Hillary's "3AM Experience" Ad vs. Her Lack of a National Security Clearance

Appearing on Sunday morning's Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer, Senator John Kerry was asked to address the question of Barack Obama's foreign policy crisis experience compared to Hillary Clinton's. This, of course, was prompted by the ad the Clintons are running in Ohio and Texas.

Here are the points he made about what the popular jargon calls the "red phone moments":

1. Hillary Clinton never had to answer the phone on a national security crisis at all.

2. She had her red phone moment on the Iraq War and got it wrong.

3. She had another red phone moment most recently on Iran. (He might have added that 5 years after her disastrous Iraq War Resolution vote, Hillary Clinton voted with Bush/Cheney on an Iran measure that could provide them a pretext for launching war against Iran. Not only was this another failed red phone moment, she seems not to have learned her lesson, or, perhaps may be she did not really mean it when she said she wanted her Iraq vote back.]

4. Barack Obama has more foreign policy experience than Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton had before they took office.

Wolf was without a comeback question.

But, there is an even larger question, not about Barack Obama's experience but Hillary's suggestion just by airing this ad is that she has had to answer the red phone in a real foreign policy crisis moment.

How could she? She never even had a national security clearance. Hence, not only could she not have been involved in national security discussions, she could not even have been in the room when they were being considered.

Why was it that Hillary Clinton did not have a national security clearance for the entire time she was in the White House? And, why do the media not ask Senator Clinton about that?

Finally, why does Wolf not ask the Clinton people why they are trying to mislead people about Hillary's red phone experience?

Comments

[c0mm0ntater]

Who is the best person to be President?

A woman who has the experience of visiting over 50 countries in Asia, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. A woman who is respected worldwide for her humanitarian work, particularly on behalf of children. A woman who is known for her compassion towards AIDS victims. A woman who was battle tested in the midst of a vast conspiracy. A woman who was humiliated in public by a cheating husband but showed strength of character by weathering the storm. A woman who has more charisma in her little finger than Obama has in his whole body. That's why my candidate is Princess Diana.

What? You were expecting Hillary Diane Clinton? Princess Diana is obviously the better choice as she was against land mines and cluster bombs. Hillary Clinton voted against Feinstein Amdt. No. 4882, "To protect civilian lives from unexploded cluster munitions."

[flodlite]

WITH ALL THE FORCASTS AND PREDECTONS AND ALL THE TECHNOLIGY INVOLVED, THE MEDIA HAS BEEN WRONG OVER 50% OF THE TIME. IF YOU WATCHED CNN LAST NIGHT, YOU WOULD KNOW WHAT I MEAN. THE COMINTATORS WOULD TELL YOU THAT CERTAIN DISTRICTS & COUNTIES HAVE NOT REPORTED AND GIVE YOU INUENDOS WHY CLINTON WAS NOT GOING TO CARRY STATES SHE WON............GOOD LUCK AMERICA, WE (ALL) ARE ON YOUR SIDE.

[flodlite]

I HAVE BEEN VOTING SINCE 1964, BEFORE TV. IT IS SICKENING HOW THE MEDIA, TODAY, SEEMS
TO CONTROLL HOW THIS COUNTRY FUNCTIONS. THE PRIMARY ELECTION, WITH THE MEDIA HAVING GIVE OBAMA 75% POSITIVE COVERAGE. iF ANYONE IS COMPLAINING ABOUT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY BEING DIVIDED..........IT IS THE MEDIA.......HOW DUMB CAN THE POWERS THAT BE, NOT TO SEE THIS. THE MEDIA IS BLAMING HILLARY CLINTON FOR OBAMA'S SHORTCOMINGS. THE COUNTRY IS FINDING OUT WHO OBAMA REALLY IS.....HILLARY CLINTON IS STATING FACTS......IF OBAMA HAS SOMETHING TO SAY, LET HIM SAY IT.

[drbala]

Kerry should stay out of this. Although I never regretted contributing to Kerry's campaign, his taking sides in this campaign is making it difficult. Obviously, there is a difference between Al Gore and Kerry.

