With the recent fiery murder of a captured Jordanian pilot by ISIS — It really looks like Hillary Clinton’s worst fall as Barack Obama’s Secretary of State might have occurred on December 3, 2012 — when she made the Syrian "Red Line" one of her own talking points
Hillary is going to be taught a long hard lesson in the concept of "the relative present” when it comes to her part in the shared Obama-Clinton foreign policy that gave rise to ISIS/ "ISIL"
Those who read this blog religiously, know that I have made much of Hillary Clinton’s history of serious falls since she became Secretary of State. According to media reports, there were three of them, two that caused documented serious injuries; and a third, which to date not been connected to any permanent injury or condition. According to widespread press and TV coverage, these are her three most notable tumbles: the first was a fall in the State Department basement garage on Wednesday, June 17th 2009, which resulted in a June 19, 2009 surgery to repair a right elbow fracture suffered by Secretary Clinton from that fall; the second occurred on January 12, 2011,when the Secretary of State fell while she was boarding a plane in Yemen – the cause of that fall has been variously described as "fainting," or alternatively, "tripping and falling" – it has also been claimed that Ms. Clinton suffered no injuries “...as a result of the fall...”; and the third, and most serious event medically, occurred over an imprecisely described time between December 7th and 15th 2012. Around those dates, it was reported that Hillary fainted at home after being incommunicado with the flu, that she then fell and was treated for a serious concussion around 12/15/12 and thereafter being moved from Washington D.C.to a hospital in New York City to be treated for a serious intra-cranial blood clot from late December 2012 into sometime in 2013. Two of those falls required extensive treatments, during which Hillary was not able to perform her duties as Secretary of State for significant periods. Enough of that, this piece isn’t about the medical mumbo-jumbo involved in Hillary's penchant for physically falling down.
CURRENT EVENTS AND A MAJOR HILLARY ON-THE-JOB TRIP-UP IN 2012
Now, it’s really beginning to look like the trip and fall, which might do even more damage to Hillary’s “inexorable,” “unstoppable,” and/or “inevitable” march to the White House in 2016 occurred on the day that she made Barack Obama’s Syrian “Red Line”in the sand an item of community property between them.With things going from bad to worse inside Syria, with the murderous “burning alive” of Lieutenant Moaz al-Kasasbeh, RJAF, being as President Obama said "just one more indication of the viciousness and barbarity of [ISIS/"ISIL"]"; the fact, that Hillary was completely on board with the President when her trip over the Syrian “Red Line” began, is critical in assessing just what her foreign policy chops might be — and whether she is in any way capable of leading this country any further into this more threatening world that she helped to create.
THE DAY THAT HILLARY TRIPPED OVER OBAMA’S “RED LINE” IN SYRIA
Even though Hillary did use the Term “Red Line” earlier during 2012 when referring to U.S. policy in Syria, it wasn’t until her Prague speech in December 2012 that she made the “Red Line” her own. There were many reports that “Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, herself, sternly warned Syria in December 2012 that using chemical weapons against rebel forces would be a “Red Line” and that it would trigger retaliatory action from the United States ( See “Clinton: Assad’s ‘Chemical Weapons’ a ‘Red Line’ for US” by Dana Hughes & Luis Martinez, 12/4/12, ABC News [http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/12/clinton-assads-chemical-weapons-a-red-line-for-us/][@dana_hughes and/or @LmartinezABC]).PRESIDENT OBAMA AND SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON WERE COMPLETELY “IN SYNCH” ABOUT OBAMA’S SYRIAN “RED LINE”
The ABC coverage of Clinton’s remarks continued with this observation: “Along with a pledge from President Obama, Clinton’s words were the second public warning from the U.S. government in response to reports that Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad may be moving a chemical weapons stockpile....” Then ABC directly quoted Secretary Clinton thus: “... ‘We have made our views very clear. This is a red line for the United States. I’m not going to telegraph in any specifics what we would do in the event of credible evidence that the Assad regime has resorted to using chemical weapons against his own people, but suffice to say we are certainly planning to take action if that eventuality were to occur,” Clinton said at a press conference in Prague.’...”The ABC report cited above also noted that on the same day that Hillary Clinton made her remarks in Prague, in Washington at the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Symposium President Obama called the possible use of chemical weapons “totally unacceptable....” And he said, “I want to make it absolutely clear to Assad and those under his command, the world is watching....”
What’s more, State Department Spokesman Mark Toner echoed his boss Hillary Clinton’s “Red Line”remarks with this: “What we’ve been very clear about, though, is that, as we said, any user proliferation would be crossing a red line, and we would take necessary steps or actions.... I’m just not going to get into any specifics about their chemical weapons program — only that we are concerned about any move that might signal that they are somehow ready to use those chemical weapons on their own people.”
