Yesterday, Hillary Clinton called Barack Obama naive. She said Obama was naive to commit to talking to the leaders of foreign countries that the United States is having trouble with. She even said that engaging in such diplomacy would be irresponsible.
Before Hillary Clinton gets so enthusiastic about calling Barack Obama naive just for suggesting that the President speak with the leaders of other nations, she might stop to think about the kind of naive behavior she has engaged in herself.
Here’s a clue for her. Two years ago, Hillary Clinton gave another speech in which she called some other people naive. Here’s what she said back then: “We’ve adopted a realistic foreign policy that is not based entirely on military might nor on the naive notion that we do not need the capacity to take tough action when necessary.”
Don’t recognize the quote? That’s all right. It’s not one that Hillary Clinton is spending a lot of time reminding people of. This quote comes from July 25, 2005, when Clinton was speaking to the Democratic Leadership Council, an organization of rightward leaning Democrats that Clinton belongs to.
Can you guess what “realistic foreign policy” of the Democratic Leadership Council Hillary Clinton is talking about? Don’t work too hard now, I’ll tell you. It’s the foreign policy of supporting George W. Bush’s decision to invade and occupy Iraq. The Democratic Leadership Council was, after all, one hundred percent behind President Bush when he came up with the plan to start a war in Iraq. Every member of the DLC that was in Congress at the time, Hillary Clinton included, voted in favor of Bush’s plan to rush the American military into Iraq.
If ever there was a naive decision about foreign policy, it was the one that led Hillary Clinton to decide that George W. Bush seemed like the kind of President who knew exactly what he was doing, and could be trusted with broad war powers. Yet, Hillary Clinton now has the gall to call Barack Obama, who had the responsibility, foresight and maturity to oppose the invasion and occupation of Iraq from the start, naive?
I encourage Hillary Clinton to look back to this speech, and what she said. She called those who urged restraint in military spending “naive”, because there were times when “tough action” would be “necessary”. Senator Clinton was just plain wrong when she suggested that using “tough action” in Iraq was necessary.
Hillary Clinton was wrong to call those of us who wrote, emailed and called her offices, begging her not to vote in favor of starting a war in Iraq, naive. If she is going to ask for our votes, she ought to at least have the decency to apologize for that insult to antiwar activists. Instead, last night, she compounded it with another slur against diplomacy.
The truth is, when it came down to the time to decide the appropriate time for diplomacy in Iraq, Hillary Clinton was dead wrong, and Barack Obama was spot on correct. Hillary Clinton’s forgetfulness of this fact may suit her conscience, but it does not reflect well upon her presidential campaign.
Good for you, jclifford.
I agree with your comments on Hillary Clinton and foreign policy. My book, “Hilalry Clinton Nude: Naked Ambition, Hillary Clinton And America’s Demise,” documents the long period of support Hillary Clinton gave to the Iraq policy of President Bush and his neocons, until public opinion shifted against the war.
It looks more and more like this election isn’t going to substantially change anything, just like the last two. Elections are a charade foisted on the Amerikkkan sheeple to keep them believing in the myth of their “democracy.” It’s complete and total b/s, and sooner or later you’ll realize that (since 2000, maybe a few elections before) the corporate sector is running things now (and isn’t about to give it up). Keep on dreaming, America, if it helps you to sleep at night, but that’s not how it is.