Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Washington Post has photo/video, obliterates Clinton Bosnia claim
Looks like Hillary's sometimes hard to believe foreign policy claims may be finally catching up with her. For instance, on March 17th this year Hillary said of her trip to Bosnia that:
"I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."
But now there are several accounts, a photo, and video that all directly contradict this statement. This comes from the Washington Post's "Fact Checker":
Far from running to an airport building with their heads down, Clinton and her party were greeted on the tarmac by smiling U.S. and Bosnian officials. An eight-year-old Moslem girl, Emina Bicakcic, read a poem in English. An Associated Press photograph of the greeting ceremony, above, shows a smiling Clinton bending down to receive a kiss.Please read the WaPo review of the Bosnia claim before responding to this post. It's a complete obliteration of the account given by Hillary Clinton and her campaign. The WaPo Factcheck apparently has a Pinocchio rating system and they give Clinton's Bosnia trip claim their worst rating of "four Pinocchios."
Clinton's tale of landing at Tuzla airport "under sniper fire" and then running for cover is simply not credible. Photographs and video of the arrival ceremony, combined with contemporaneous news reports, tell a very different story. Four Pinocchios.
Let me just say this before you respond to this post: I think Hillary Clinton has some legitimate claims to more foreign policy experience over Barack Obama. There's no question she played a more active role in the White House than many, if not all First Ladies, and as a Senator of 7 years she's certainly had more opportunities to weigh in on foreign policy (such as...Iraq...Iran...).
However, she's has totally undermined this slight advantage but completely overstating and embellishing what she did and what positions she held. I would have a lot more respect for her if she spent more time saying something like this: "I can't take credit for peace in Northern Ireland, there were many more people who gave much more than I did. But I tried to play a role in the process as much as I could, such as bringing women's groups together on a few occasions. Being close to that process through the work of my husband and through the small roles I played makes me better prepared for the reality of diplomatic relations in the White House."
Instead, we get Hillary the embellisher. She is desperate because she's losing the primary and desperate people take desperate measures. Her campaign has embellished her record (or changed her recorded positions in the past to suit today's issues) and by doing so they've set her up for a big fall, either now or in the general election.
And, this isn't going to help Clinton's "honesty" ratings either, which are already disturbingly low for a Presidential candidate: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Honesty_gap.html
If you enjoyed this post, please share with other readers by clicking on the 'recommend this' link.
Advertisement


Comments (86)
THAT VIDEO IS BIASED!!!!!! AND THAT LITTLE GIRL IS SEXIST! AND HER POEM IS TEH SUCK!
March 21, 2008 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is great news for Hillary!
March 21, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have to disagree with you. These statements by the people who were there with her, and subsequent statements by the people of Ireland show Hillary worked diligently to help bring about an agreement. http://facts.hillaryhub.com/archive/?id=6430
As with most things this country doesn't appreciate, the way a woman sometimes has to work in a arch to get to the same place a man can get to eventually in a straight line is something Hillary does very well. I can only say that we all know that the straight line isn't working for the US, but the arch has lots of possibilities..
March 21, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Hillary Clinton had no direct role in bringing peace to Northern Ireland and is a "wee bit silly" for exaggerating the part she played, according to Lord Trimble of Lisnagarvey, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and former First Minister of the province." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/08/wuspols108.xml
I'm not saying she played NO role, but what she did do has been exaggerated. She basically attended events with the President and hosted a couple of made for media events.
I would agree that we need a different way of going about foreign policy, but Hillary demonstrated with her Iraq vote that she's more likely to be more of the same.
March 21, 2008 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe you had a bit of a problem getting to the URL I provided, so I am posting a part of the factualization of Hillary's involvement in Ireland. "In 1998 under the auspices of the U.S.-led Vital Voices Democracy Initiative, established by Hillary and former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright the previous year – Hillary brought together 400 women in Belfast, Northern Ireland to foster their rise to prominence and leadership and to ensure that their success helped support peace. She met with community workers and with women politicians in Northern Ireland to encourage them to take on a larger role. She carried a pledge to the government of Ireland that the United States would remain a partner in the peace process.