There were similar reports about Hillary’s December 2012 echoing of Obama’s Syrian “Red Line” formulation by several other major news outlets ( See e.g., “U.S. Warns Syria on Chemical Weapons” by Peter Baker & Michael R. Gordon, 12/3/12, NY Times/ Middle East [http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/04/world/middleeast/nato-prepares-missile-defenses-for-turkey.html?_r=0]; see also, “U.S. ‘planning to take action’ if Syria crosses chemical weapons ‘red line’ " by Margaret Brennan, 12/3/12, CBS News [http://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-planning-to-take-action-if-syria-crosses-chemical-weapons-red-line/]; and see also, “Why the red line on Syria’s chemical weapons matters” by Max Fisher, 12/6/12, Washington Post [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/06/why-the-red-line-on-syrias-chemical-weapons-matters/]).
10 comments:
Hey Gail, what gives here? This reads like a very long and twisted Kassar "Common Sense" article. You could have made your point by only saying something like this - HILLARY FOOLISHLY TRIPPED ON OBAMA'S RED LINE FOR SYRIA MAKING A NEW TOTAL OF FOUR SERIOUS FALLS FOR CLINTON WHILE SHE WAS SECRETARY OF STATE.
So Gale your "Hillary is too old" argument was found to have no merit and properly debunked by a commenter and now you spew forth a novel yet equally feeble "Hillary has a head injury" claim to try to besmirch her candidacy. This again will fail. What did they teach us in law school? If you don't have the law on your side argue the facts if you don't have the facts argue the law; when you have neither then pound the podium. Stop pounding the podium.
UPDATE: THE “ELIZABETH WARREN ECHOES” EDITION
IS IT TOO EARLY TO CUE THE FOLLOWING AS PART OF THE HILLARY CLINTON SOUNDTRACK:
“I SEE A BAD MOON RISING... I SEE TROUBLE ON THE WAY... I SEE EARTHQUAKES AND LIGHTIN’... I SEE THOSE BAD TIMES TODAY...."
— CCR
According to a report from ABC News, “Elizabeth Warren has said over and over that she isn't running for president in 2016[, but h]er supporters don't wanna hear it.”
(See “Elizabeth Warren's Supporters Persist on 2016, One Meeting at a Time” by Stephanie Ebbs, 2/3/15, ABC News [http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/elizabeth-warrens-supporters-persist-2016-meeting-time/story?id=28669171]).
The ABC report goes on to say that “... Run Warren Run is a project of MoveOn.org’s political action committee and affiliated with Democracy for America. Both organizations are working with the Ready for Warren group. Since December, MoveOn has gathered almost 282,000 signatures on a petition urging Warren to run for president, invested $1 million and even set up offices in Iowa and New Hampshire, according to MoveOn Media Relations Director Brian Stewart. *** And the draft movement appears to be picking up steam. Recently a group of celebrities including Mark Ruffalo, Michael Moore, Olivia Wilde and Susan Sarandon fired off a letter encouraging Warren to run and formed an offshoot called “Artists for Warren.” *** The PAC raised close to $7 million in 2014, according to Federal Election Commission reports, but that is not exclusively for the Warren effort....”
ABC’s reporter Stephanie Ebbs focused on “[o]ne of the most vocal attendees at the D.C. meeting,” Jim McBride. Ebbs described McBride as “a communications specialist who worked on Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign in D.C. and Virginia and is still active in progressive politics....” Ebbs then quoted Mc Bride — “...‘I really want to get a discussion going about what kind of party we want to be.’...”
Also according to Ebbs, a “...noticeable moment of tension was when members of the group disagreed on whether their efforts should try to contrast Warren from Clinton, who some even described as ‘Republican light.’ *** McBride cautioned against anything that might alienate Democrats, such as going negative toward Clinton or the president.”
UPDATE: THE "THIS PROVES THAT 'GRANDMA CLINTON' IS TOO OLD" EDITION
ISN'T HILLARY USING THE "SARAH PALIN METHOD" OF RUNNING ?
DON’T MISS THIS —
“Hillary Clinton @HillaryClinton Feb 2 – retweeted by________
The science is clear: The earth is round, the sky is blue, and #vaccineswork. Let's protect all our kids. #GrandmothersKnowBest”
— You know, she didn’t always say that!
— Besides each and every part of that is only a “half-truth”....
— Hmmm, “The science is clear....” is that anything like, “The science is settled....” ?
What Hillary is really saying is that she believes in the kind of science that underpins “Scientific Socialism, ” which we all know is Engels' term for "Marxism."
It is an excellent strategy for Hillary to emphasize her role as a grandmother. It makes her more endearing and trustworthy. She is embracing who she is while at the sNe time declawing any ridiculous ageism rhetoric that comes from the GOP. Grandmothers in general are respected as wise sages which is exactly what Hillary is.