Everyone is missing the point. The ad was not saying that she has all the foreign policy experience, it's only implying that BO has none, nada, zilch. But then, Obama may have given a "speech" somewhere about foreign policy which I'm sure is enough for his followers.

What I read from last nights results is that once people get to know the emptyness of the suit, they'll just go right past it.

BTW: the most damaging thing was not the 3 am ad; it was Obama's flip flops and coverups on NAFTA/Canadian issue. Maybe, just maybe, Obama should have just answered "present" when questioned about his vies on NAFTA.

[CanadianinNY]

If working to open borders for refugees is a national security experience then either Angelina Jole or Mia Farrow would make a great president. They certainly have visited more borders than Senator Clinton. I am sure both also met a number of heads of states. Does this particular experience qualify them to be Commander and Chief?

This morning when the CNN reporter (I use the term loosely), asked Senator Clinton if she could name one time when she was tested, she gave several examples: visiting numerous countries and meeting heads of states, negotiating to open the borders for Kosovo refugees, giving a speech in China about women’s rights. Either my understanding of National Security is wide of the mark or Senator Clinton is being disingenuous. Her work on behalf of marginalised groups is admirable and her speech in China was courageous and principled but it does not give her national security cred. It shows her to be dishonest and win at all cost. Having said that I don’t think Obama should go negative. I think he should challenge her on the issues and he should highlight his strength and their differences.

[PinkoAttic]

I appreciated your comment. Have to disagree about him not going negative though. He really doesn't have any other option at this point since the Clinton campaign will redouble their own negative efforts now that same appear to have borne fruit in Ohio and Texas. He can still stay above the fray in my view by merely poking holes in her " experience " claims and her purporting to be the candidate best able to take on McCain in November. If he just sits back and plays the " gentleman " card, he'll get slaughtered. Politics is not for the meak; especially against an adversary such as Mrs. Clinton.

[Purple Girl]

Frankly she is showing not only her allegience to the very tactics We have deemed repulsive, but th esponsors of such deceit. She wold best advised to cease those ads for they are not only misrepresentations of her past expereince , but are Indictments against her Husband and his Presidential ( And As Gov) legacy.
Seh has now taken sides with mac against Obama- her so called Fellow Dem. She has proven she is not the person she purports herself to be, she may actually be proving her long time detractos right. this Ol' Dem can no longer stand the sight or sound of her. she now causes the same reaction as Cheney- my blood presure rises and my skin crawls. A Corporationist. through and through- she is Not True blue!

[LAJonathan]

And she "worked to open the borders in kosovo," not with government officials, but with Cheryl Crow and Sinbad. No one discusses this. Why CNN? Why MSNBC? Why NyTimes? Why? Answer it, WHY?

[austinobserver]

It is beginning to look like Hillary wants to be John McCain's running mate.

[Emmaboverry]

I don't want Hillary answering the red phone because she'd probably complain about having to answer it FIRST. "Not that I'm not HAPPY to,"she'd say, "President Med--um, President whatever..."

[Gebby]

why does the media just pick up the ball of whatever is thrown out by a candidate. in this case hillary clinton. she expressed falsehoods or out right lies about barak obama. all the media can do is go along instead of calling it what it is. an outright lie, a smear on the character of barak obama. it should not be tolerated. the real story......hillary insisting on running with the hope the superdelegates will give her the nomination. she can not win the elected delegate count. this is the story. the media should run with this story. the selfishness with which hillary continues to go negative on a great democratic candidate. in the process jeapardising the dems chances in november.

another point. she keeps telling people she won florida. there was no campaigning or competition in florida. those delegates should not count. nor should there be a do over. rules were agreed to by all candidates.

[sophiamd]

What were the lies about Barack?

Run with the ball? more like faun over Barack and his hollywood posse.

The real hope, is that the people of Florida and Michigan will have their votes counted. It has to be a do-over to be fair. ( I just wanted to give Hillary the ones she won and Barack the rest, but my husband said it wasn't fair b/c Barack did have name recognition). So to be fair, a do-over
You can't disenfranchise Florida and Michigan. that's just wrong

Selfishness to point out Barack's failings in experience? If Barack and his supporters can't take what Hillary is dishing out, wait until Rove and the Republican machine start and destroy him in September.

