• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Hillary Clinton - What a smooth talker

Help Support Ranchers.net:

B

Buckeye

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
147
Reaction score
0
Location
Ohio
I wonder how it is that AP removes part of their original article?


http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/10/024827.php
October 29, 2009 Posted by John at 2:06 PM

Isn't a diplomat supposed to be--you know--diplomatic? Secretary of State Hillary Clinton doesn't seem to think so. On her current visit to Pakistan, she managed to insult both her own government and Pakistan's in the space of a few minutes.

The Associated Press has reported on interviews and a Q and A session that Clinton gave in Islamabad. I came across it via The Corner, where John Hannah was appalled by this partisan attack by Clinton on her own government:

  • As a way of repudiating past U.S. policies toward Pakistan, Clinton told the students "there is a huge difference" between the Obama administration's approach and that of former President George W. Bush. "I spent my entire eight years in the Senate opposing him," she said to a burst of applause from the audience of several hundred students. "So to me, it's like daylight and dark."
One can only agree with Hannah's comment:

  • Does anyone advising President Obama and the secretary of state really believe that this kind of partisanship and trash-talking abroad about another American president is going to buy us much long-term goodwill among either our friends or our adversaries? Do they imagine that this sort of thing really helps to advance U.S. national interests?
Interestingly, that paragraph has now been deleted from the version of the AP account to which Hannah linked, although it can still be found elsewhere. But the linked version adds this report of Clinton slandering the government of Pakistan, which is equally appalling, but for different reasons:

  • While U.S. officials have said they believe Osama bin Laden and senior lieutenants have been hiding in the rugged terrain along the border with Afghanistan, Clinton's unusually blunt comments went further as she suggested that Pakistan's government has done too little to act against al-Qaida's top echelon.

    "I find it hard to believe that nobody in your government knows where they are and couldn't get them if they really wanted to," Clinton said in an interview with Pakistani journalists in Lahore. "Maybe that's the case. Maybe they're not gettable. I don't know."
Is it really the position of the U.S. government that Pakistan's leaders could kill or capture bin Laden et al. if they wanted to, but they have chosen not to do so? That is an explosive charge, and one that to my knowledge is false. Moreover, Clinton doesn't seem to make the charge seriously, as she immediately sort-of-retracted it by saying "Maybe they're not gettable. I don't know." So was she just idly musing when she accused Pakistan's government of deliberately harboring al Qaeda's top leadership?

Does either of the above instances represent how a competent, professional diplomat would behave? I don't think so
 
Buckeye said:
hypocritexposer said:
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/yt-1J3w4cS2MvM/seinfeld_double_dip/
Click to expand...
Glass house dweller :x
Click to expand...


bubble_boy2.jpg
 
Did anyone hear about this on CNN, MSNBC, MBC?


What a classy administration.

Bush dinner tastes sour for Obama
- PMO decision to entertain former President causes hurt in Washington
K.P. NAYAR

Washington, Oct. 24: Preparations for Manmohan Singh's visit to Washington on November 24 have begun on a negative signal to the Obama administration with a decision by the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) to host former President George W. Bush for dinner at Singh's residence at the end of this month.

Bush is visiting New Delhi on October 30 and 31 at the invitation of an Indian newspaper and will speak at a conference organised in New Delhi on October 31 on "America Re-engaging with the World: Challenges, Opportunities and Risks".

Arguably stung by the PMO's insensitivity in ostentatiously receiving the bete noir of the Democratic establishment here just over three weeks before Singh's arrival at the White House, the Obama administration announced yesterday that US secretary of state Hillary Clinton will make her first trip to Islamabad.

Clinton, a long-time friend of India, has tried her best to prevent a return to hyphenated Indo-Pakistan relations under the Obama administration and had refused to include Pakistan in the 229,528km that she has flown in her nine months in office.

Despite the strategic importance of Pakistan in the Afghan conundrum that is confronting President Barack Obama, Clinton has so far left it to her minions to deal with the broad leadership in Islamabad.