Senator George Mitchell said that “She was very much involved in encouraging the emergence of women in the political process in Northern Ireland, which was a significant factor in ultimately getting an agreement.” READ THE LAST LINE.
March 21, 2008 2:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exageration is the key accusation here. Including her supposed creation of the SCHIP program.
It is not that she has a part in these events - it is that she makes it seem as though she did everything.
People can smell bullshit from a mile away. Sticking to the facts would reduce the bullshit alarms going off.
March 22, 2008 12:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary rarely takes full responsibility for any success. What you read into her speeches and between the lines is really just another Obamacentric trait.
March 22, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
And "expert witnesses" for trials can be bought too. Come on. Stop quoting hillaryhub.com and their supposed "witnesses" sponsored by the hillary campaign and do some independent research.
Common sense would suggest that for every one or two people that hillary ropes in to verifying her "claims of experience", there seem to be many many unrelated witnesses to the contrary.
Sorry, I will take the evidence from multiple unrelated sources over campaign bias anytime.
March 22, 2008 1:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sorry - I gotta say this. There really is a Lord Trimble of Lisnagarvey?
Bwahaha!
OK -sorry, that was really immature.
March 22, 2008 2:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
What you are saying is that the arch you lean on here to make your point includes the Iraq AUMF and the vote on Iran?
Or is that her cleverly using a straight line to disguise her arch?
Very clever.
I have no problem with the value a woman brings to the table. I have no problem acknowledging the value Hillary brings and historically brought to the table. But she is to busy painting her self as something different than this proclaimed womanly arch. She is busy saying
Posturing around something that looks nothing like an arch, but more like a straight line bully. Everyone knew that the AUMF was a bully move, just as the Iran vote was the first step in a bully move. Did her acceptance of not seating the MI and FL votes also count as arching? Some clever plan where she would fail to stand up when it was important and hope that she could gamble those votes later, after the game started? Bully is not what we need anymore. It is time to move on and to move forward. Her determination is only there when it is convenient, and that scares me.
March 22, 2008 12:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
You are using hillaryhub.com as a "fact check"?
Sorry. You'll have to do better than that to support your claims. How about a site not affiliated with the hillary campaign?
March 22, 2008 1:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm a little surprised this isn't getting more attention - hard evidence of a rather huge exaggeration on her part on the issue (foreign policy experience) she's staked her campaign on.
We'll see if this makes it into the MSM, but at this point it appears off the radar.
March 21, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Hillary exaggerated her 'experience' claims" is the new "Dog bites man". The MSM is more likely to front page an item about something she said turning out to be 100% accurate.
BTW, don't forget the earlier tiff between Hillary and Sinbad. Turns out, Sinbad was telling the truth and Hillary wasn't.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/?hpid=news-col-blog-viewall
March 21, 2008 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sniper fire? just a flat out lie!
March 21, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great post, although that video site gives me like 10 popups right away. Like you said, she does have some legitimate claims to be strong on Foreign Policy, but lying about them doesn't help.
March 21, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the key is exaggerating. Nowhere does anyone seem to remember that she has never had a security clearance that would provide true credibility to those claims.
March 22, 2008 12:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
She doesn't need a security clearance and neither does the President of the United States. For years that meme traveled the U.S. that Bill Clinton couldn't get a "security clearance" and the fact of the matter is that the Pres. doesn't need one. Neither does the First Lady.
March 22, 2008 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ms, while I don't agree with you about Hillary, I do think that was very nicely said.