[detriangulation]

Obama's rapid response ad was problematic for 2 reasons. Karl Rove pointed out that the response, which refocused the "red phone" moment to a question of judgement over Iraq, didn't counter the fear mongering because Obama already had the anti-war vote locked. Secondly, some said that the 2 ads were so similar that the rebuttal mearly reinforced the fears of the first and the Obama judgement argument at the end was lost on viewers.

Obama has to go on the offensive. He has to contest the myth of her "experience" head-on. He has to spotlight the hypocrisy of a candidate who was shouting about his "Rove style" anti-universal health care attacks in Ohio, and then turns around and launches Rovian fear monger "red phone" ads. He has to attack her on character. If she has a kitchen sink, he has septic tank full of her sorted, corrupt history to dump.

[Emmaboverry]

Excellent Detriangulation. The septic tank he throws at her can't be dirty enough for me. She'd see America in hell before she'd give up her fantasy of becoming its president.

He has to pin her down about the specific foreign policy and national security experience she claims. Or should we believe her because she says so?

[Whale]

I have contended since the start of this campaign that it is impossible for a male to run against a woman. If the male candidate attacks the experience, qualifications, etc. of the woman it will look like a man attacking a poor defenseless woman. Every woman will rise to her defense. The guy doesn't have a chance. However, it seems that attacks in the other direction are perfectly OK, because women can be "just a tough as men". This double standard stinks!

[sophiamd]

Are you serious?!?! More like the media and huffpo loves Barack and they slam on Hillary in the typical anti-woman way.

If she attacks, she is "shrill." If he attacks, it's justified, right. They talk about Hillary's clothes, laugh, cleavage. They talk about his "coolness"

Please. No one is holding back from attacking Hillary. and not "every woman" rises to her defense. In fact the "enlightened super-liberal women" are all going Obama b/c they have attained equality and want to show that "women don't need a woman president" and that the US is no longer racist.

[thebirdstheword]

Now, you're all being too hard on Hillary. Don't you know that she was a board member of Walmart from 1986-1992. This experience helps show how Hillary's going to help the common folk. If any company screams worker's rights, it's Walmart.

[sophiamd]

And Michelle Obama knows about the common people.
From the National Review

"if you make that choice, as we did, to move out of the money-making industry into the helping industry, then your salaries respond."

the helping industry has treated her pretty well.
In 2006, the Chicago Tribune reported that Mrs. Obama's compensation at the University of Chicago Hospital, where she is a vice president for community affairs, jumped from $121,910 in 2004, just before her husband was elected to the Senate, to $316,962 in 2005, just after he took office. And that does not count the money Mrs. Obama receives from serving on corporate boards.

Mrs. Obama also bemoaned the amount of money she HAS to spend -- nearly one-third of the median household income in Zanesville,OH (where she was speaking) -- on piano, dance, and other lessons for her two children.

[joebaggadonuts]

For my money, teh correct approach to take here is to let the Democrats win the White House to help us clean up the mess we are in.

I don't really care if it's Obama or Clinton.

Therefore what I want to focus on is how either of these two can beat McCain. I think that that is what they should focus on too.

I like the Onion but I really was disturbed to see their report about the McCain fix already being in.
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Onion_News_Diebold_already_rigged_election_0227.html

The right wingnuts are laughing at us. God forgive them.

[Aroth30]

I have news for you the demcratic party is too divided now. its over. in my mind I see no real way to stop Mccain from obtaining the White House. Clintonites wont vote for Obama, Obamites wont vote for Clinton= were screwed.

[nightwind928]

The only loser here is the American people who will have to suffer through more of Hillary's tiring oratory, at least until May. As the Democrats spend millions more dollars and do damage to their candidate in the accusitory innuenndo that's sure to come in the up coming weeks, the Republicans will take a break and gather strength for the fall showdown