HIllary APIf you ever needed a crystal clear example as to why people have zero trust in politicians, then look no further than Hillary Clinton’s recent criticism of President Obama’s “Don’t do stupid stuff” foreign policy and her denial of it roughly 48 hours later.

The Atlantic reported August 10:

This is what Clinton said about Obama’s slogan: “Great nations need organizing principles, and ‘Don’t do stupid stuff’ is not an organizing principle.”

After someone pulled her aside and convinced her that the internet doesn’t exist, her spokesman released the following statement August 12:

“Earlier today, the Secretary called President Obama to make sure he knows that nothing she said was an attempt to attack him, his policies or his leadership. Secretary Clinton has at every step of the way touted the significant achievements of his presidency, which she is honored to have been part of as his secretary of state. While they’ve had honest differences on some issues, including aspects of the wicked challenge Syria presents, she has explained those differences in her book and at many points since then. Some are now choosing to hype those differences but they do not eclipse their broad agreement on most issues. Like any two friends who have to deal with the public eye, she looks forward to hugging it out when she they see each other tomorrow night.”

Intelligent people can have a debate on whether or not Mr. Obama should have been more engaged with Syria before 200,000 people were slaughtered and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) took over large swathes of the Middle East, etc., but there is no debate to be had regarding Ms. Clinton’s attack on the president’s foreign policy. That is exactly what she did, and to say otherwise — only 48 hours after she did it — is indicative of someone who is a pathological liar. One almost feels bad for National Journal’s Ron Fournier, who had to amend his original piece on Ms. Clinton’s Atlantic interview after saying that Americans may have “just witnessed a rare and risky act of authenticity.” No authenticity there, Mr. Fournier. Just blatant lying.

The problem with lies like this (besides the fact that it’s a lie), is that it’s over something relatively insignificant — she disagrees with her old boss’ foreign policy. She could have easily said, “You know what, that was probably an unfair assessment and I should have articulated that better,” — but she didn’t. She lied. And if she will lie without hesitation over the little things, then she will lie when it comes to the big things.

I could sympathize with a woman whose husband gets caught having an affair with a young intern in the Oval Office. I could forgive her lies when she is forced to talk about her husband’s personal failings on live television. I do not sympathize with a woman who lies about public policy as if whatever she says at any specific moment is and always was the truth.

If Mr. Obama’s foreign policy is “don’t do stupid stuff,” (while allowing Putin to take Crimea, ISIL to take over large swathes of Syria and Iraq, and Libya to turn into Terrorist Central), then it appears as though Ms. Clinton’s is: “2 + 2 = 5”.

Advertisements

About the Author Douglas Ernst

I'm a former Army guy who believes success comes through hard work, honesty, optimism, and perseverance. I believe seeing yourself as a victim creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. I believe in God. I'm a USC Trojan with an MA in Political Science from American University.

28 comments

  1. Hillary’s such a stupid, self-serving coward. If she can’t even stand up to Obama for his obviously failing policies, how will she ever have the spine to stand up to Putin, or anyone else?

    1. I would say that Hillary Clinton’s spine is probably in whatever shape the polls are in from day to day. If the polls are in a straight line pointing towards doing “x” to Putin, she will work to achieve “x.” If they’re a twisted mess, then she and her spokespeople will created talking points that are rambling and incoherent. It’s sad, but if she is elected in 2016, then the American people have no one to blame but themselves.

  2. Interesting article, Doug. But I actually have a question; are you going to weigh in on what’s happening in Ferguson, MO anytime soon? From what I’ve read from eyewitness accounts and seen on the news, if one were to call the police in that town “utter lunatics”, it would honestly still be an understatement. I’d like to hear what you think of all this, especially considering that the police there are actively trying to censor the media.

    1. Thanks for the read, psychokineticex. With racial stories I usually like to hold off a bit and let some of the dust settle. I don’t even think the internal investigation is complete, if I’m not mistaken (I’m on vacation, so I’m not as up on all of this as I normally would be). I suppose if I had to comment, then I’d say that there are plenty of lunatics to go around, whether it’s in the police department or the general population. Again, that’s why I’d like to see what the investigation concludes.

      Also, I suppose my other knee-jerk reaction is to wonder about people who essentially say, “I’m upset. I should just torch my own community to show everyone how upset I am.” Stealing from the Chinese businessman down the street and looting shoe stores is hardly the way to telegraph the message “I have the moral high ground.”