March 21, 2008 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
ONE more piece of information if you can stand facts. This endorsement from the ambassadors: http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=4574
These are the names of the ambassadors that supported her then and who support her now: Christopher Ashby – Ambassador to Uruguay (1997-2001)
Harriet C. Babbitt – Ambassador to Organization of American States (1993-1997)
Elizabeth Frawley Bagley – Ambassador to Portugal (1994-1997)
James Blanchard – Ambassador to Canada (1993-1996)
Amy L. Bondurant – Ambassador to OECD (1997-2001)
Edward P. Brynn – Ambassador to Ghana (1995-1998)
Robin Chandler Duke – Ambassador to Norway (2000-2001)
Stuart E. Eizenstat – Ambassador to European Union (1993-1996)
Thomas Foley – Ambassador to Japan (1997-2001)
Edward E. Gabriel – Ambassador to Morocco (1997-2001)
Marc C. Ginsberg – Ambassador to Morocco (1994-1998)
Gabriel Guerra-Mondragon – Ambassador to Chile (1994-1998)
Anthony S. Harrington – Ambassador to Brazil (1999-2001)
Richard Holbrooke – Ambassador to Germany (1993-94), Ambassador to UN (1999-01)
Swanee G. Hunt – Ambassador to Austria (1993-1997)
Karl F. Inderfurth – Rep. for Special Political Affairs to the UN (1993-97)
James R. Jones – Ambassador to Mexico (1993-1997)
John Kornblum – Ambassador to Germany (1997-2001)
Philip Lader – Ambassador to United Kingdom (1997-2001)
Luis Lauredo – Ambassador to Organization of American States (2000-2001)
Tom McDonald – Ambassador to Zimbabwe (1997-2001)
Gerald McGowen – Ambassador to Portugal (1998-2001)
Charles T. Manatt – Ambassador to Dominican Republic (1999-2001)
Walter F. Mondale – Ambassador to Japan (1993-1997)
Richard L. Morningstar – Ambassador to the European Union (1999-2001)
Peter F. Romero – Ambassador to Ecuador (1993-1996)
James C. Rosapepe – Ambassador to Romania (1998-2001)
Cynthia P. Schneider – Ambassador to Netherlands (1998-2001)
Derek Shearer – Ambassador to Finland (1994-1998)
Wendy R. Sherman – Ambassador at Large (1997-01)
Terry Shumaker – Ambassador to Trinidad (1997 to 2001)
Daniel Spiegel – Ambassador UN in Geneva (1993-1997)
Joseph Wilson – Ambassador to Gabon (1992-1995)
March 21, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
These endorsement don't have anything to do with her dishonesty about her foreign policy resume. Does Bill Richardson's endorsement add to Obama's foreign policy credentials?
Ms - based on this WaPo report, do you think Hillary was honest about her trip to Bosnia?
March 21, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you!
Talk about changing the subject.
Yes, Ms, what are your thoughts on the fact that Hillary's bosnia story is (if I may piece together the fact and fiction into a tight narrative) that she was running from the plane under sniper fire and stumbled upon a little girl reading a poem, kissed her, and then kept running. I'm amazed Sinbad could keep up.
The pictures of the even do look terrifying by the way. Must have been a harrowing experience for the First Lady.
March 21, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
The way you all depict the story changes on an hourly basis. I still don't see anyone posting facts about the THREE stops she made that day, I only see one of the stops in the Utube video. Lets make up another one, let's say she was told to go into the cockpit with Chelsea and in the cockpit they told her that they would be doing some maneuvering of the plane to avoid any incoming fire. Lets see... um.. now they started to swish the plane this way and that way and then they landed. Now she was scared to death, what with being a girl and all, and so she grabbed her daughter, pulled her into her coat, yeah, her coat, and then they all ran right past the POOR little children who were so disappointed that they couldn't get their poems read to her and then she pushed one of them down, trying to get past her as fast as she could... um Then SHE Fired missles at Sinbad, yeah, that's right...so you see, I can also make up stories just like you.