But that will change with her first trip, which was significantly announced at a briefing by Richard Holbrooke, Obama's special envoy on Pakistan and Afghanistan, whose prickly equations with New Delhi are well publicised here.

On the record, of course, no one in the Obama administration will say anything negative about the Bush trip to India because civility in political discourse is valued in the US. Nor will they suggest a Bush-India link in Clinton's sudden decision to travel to Islamabad "soon".

A source close to Clinton, however, said she recalled being kept hanging in her Senate office in 2001 while Sonia Gandhi repeatedly changed plans to meet her. The Indian embassy here had advised the Congress president that the Bush administration would not look favourably on a meeting with the former First Lady-turned-Democratic Senator from New York.

Instructions have gone out from the state department to the US embassy in New Delhi to extend all the courtesies that are due to a former American head of state and the ambassador in New Delhi, Timothy Roemer, will be correct, but not effusive in dealing with Bush.

But in private conversations, officials of the Obama administration, especially Democratic political appointees, make no secret of their sense of hurt over New Delhi's decision.

This sense of hurt is shared by liberal Democrats on Capitol Hill, where enthusiasm about the Prime Minister's visit was palpable until it became widely known here that the man whom many of them consider to be a war criminal is being needlessly feted in New Delhi at this time.
"We are rolling out the red carpet for your Prime Minister," pointed out one Obama administration official. "Singh's is the first state visit to be organised by the Obama administration. And what do you do? Invite the man who triggered the end of my country's superpower status and brought shame to America worldwide."

Said a Congressional aide: "In New Delhi people have been complaining for nine months, quite mistakenly, that Obama has downgraded the relationship with India. You have complaints about Obama's nuclear policy, his climate policy and his trade policy.

"So the President decides to organise a grand show of bonhomie with your Prime Minister in the White House. Instead of making the most of this opportunity by both sides, your response is to slap us in the face by inviting the one man who is responsible for most of the problems on Obama's shoulders."

The wide-ranging sense of betrayal in hosting Bush little over three weeks before Singh travels to Washington is partly the result of a feeling here — perhaps mistaken — that it was the PMO which organised the invitation to Bush to visit New Delhi.

Some Americans insist that the US embassy in New Delhi had sent cables earlier, reporting government feelers to think tanks and non-government institutions to invite Bush to give a lecture in India as an excuse for the UPA government to thank him for what he did for Indo-US relations.

Sources who have seen these cables said such feelers began after Bush made his first trip outside North America in April to attend the Boao Forum in China, which is similar to the conference the former President will address in New Delhi on October 31.

In March, Bush made a feeble attempt to enter the lucrative lecture circuit by making a test trip to Calgary, Canada, where 1,500 people paid $400 per person to hear the former President. But protesters outnumbered listeners, media were kept out of the hall and the trip was deemed a disaster.

The only other known overseas trip made by Bush since relinquishing office was to South Korea in August to speak at an economic forum organised by the Federation of Korean Industries. But in this case, Korean industries had been working with him to overcome Republican opposition in the US Congress to the ratification of a Korea-US free trade agreement.
Top
Click to expand...

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1091025/jsp/frontpage/story_11655878.jsp#
 
As a way of repudiating past U.S. policies toward Pakistan, Clinton told the students "there is a huge difference" between the Obama administration's approach and that of former President George W. Bush. "I spent my entire eight years in the Senate opposing him," she said to a burst of applause from the audience of several hundred students. "So to me, it's like daylight and dark."
Click to expand...

was this a racist comment I bolded above? :p
 
Sandhusker said:
Einstein said:
Sandhusker said:
Yes, it was, Einstein. You are clearly a racist and a rightwingnut as well. :wink:
Click to expand...

how do you figure Sandhusker?
Click to expand...

Any comment not glowingly supportive of Obama reveals one as an obvious racist.
Click to expand...

I am with you now. I shouldn't have doubted your motives.
 

Latest posts

Top