    2. I have to agree with your reasoning that the looting was unjustified, but that’s only a small part of the story, and after reading up as much as I could, I still have to side with the protesters, considering that the police in Ferguson are escalating the tensions by bringing out military level gear against what is largely a peaceful protest, and there has been much less violence coming from the protester’s side. There have also been the unlawful arrests and detainment of news reporters covering the story, and I saw pictures taken of officers in full riot gear dismantling the cameras of news crews covering the story. If that ain’t a giant neon sign of “WE’VE DONE SOMETHING WRONG AND ARE TRYING DESPERATELY TO AVOID RESPONSIBILITY”, I have no idea what is.

    3. I think it could be interpreted as a neon sign that says “We are horribly handling the aftermath of this incident,” but it says nothing to me about what actually happened on the night that the young man was shot. Again, that is something that we’ll be able to get a better picture of once the internal investigation is complete.

      Americans give federal and state governments more and more power, and then they wonder why a.) the U.S. looks more and more like a police state, and b.) why that power is abused. You can’t help but laugh because otherwise you would weep.

      To me, the “neon sign” is that we as a society are lost and confused. We are in desperate cultural straits, but no one wants to admit it.

  3. So Hillary was for the Obama administration’s foreign policy before she was against it, and now she’s for it again. And Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee recently said that the Democrats never tried to impeach Bush, although she co-sponsored a bill to do just that in 2008.

    It’s easy to tell when politicians are lying. Just watch their mouths to see if they’re moving. As Lily Tomlin said, no matter how cynical you get, it’s impossible to keep up.

    Re: the shooting in Ferguson, MO, I agree with reserving judgment (and comment) until the dust settles and more facts are known. For all I know, the cops in Ferguson are a bunch of trigger-happy storm troopers who shoot anything that moves. Then again, maybe the decedent did assault the cop. Or maybe a well-intentioned cop made a tragic mistake when he was forced to make a life-or-death decision in a split second.

    One thing is certain: the mainstream media are, at best, unreliable. I want to get more information from other sources (probably including Mike McDaniel’s and Massad Ayoob’s blogs) before forming an opinion.

    1. And Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee recently said that the Democrats never tried to impeach Bush, although she co-sponsored a bill to do just that in 2008.

      Saw that one and had to laugh. Unreal…

      Or maybe a well-intentioned cop made a tragic mistake when he was forced to make a life-or-death decision in a split second.

      This is what always gets lost in the mix. Cops often have an instant to decide what to do, and if they’re in a dangerous situation sometimes they’re going to make the wrong call. Did this kid have a prior record? Was that known prior to the altercation? Why was he pulled over? What does the report say? (Again, I’m on vacation so I haven’t been following all of this.) There are all sorts of questions I’d like to have answered, but from what little I’ve seen over Twitter, Facebook, etc. … it sounds like a cop just went up to a black kid and murdered him in cold blood. My guess is that the truth is a bit more nuanced than that.

    2. “And Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee recently said that the Democrats never tried to impeach Bush,:although she co-sponsored a bill to do just that in 2008.”

      Yeah, I had to laugh, too. She has a very selective memory, as do most Democrats. Remember, many of them were for the Iraq War initially, from Harry Reid to Hillary Clinton and others. Then they abruptly changed their stance, like when Reid declared the “war was lost.”

      As for Clinton, I don’t think she is even qualified to become President. She’s never run anything her entire life. She’s been a First Lady (at both the state and federal levels), a Senator and a Secretary of State. She’s never been a governor, she’s never run a business, etc. She was one of Obama’s yes people and helped cover up Benghazi. I haven’t forgotten “What difference does it make?” and I won’t when it comes time to vote in 2016. And you know that if she becomes President, what was considered “racist” under Obama will morph into “sexism” because a woman’s in office. The War on Women nonsense will be brought again, you can count on that.

      As for the Ferguson case, I also prefer to stay silent before I know the facts. A lot of people have instantly declared “racism” without having all the facts first. But it’s easier for clowns on social media to get all worked up about “racism” than it is to actually take a step back and wait until all the details are known. They think on emotion and not facts. They think America is an incorrigibly “racist” nation and not much has changed since the 1950s and 1960s.