March 23, 2008 6:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Match that with a list of contributions to the Clinton campaigns of the 90's and maybe we can see how they became ambassadors.
March 21, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
All 100% irrelevant to the topic of this piece, but thanks for trying to shift the goalpost and change the subject.
March 21, 2008 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lots of ambassadors trying to get new assignments. I am so impressed with their support(sarcasm intended). Maybe some of them were lobbing grenades back at the bosnians with Hillary.
March 21, 2008 10:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, probably the same response from you for all of the Admirals and Generals that think she is the best candidate: http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=6616
Hillary for President
Admirals and Generals
(Ret) Rear Admiral David Stone: There’s a large group of retired Admirals and Generals that believe that this is the most important election in their lifetime...
[Screen: 34 retired Generals and Admirals including two chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff endorse Hillary Clinton]
..."We face growing threats around the globe. Sen. Clinton is the candidate that we believe is the strongest, most experienced leader.
(Ret.) Lt. General Joe Ballard:
She has spent time in discussions with foreign governments and has spent time on the ground with military in Iraq and Afghanistan.
(Ret.) Brigadier General Evelyn "Pat" Foote:
The woman has traveled to over eighty countries; she knows this world
D. Stone:
Sen. Clinton has served for over five years on the Senate Armed Services Committee. She’s intimately familiar with the challenges that we face in our military today.
J. Ballard:
Sen. Clinton is the only candidate that has articulated a clear plan for getting us out of Iraq.
(Ret.) General Wesley Clark:
On Iraq, she has a plan to bring our troops home in a smart, safe way.
(Ret.) Brigadier General Michael Dunn:
I have seen her get legislation passed that provides resources for our combat veterans.
(Ret.) Brigadier General John Watkins:
She took it upon herself to make sure that the National Guard and Reserve members who didn’t have access to TriCare insurance would get access to TriCare.
(Ret.) Major General George Buskirk:
Sen. Clinton came out early and often, to fight for upgraded body armor, and you can ask any soldier-you can ask my son-how appreciative they are.
M. Dunn:
I admire charisma, I admire intellect. In a Commander in Chief I want more than that. I want proof. I want a track record.
J. Ballard:
You cannot learn on the job, you have to have a base of experience-a framework of experience.
J. Watkins:
Who do we believe would be the best person to occupy the Oval Office and to answer the red phone, as we said, at 3 o’clock in the morning or three o’clock in the afternoon? We come down on the Sen Hillary’s side of the ledger
W. Clark:
I believe Hillary Clinton is the right choice for America.
March 22, 2008 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
And don't forget, Bosnia isn't even a caucus State.
March 21, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha!!!!!!!!!
March 22, 2008 12:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
If it was so dangerous, why in the hell did she take her daughter with her? When I saw Chelsey in the picture of Hillary, Sinbad, & Cheryl Crowe, I KNEW she had been lying about the danger. No mother would do that, even a Hillary.
March 21, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
At least she is consistent!
HRC thinks there was sniper fire when she landed in Bosnia...
HRC thinks she was right in voting to authorize military action in Iraq...
Thank God she's ready to protect us On Day One from the Creatures From Outer Space who are landing in Chappaqua even as we post!
March 21, 2008 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
And I'd just like to reiterate that Hillary did not need to exaggerate. Going to Bosnia in the manner she did was something she could have owned proudly without the embellishment.
March 21, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't look at reports, I look for the facts and they made three stops in Bosnia that day,, I see one stop that was filmed and I can't find the actual Associated Press news story from that day. I do however remember thinking (since Chelsea is the same age as my youngest son) why would she put Chelsea in such danger? From most of what I read, they did feel a need to shield her from some kind of fire at one of the stops. I will keep looking, but usually Hillary is proven to be/do/say exactly what she is/does/says.
March 21, 2008 4:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
"they did feel a need to shield her from some kind of fire"
The job of the Secret Service was to always "shield her from some kind of fire" whether she was in Bosnia, Paris, or Palm Beach.
