position. She has served exactly 1 term as the Junior Senator from New York and has NO OTHER experience. Her Armed Services Committee position was concurrent with her time in the Senate. La Di Da, LA Di DA.

Obama is inexperienced. So is the Junior Senator from New York, via Arkansas and Illinois.

We cannot afford another OJT President or another Republican. Hillary Clinton has DLC (read Repugnican Lite) tattooed on her forehead. It is the Mark of the Beast®™

[darcy]

Let's dump both of them. Any of the other candidates would be better than Clinton or Obama.

[jakibaez]

This is my very first time using your blog and reading this report has left me speechless. It was so well prepared and news worthy. I wish that people that write like yourself will expand into MSNBC (the obama promoters) and others like Fox. Obama will be a big blunder for us, but, it seems like networks like MSNBC are determined to put him in the white house. With the exception of Dan Abram, who is fair. The remark at apollo from Chris referring to Hillary as the "white lady", (being myself half african-american) has left me speechless. If Chris was a white man and he was introducing Rommney and said " Black man"., we would have a riot on our hands. Obama should have got on the mike and "now, shame on you Chris, we don't want to bring race into this", but instead, he was too ready to receive his annointment of a savior from the african americans. He made a comment about appointing a special federal commission to take care of unfairness practices done to the african american, but I didn't hear NAACPA get up and say , "what the hell do you think we are, buddy??" The NAACPA has done a great job these last past years, we don't need to replace them. The american people seems to be under a super star spell, and I hope that it pops before January and February's election. To conclude, the story of Obama is true, he was a muslim- why deny it? Simply this doesn't go while with the church christian goers, so he makes sure that he spreads his denial over and over. Get his father down here to the US and see how fast his ratings go down. Good job on the article.

[godlessclif]

Hillary is not only just talk, she is dishonest talk.

A plastic hippie who voted federal money for a Woodstock museum, commemorating a concert she did not go to for a cause she does not beleive in.

Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll?
The kid is not named Janis Joplin Clinton.
Her name is Chelsea.

Hillary is a Joni Mitchel fan.

We are stardust
We are golden
And we've got to get ourselves
Back to the garden

Light up a jay Hillary :)

[CrewMantle]

Mr Feinstein.... Don't even bother trying to utilise facts; it won't work wth this crowd.


I have spent time with Americans who were Bush fanatics like no other. You could sit TEN Randi Rhodes in front of any one of them and debate using historical facts, and all you would get is a blank stare, no repudiation of the obvious; just a waste of your time.


Regardless of historical FACT, these 'democrats' will only respond with a blank stare, as they are incapable of seeing or hearing anything other than what they want to believe.


Its OJ Simpson all over again; everyone KNEW it, but there was a segment who would never believe it even he stood in front of them himself and said so.

[fedupwithpolitics]

This isn't about "experience," it's about judgment--and Clinton has proven that she has bad judgment. Her votes for invading Iraq and against Iran have left no doubt whatsoever that her political judgment is heavily controlled by AIPAC and Israeli interests. She is not presidential material.

[drricklippin]

Hillary will be the nominee- Hillary will win.

Hillary, while not flawless, will restore this nation from the trauma of the Bush nightmare.

Also -call me sexist-but this nation will mature significantly by electing its very first female president

Dr. Rick Lippin
http://medicalcrises.blogspot.com

[USMC1980]

This is exactly right. We don't need a guy with two years experience running our country at a time when we need all the Foreign and Domestic policy experience we can get from a president.

Hillary was in the WH, learning the ropes on these issues, back when Obama was still a distant memory even in Illinois.

Obama would get his ass handed to him by Rudy Giuliani, Hillary would hand Giuliani his own ass...that;s the difference, and that is why any Democrat who thinks of the country first, will vote for her.

[Nonamnesiac]

Although Hillary benefits immensely from the medicority of Obama and Edwards, this column is a joke.

Hillary's "experience" is precisely why we're in Iraq, might go into Iran, have large amount of our manufacturing done in China and other societies that repress the rights of organized labor and have immigrants (documented and undocumented) performing work in the U.S. that historically has been done at union scale with benefits for incredibly low wages and without benefits.

With that kind of experience, and no notable legislation to her credit, and the bulk of her experience and so-called accomplishments based solely upon her marital spousal to her husband, the former Governor of Arkansas and President of the United States, we need to learn from that experience by distancing ourselves from it as quickly and as far from it as we can.

On top of that, she's not the Rhodes scholar (her husband is) and her world view is so pathethically limited that she might actually believe her utterances on national security (that Iran, and Iraq before it, were actually such military threats to the U.S. they require invasion and bombing), even though neither have a military 1/1000th of our abilities, economies even 1/100th of ours and populations no greater than 1/4 of ours.

The experience argument should work against her, unless you're John Edwards or Barak Obama, who are so clueless and have demonstrated such incompetence that even a Hillary Clinton (with her husband's machine doing the lion's share of the campaign) appears to have something to say.

She will be an incredibly dangerous President, and it's my family and others like mine (and not hers and others like hers) and the famillies of those whom she chooses to attack, based on her "experience", who will pay the price in lives and limbs.

[WIDESTANCE]

hillary clinton's "experience" is the last thing america needs

hillary clinton is the neocon candidate of choice which is why CNN is trying so hard to shove her down our throats - she is the one they KNOW they can beat

hillary clinton is pro-war, what i like to call a war ho', firmly tucked into the military/industrial back pocket

hillary clinton's closet is full of god(and rove)-knows-what secrets and deceptions

hillary clinton is the dnc's credible loser candidate (as was kerry) in this kabuki charade that used to be called democracy