      It sounds like the kid was a suspect in a gas station robbery, but don’t expect that detail to be mentioned because the grievance mongers in the mainstream media will try to turn this into another dog-and-pony show like the Martin-Zimmerman incident from the past two years. They’ll try to turn him into the next Rodney King.

      And don’t even get me started on the senseless riots and looting of stores that have taken place since that kid was shot. I don’t know what would compel anyone to do that.

      Doug is right about the growing police state, too. We give the federal and state governments more power, and then act surprised when they abuse their power. Wake up, people.

      Sort of related, but here’s an example of a comics reviewer who decided on his liberal soapbox about the Ferguson case:

      http://www.avclub.com/article/top-cows-genius-chilling-reflection-weeks-ferguson-208159

      I would say, “stick to comics,” but this guy doesn’t know much about them, either.

  4. You have a good point Carl, I stated similar things in my blog that we need to wait and get the facts but some comic writers are on a twitter crusade against the police. I must have really pissed Ron Marz off because he keeps making tweets about me.

    1. He’s making Tweets about you? Not surprising. He’s an insecure man-child, much like Dan Slott, and any form of criticism is enough to set him off, going so far as to belittle and harass those who disagree with him or dislike his stories. He’s referenced Avi from Four Color Media Monitor in the past on his Twitter feed in the past and sent his fanboys there to harass Avi.

      I also read your post about it; it was pretty good. I see that some troll named Greg is lecturing you as well.

  5. He is, he is taking offense that I posted that he wanted the police chief fired. Now I am a “righting nut”. He also did not like that I think we should not rush to judge the situation.

    1. What does he expect? If he doesn’t people to know his opinions, he shouldn’t post them online for all to see. Period. Another example of his immaturity. And if you’re in the entertainment industry or in the public arena period, and you post something controversial, you should EXPECT criticism. Not everyone is going to kiss your a**.

      So because you took the mature route and said we should reserve judgment until the details are known, you’re a “right wing nut.” Yeesh. Grow up, Marz. If you don’t like what others have written about you, IGNORE it. Is it really that hard?

      Side note: When liberals call me a “wingnut” (and it’s happened quite a bit, thought not recently since I quit social media) I just laugh at them. I find that word to be more amusing than insulting. But they sure do throw hissy fits if you call them “moonbat.”

  6. I guess in his mind the following does not mean he thinks a person should be fired:
    This is what I mentioned that he tweeted in my blog:
    “it will be fascinating to see if Ferguson police chief keeps his job. You’d think he has to go, but nothing about this makes sense so far.”
    So in my blog I posted he feels the chief should be fired. After he said I am crazy for that he posted this.

    “I’m truly baffled that the #Ferguson police chief is still on the job. Apparent incompetence aside, he’s a recurring p.r. disaster.”

    Really, he does not think he should be fired?

    1. Having read your post, I think you were fair with the Ferguson issue; but was that even the point? I took the post as showing his hypocrisy of “think before you type” and his rush to judgment on the issue as the greater point. He can’t deny that, which is why he’s trying to make it an issue of you being “right wing” and “crazy”.

      Carl is right, let him throw his hissyfit; your words must of resonated with him 🙂

    2. Thank you Patrick, I really appreciate your response. You clearly see my point, this guy and others reach thousands of people with their comments imagine what good they could do but instead they are used to provide hate. We need to be calm on the Ferguson issue and get the facts we don’t want to make matters worse.

    3. Marz is just an immature punk. He’s yet another progressive whose “tolerance” only extends to people he agrees with; otherwise, he’ll try and destroy you if you don’t agree with his leftist worldview. Or sic his sycophantic fanboys on you, like he’s done at Avi’s blog in the past.

      And there have been more riots in Ferguson. The convenience store that the kid apparently robbed was broken into and ransacked. What the hell? What is the point of destroying property like that? If they’re trying to make a point, they’re failing at it.

    4. I saw a number of people yesterday saying, “Why release the video if it has nothing to do with the shooting?” Here’s the deal: The same people who are saying that this kid was an innocent little angel who would never hurt an ant, let alone mix it up with a cop, are the same people who are upset this video was released. It is entirely relevant to the conversation to know that only an hour earlier Mr. Brown was roughing up a store clerk during a robbery. If a cop says, “That kid in the video is the one who tried to take my weapon when I approached him,” then it makes sense. The video shows exactly where Mr. Brown’s mindset was shortly before his death — crime and violence.