March 22, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here's a direct Youtube link to the video if you don't want to go to Newsbusters:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piZqaUfNs8g
March 21, 2008 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great post. Thank you.
Can someone explain to me how such an obvious and embarassing lie by a presidential candidate does not warrant a post by Greg Sargent or Eric Kleefeld on Election Central? But the Obama-NAFTA-Canada story warranted multiple posts?
March 21, 2008 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Something about that to question Hillary would equal picking on her. I guess if she is picked on (as most presidents are) then that diminishes her clear ability to be ready from day one.
Or maybe it is because questioning her actual claims equates to tearing down the democratic party.
Maybe questioning her claims is really another form of chauvinism.
Maybe by questioning her claims, we are all demonstrating how we are cultists and only want hope and light for dinner, and not whatever it is that Hillary offers.
Or maybe questioning her clearly demonstrates the deleterious effect of lattes and bad posture stemming from wearing Birkenstocks.
Or maybe question Hillary's claims is a traitorous Republican tactic and everyone who dislikes our questioning will vote for McCain instead.
I am sure I will think of what the answer is, but I must go lay prostrate to a YouTube video of Obama speaking now.
March 22, 2008 12:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, God forbid we pick on Hillary..Mr Obama is finally getting his and it doesn't feel good now, does it? She has been demeaned from fat ankles to bad hair, it will take more than the nastiness coming from this blog to tear her down. We will see how Mr AND Mrs Obama do in the coming months.
March 23, 2008 6:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe because it is not a lie, maybe because the first lady actually was at some point during that day, in a bad situation..
March 22, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
When Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton was first lady, their were no daily schedule records kept for the 3.00AM time slot, and that is why the following incident was not recorded:
One night, at around 3.00AM, as Hillary had just ended her late shift rounds of checking in on all the sleeping kids of America, and was about to bunk down for the night in her pantsuit pajamas and sleep wear pearls, the red phone rang.
Hillary answered it on the twenty seventh ring. NASA had discovered a huge meteorite bearing down on the earth that was projected to hit the planet within 15 minutes time, and destroy all life on earth.
Hillary calmly changed into her Wonder Woman Pantsuit costume, soared into space, deflected the asteroid, and returned back to her bed. She never revealed what she had done because NASA was afraid that if she revealed her super powers, then NASA would become redundant and would lose their federal funding.
Elect Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton as your next President and she will protect Senator Obama's young daughters ever night while they sleep.
You know that Hillary cares more about protecting those young girls than their father and mother do!.
March 21, 2008 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Quite funny satire - although the Wonder Woman comment is clearly sexist.
Why it is sexist escapes me now, but it will come to me. It will come to me, I am sure of it.
Since it is not coming to me, let me try a couple theories on you:
1. HeMan was the Master of the Universe all the time, and Wonder Woman had to hide her super powers to avoid NASA and scheduling conflicts.
2. Clearly someone named Wonder Woman who represented strong, powerful and successful women must be sexist. I mean, Wonder Woman? How demeaning can you get?
March 22, 2008 12:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Obamaistas are starting to remind me eerily of the Richard Mellon Scaife & Co. of the 90's with Regenery Press spelling all the "truths" that they had unearthed about the Clintons. Never thought I'd see my own party denigrate the efforts of One its best Presidents AND First Ladies in History. But, oh well, we're ready to implode.....once again.
March 21, 2008 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
There was loads of bunk, such as the Vince Foster rumor, back then.
But here there is a contradiction over recorded reality. Sniper fire, or little girl, which was it?
March 21, 2008 7:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Billary started the denigration game. Obama did not start it.
And now that the game is underway, it is clear to me that Obama is playing the game with far more honesty and sportsmanship than Billary.
March 22, 2008 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama started it, http://www.attacktimeline.com/ scroll down, it may shock you, but then as an Obama supporter, I don't really expect you to go and actually read this...