COMMENT: THE “OBAMA’S FLUNKING ‘DEGRADE’” EDITION
THE BLOODLESS RESPONSE, AND THE FLAWED MATH AND RHETORIC SHOW THAT OBAMA, JUST DOESN’T HAVE IT AS A WARRIOR OR AS A NATIONAL LEADER — MAYBE, THAT’S WHAT AMERICA GETS FOR ELECTING ITS FIRST POST-AMERICAN PRESIDENT
Breitbart News said that on “Tuesday President Barack Obama reacted to ISIS releasing a video showing a captured Jordanian pilot being burned alive. *** President Obama said, “You know, I just got word of the video that had been released. I don’t know the details on the confirmation. Should in fact this video be authentic, it’s just one more indication of the viciousness and barbarity of this organization. And I think we will redouble the vigilance and determination on the part of global coalition to make sure that they are degraded and ultimately defeated. It also indicates the degree to which whatever ideology they are operating off of, it’s bankrupt. We’re here to talk about how to make people healthier and make their lives better. And this organization appears only interested in death and destruction. Thank you very much, everybody....” (See “Obama Reacts to ISIS Burning Alive Pilot: We Will Redouble Vigilance” by Pam Key, 2/3/15, Breitbart News [http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/02/03/obama-reacts-to-isis-burning-alive-pilot-we-will-redouble-vigilance/]).
How could the President of the United States respond to the barbarity of the video-taped immolation of Jordan’s pilot, Lieutenant Moaz al-Kasasbeh with this bloodless comment: “It [ ] indicates the degree to which whatever ideology they are operating off of, it’s bankrupt....” ?
The math and the logic just isn’t there either. On Sunday [broadcast on Monday] Obama said this: “Anything that we're doing – anything that we could be doing... we are doing." However, on Tuesday in his response to the brutal murder of the Jordanian pilot, the President said “...[W]e will redouble the vigilance and determination on the part of global coalition to make sure that they are degraded and ultimately defeated....”
I think Gale subscribes to the belief of "keep slinging the mud, eventually it will stick." Well Gale that was only true in Catholic school. In the real world it usually doesn't stick. Hillary cannot be aligned with the present administration's errant policies (there are only a few - not many) no matter how hard the GOP's try.
RESPONSE: THE "MUDSLIDE" EDITION
The mud won't have to stick when y/k/w is buried in it.
"Anonymous...5:35 PM" might not know it, but I'm sure that Hillary does.
Hillary is old and fat
UPDATE & BACKFILL: THE “THANK GOD FOR JOHN KERRY” EDITION
SECRETARY OF STATE JOHN KERRY FOUND TO BE AMONG THE WORST SECRETARIES OF STATE BY FOREIGN POLICY SCHOLARS
HILLARY CLINTON AND HER TEAM BREATHED A SIGH OF RELIEF — FIGURING THAT A TIE FOR FOURTH PLACE WITH MADELINE ALBRIGHT ISN’T THAT BAD
The Washington Post says that Foreign Policy magazine this week announced the results of its 2014 Ivory Tower survey of 1,615 international relations scholars from 1,375 U.S. colleges. *** One of the questions: “Who was the most effective U.S. secretary of state of the past 50 years? ( See “John Kerry gets dissed on scholars’ list” by Al Kamen & Colby Itkowitz, 2/5/15, The Washington Post [http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/john-kerry-gets-dissed-on-scholars-list/2015/02/05/d38f8f00-ad7e-11e4-ad71-7b9eba0f87d6_story.html]).
According to the WaPo report, the winner was Nobel Peace Prize recipient Henry Kissinger, who was secretary for four years during the Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford administrations. Since the Vietnam thing didn’t turn out so well, the scholars must have been grading him on openings to China and the Soviet Union when he was at the National Security Council. Kissinger got 32.21 percent, extraordinary in such a large field.
“Don’t Know” came in a relatively distant second, with 18.32 percent.
James Baker — who was actually the most effective secretary in the past 50 years — came in third at 17.71 percent, just behind “Dr. Don’t Know.”
Madeleine Albright and Hillary Clinton tied for fourth at 8.70 percent.
George Shultz was sixth with 5.65 percent; Dean Rusk, who served under John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, came in seventh at 3.51 percent; Warren Christopher got 1.53 percent, tying Cyrus Vance for eighth place. Colin Powell was picked by 1.07 percent for 10th place; and Condoleezza Rice got the nod from 0.46 percent, putting her in 11th place.
Lawrence Eagleburger came in 12th place with only 0.31 percent; then, dead last among the vote-getters was Kerry, who got a total of two votes of the 660 scholars who responded, tied with Eagleburger’s 0.31 percent, nonetheless Foreign Policy Magazine listed him at 13th.
On the other hand, SOS John Kerry did better than these folks: William P. Rogers, who served for four years as Nixon’s first secretary of state, butt no votes at all; ditto for Ed Muskie, who served under Jimmy Carter; and Al “I Am in Control Here” Haig, who was secretary for 18 months under Ronald Reagan also received the same round number of votes “0".
Post a Comment