      You can not try the cops in the court of public opinion and believe that they’re going to just sit there and take it lying down. While the video does not prove what happened during the altercation with the cop, it does highlight quite clearly what Mr. Brown was capable of doing. If he believed he could choke out a grocery store clerk with impunity, then why would he doubt his ability to get away with altercations involving cops?

    5. Hube’s post more or less reflects on how I feel about the case. http://colossus.mu.nu/archives/351178.php

      Once again, the progressive race hustlers in the media are trying to turn this into another Zimmerman-Martin incident and using to perpetuate the claim that America is a “racist nation” and that we need to have “an honest discussion about race.” (those “discussions” are always BS) Never mind that things have improved tremendously for African-Americans in the past 50 years.

    6. That’s something else that gets me about this, too: the portrayal of this kid as a little angel who could do no wrong, whereas reality paints a much different picture, like you said. They did the exact same thing with Trayvon Martin, too, but once again, reality painted a much different picture once the facts were known.

      And because the kid in Missouri been retroactively declared a saint, the cops are demonized even though he held up a convenience store and choked the clerk. It’s ridiculous. Why can’t people just admit that, in cases like this, their kids aren’t the little angels they think they are?

  7. The best thing to do is just let Hillary talk, because she may just talk herself out of winning in 2016….here’s what I’ve learned from Hillary’s own words the last 6 or so years: she brokered the Northern Ireland/Britian peace, she was under attack on a tarmac, she and Bill left the whitehouse broke, and her “southern accent” will help her with voters. All these things were an embellishment at best and a total fabrication at worst; Obama exploited these to no end during the 2008 primaries and she seems perfectly willing to keep giving more fodder; the republicans can take a page from 2008 Obama’s book in dealing with her.

    Plus she sways even worse than the average politician with polls, in that sense she is a follower- not a leader. Obama exploited that too, her wishy washyness on the Iraq war; Obama gives a speech on the anniversary of the Selma Alabama civil rights march, Hillary follows him right down there (and makes a fool of herself with her accent). He always seemed to dictate the race in 2008. I think she’s beatable. She’s got a huge war chest, and it’ll be tough, but I think she’s beatable.

    1. Plus she sways even worse than the average politician with polls, in that sense she is a follower- not a leader.

      Obama is a follower as well (i.e., “lead from behind”), but he had the ability to be all things to all people. In one of his autobiographies (the guy had two before he really ever did anything), I believe he mentioned something about being like a blank screen that people projected their hopes and dreams onto. He’s half black, and half white. He’s an American, but he grew up in other countries. He gives speeches that occasionally make him sound like a Republican, while in actuality being a hard-core leftist.

      I think that people voted for him again in 2008 because they were so heavily invested in not having him fail…

      At this point I still hope Rubio gets the nod. I think that he could handily beat Hillary.

    2. Don’t get me wrong, my observations on the campaign in 2008 isn’t an endorsement of the administration that followed. I’m a nerd who likes political theatre during election season, and that 2008 primary campaign was perfectly played. I found it funny that Hillary (or her camp) was bragging about putting “20 million cracks in the glass ceiling”; Obama had already cannonballed thru that ceiling before she even realized what was up.

    3. Don’t get me wrong, my observations on the campaign in 2008 isn’t an endorsement of the administration that followed.

      Ha. Yeah, I can’t see you walking down the street with a “Hillary 2016” pin.

  8. Speaking of elections, I notice you tweeted out a story on ex-Eagle (and your fellow USC Trojan) Gary Cobb running for Congress. I remember him being a good person, and getting some sacks for Buddy Ryan’s teams in the mid to late 80s. I also know he does a lot of outreach to inner city youths; by all accounts a good guy- I hope he does well.

    1. From what I do know of Mr. Cobb, he’s been dong youth outreach for years. It will be hard to paint him as a guy who doesn’t care about what’s going on in some of these troubled areas. If I’m not mistaken, I think he said that he was a Democrat when he was in college. I saw an interview with him where he noticed the disintegration of the black family and the (liberal) policies that helped make that a reality.

  9. ” I saw an interview with him where he noticed the disintegration of the black family and the (liberal) policies that helped make that a reality.”

    Shhh… liberals will say that makes you a racist.
    Or should I say “right wing nut”….
    To be serious the family dynamic issue really needs to be researched more (for all families).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s