March 22, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow Liam , thats pretty pathetic. Ugly remarks. I'd expect no less from Rove like Obamaistas
March 21, 2008 5:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nice to see that you are such a sensitive soul, that not even satire or irony can deflect you from revealing yourself for the sanctimonious hypocrite that you are. I offer as clear evidence your own words that you posted on TPM today.
"Can only hope that little twit gave the money she earned from the ad back to Hillary!"
Those are your words, verbatim that you posted about a 17 year old girl.
You are a two faced jerk! and more likely off than on!
March 21, 2008 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
How do you pronounce Obamaistas?
I get Obamabots, but this new one seems to be a bit of a stretch. At least Clintonistas has a ring to it.
Maybe it is similar to Barista? Do they brew their own lattes from the hatchback of their Prius?
March 22, 2008 1:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Somebody get the fork ready. That lying monster is done!
March 21, 2008 6:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wish that were the case. But every time someone says she's done, she keeps coming back. You know like all of those 80's slasher movies. Just when you think the schmuck is done and the hero is walking away....the horror stands back up to attack yet again.
I always hated those movies.
March 22, 2008 1:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
This will not make a real bounce, Why? Because no one with a functioning brain bought that "experience" b.s. in the first place!
March 21, 2008 7:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bizarre. Either I was greeted by dignitaries and a little girl, or I ran for my life under sniper fire.
Just bizarre.
Is this the Sinbad trip?
March 21, 2008 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, but that's only a bunch of women getting together. It only counts when a bunch of men get together.
March 21, 2008 7:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, there is some garbage posted around here, but you rarely do yourself and your believability any good when this is how you present your point of view.
urbinato went out of the way to show that the problem was embellishment, not actually a lack of participation. You choose to demean the conversation.
March 22, 2008 12:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly - but desiderado is another troll, much like louisville.
March 22, 2008 2:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
"but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."
Does this mean there were lobbyists in the their vehicles?
March 21, 2008 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
LMAO!!!
March 22, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was in Bosnia at that time. The active fighting had stopped, but freshly arrived US Armed Forces considered it a combat zone and followed the appropriate rules of engagement.
That meant sharp descent and ascent during landing and takeoff procedures and mandatory helmets and flak-jackets for all personnel. At the slightest alarm, everyone would duck into shelters, fearing the attack (no US troops were ever attacked during their engagement in Bosnia).
I can only imagine how paranoid US security must have been surrounding Hillary's visit and what impression it left on her and her entourage.
This is the recollection by her speechwriter at that time:
"Lissa Muscatine, who served as Hilary Clinton's chief speechwriter in 1996 and accompanied her on the Bosnia trip, feels that I have been unfair to the former First Lady. She gave me her "vivid recollections" of the arrival in Tuzla, which I quote below:
I was on the plane with then First Lady Hillary Clinton for the trip from Germany into Bosnia in 1996. We were put on a C17-- a plane capable of steep ascents and descents -- precisely because we were flying into what was considered a combat zone. We were issued flak jackets for the final leg because of possible sniper fire near Tuzla. As an additional precaution, the First Lady and Chelsea were moved to the armored cockpit for the descent into Tuzla. We were told that a welcoming ceremony on the tarmac might be canceled because of sniper fire in the hills surrounding the air strip."
After her visit, Hillary Clinton put her clout behind securing the funding for Bosnian Women's Initiative, which de facto served as the primary funding source for the nascent non-profit sector in Bosnia:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/print.php?pid=53015
Strengthening such initiatives had a significant impact on securing peace through economic strengthening of women:
http://www.forbes.com/free_forbes/2005/0418/158.html
If you want to push this story, why not ask Bosnians themselves about how they value her role?
March 21, 2008 7:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you for a clear discussion. That would have passed the smell test, rather than the embellishment she decided to present us.
I also highlights that strengthening economic conditions is more effective that AUMF votes...
March 22, 2008 12:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Hillary would have recounted it as accuratley as the speechwriter, we wouldnt be having this conversation.
March 22, 2008 2:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
And her is the video of her ducking the snipers.. better watch it carefully or you will miss it!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxVsdS887HA
March 21, 2008 8:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now just a minute here. I watched the video and there were plenty of soldiers around. It could have been friendly fire.
March 21, 2008 8:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like the one democrat friendly-firing on the other democrat right now?
March 21, 2008 8:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well said, ork.
March 22, 2008 2:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Facts are over-rated. The sniper story is much better - if I were Hillary I'd stick with that one.
March 21, 2008 8:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just watched the Youtube video and I believe we should all write our Congresspersons tonight and demand the immediate awarding of medals for bravery under fire to Chelsea, Cheryl Crowe, Sinbad, Hillary, and that cute little kid who read the poem!
Oops, sorry, I took the snark filter out of my intertubes to clean it and that one slipped through.
March 21, 2008 8:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
OMG DUCK! THAT GIRL HAS A GUN!
March 21, 2008 8:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary: Nobody could have predicted there would be camera's there.
March 21, 2008 9:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sorry, did I hear correctly? Somebody shot at the First Lady of the United States of America and that did not start a national and international crisis?
Really, if that would happen in the real world (as opposed to Hillaryworld) then:
- the National Threat Level would be raised to Severe
- we would evaluate declaring war to one or more nations
- the First Lady would be rushed back to a safe location in the US, not to the closest vehicle in Bosnia
- some high-ranked people would pay with their careers for endangering the life of the First Lady with no real purpose whatsoever
- the news channels would cover it non-stop for days and weeks in a row
In short: is she insane or what?
March 21, 2008 10:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Bosnians were actually trying to take out Sinbad, who, though not widely known, was the "jack of spades" in the Bosnian "Most Wanted" deck of cards.
March 21, 2008 11:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I had forgetten about the deck of cards - I am still trying to collect the Sinbad card to get a complete deck. I guess they stopped selling the Fruit Loops with them in it.
March 22, 2008 1:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!!
and the honorable Mr. Sinbad, I'd imagine.
March 21, 2008 10:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jeeze, idiotic, where have you been? Others have tried to fill in, but they've killed the joke with their heavy-handedness. But you, subtle and deft!
March 21, 2008 10:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am still waiting for Sinbad to weigh in on this. Idiotic, could you pick up the Sinbad-phone (it's the flashing red one, with the parachute pants).
March 22, 2008 12:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
"it's the flashing red one, with the parachute pants"
Hilarious
March 22, 2008 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe the Bosnian ambassador was spitting when he was talking to her. That's kind of like sniper fire....
March 21, 2008 10:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe the toddler brother of the little girl was shooting suction-cup darts at Hillary's feet.
March 22, 2008 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks to all for commenting. And for the Clinton supporters too - I know I'm hard on her on some of my TPM posts but I'm not a Hillary hater. I would vote for her in the general if she were the nominee because any Democrat in the WH with a Democratic controlled Congress could do a lot of good for 4-8 years.
And if you want to look at it optimistically, I'm just helping to completely vet her now. If she can't take my shots, imagine what'll happen in the Fall.
March 22, 2008 12:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
This was very well done urbinato. It was done with both respect and care. I might have written it a bit differently:
Leaders lie about war because it makes them look like killers; and the people want a killer to lead them.
Or, as Tracy Morgan said, "America is a racist country. The end."
March 22, 2008 12:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
I get it! It was a poetry reading little girl who was laying down sniper fire on Hillary's entourage at the airport. Yeah, thats the ticket!
I don't know how people make sense of her not having a security clearance yet believing that she was deeply involved in affairs of state. She had an impressive enough record without embellishing it. When people are caught doing this, it only diminishes their true accomplishments. People do not like it when others misrepresent themselves to them.
Just another stupid decision by her that only confirms to me that she is not fit to be president. Her whole campaign has been playing catch-up to Obama, and if not for her initial super delegate lead she would be behind in every metric there is. She came to a fair fight with only one plan, no backup.
She tossed the dice and lost. It is over. Gobama! :)
March 22, 2008 7:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Clinton were the nominee, I would expect the Republicans -- and perhaps McCain personally -- to contrast Clinton's silly exaggeration of how she and her teenage daughter faced personal danger on that landing strip with the years McCain spent as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, and the torture he endured during that time.
I would expect them to make that contrast about a million times -- always drawing a laugh, and always linking it to a general argument that Clinton is dishonest.
March 22, 2008 10:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. A bunch of people who were appointed by Bill Clinton endorsed Hillary. That is almost but not quite as impressive as wrangling that Chelsea endorsement.
March 22, 2008 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Looks like the Clintons have decided that Northern Ireland is no longer of any political use to them, so Bill has dropped it from his schedule, and Peace Maker Hillary never even planned on attending:
Ireland
Clinton pulls out of NI conference
Thursday, 20 March 2008 16:44
Former US President Bill Clinton has pulled out of a major conference in Belfast next month.
The event was organised to mark the 10th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement.
Mr Clinton withdrew from the 10 April conference, organised by the US Ireland Alliance, because of changes to his schedule.
Trina Vargo, president of the US-Ireland Alliance, said, 'It is an historic occasion and while we would have welcomed President Clinton's participation, we are looking forward to this opportunity to bring together the negotiators on one stage for the benefit of the George Mitchell Scholars and their peers on the island of Ireland who will be in the audience.'
Other guests confirmed to attend the event include Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness, General John de Chastelain, who oversaw paramilitary decommissioning, former and present SDLP leaders John Hume and Mark Durkan, Ulster Unionist leader Sir Reg Empey and ex-Northern Ireland secretary Paul Murphy.
The US government is helping to sponsor the event.
Story from RTÉ News:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0320/northpolitics.html
March 22, 2008 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Chris Bowers over at OpenLeft did a post on in-group/out-group bias and the obvious impact it's having on our discussions of our nominees, and it was interesting, but I wonder if an appreciation of the implications of the Milgram Experiment wouldn't be even more useful?
To the extent that facts undercut the claims to hyper-competence/hyper-vigilance that are used by the Clinton campaign to buttress their pitch to protect us (the helpless) against dark forces, well, those same facts in turn become reasons to wonder whether Yes.We.Can is all that trite ... does Y.W.C. in this instance not then become a call to reject 'learned helplessness'?
March 22, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
So just to prove your point, lets use a release by Hillary on 3/15 as an example of your idea regarding "Learned helplessness" Can you also tell me for instance, what Obama has EVER done in this matter.. I just picked one off of her web page, so this is just an example...
"I co-sponsored the Fourteenth Dalai Lama Congressional Gold Medal Act and co-sponsored the Tibetan Policy Act of 2001, supporting a dialogue between the People’s Republic of China and the Dalai Lama. I have personally met with the Dalai Lama. I asked President Jiang Zemin to explain China’s repression of the Tibetans and their religion during his 1997 state visit to the United States. More than 10 years later, Chinese repression in Tibet continues. This week, Tibetan monks have sent a message to the world that their aspirations for religious liberty remain as strong as ever.
"Upholding freedom and human rights in Tibet will happen through negotiation, and with a commitment on all sides to seeking constructive solutions for the benefit, above all, of the Tibetan people."
March 22, 2008 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
And exactly what effect did this have? "More than 10 years later, Chinese repression in Tibet continues." Great legislation there, H.
I prefer the candidate who doesn't have the blood of 100,000 innocent Iraqi men, women and children on his hands.
March 22, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Obamaistas are the campaign workers who serve the coffee.
March 22, 2008 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment