Hillary Clinton Supporters Slowly Realizing She Didn’t…Actually… Do… Anything… as Secretary of StatePosted: November 29, 2013
Daniel Greenfield writes: But that’s okay since Hillary Clinton also didn’t do anything in the Senate. It could actually be a good slogan for her campaign. “Vote for Hillary: She Won’t Do Anything as President Either.”
But some people close to Mrs. Clinton worry that, because of the high profile given to her work for women’s rights, and the headlines now being generated by the hyperkinetic Mr. Kerry, her efforts on trickier diplomatic situations have been eclipsed.
What exactly did Hillary Clinton do for women’s rights? I mean besides give speeches about it.
What about her 13 trips to Libya in 2011 to build the coalition that led to the ouster of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, they ask. Why is no one talking about how she brokered a cease-fire in Gaza? Anyone remember that she furthered economic sanctions on North Korea?
Libya is on fire. Its cities are run by armed Islamist militias. Some of whom murdered 4 Americans in a diplomatic mission that Hillary and her staffers failed to provide security for while they were blowing millions on overpriced Kindles, art in embassies and a YouTube channel for Afghanistan.
Does anyone in her right mind want to give Hillary credit for Libya?
Negotiated a ceasefire in Gaza? You mean the one that consists of Hamas attacking Israel and Israel fighting back?
North Korea? The brutal Communist tyranny that keeps expanding its nuclear power base despite the useless sanctions?
In contrast, even when members of Mrs. Clinton’s own party describe her achievements, they tend to point to a lot of miles traveled (956,733 to be exact).
Her biggest chance to shape how she is viewed may be through her memoir, which is due out next summer. Dan Schwerin and Ethan Gelber, who both worked under Mrs. Clinton in the State Department, are assisting with the book.
The New York Times means they’re writing the book. Apparently it takes two people to write one Hillary memoir.
Former State Department officials say Mrs. Clinton and her advisers need to do a better job of highlighting how her work on women’s issues ties into national security efforts and the progress now underway.
Also they need to explain what she did on women’s issues.
“There’s a direct correlation between countries that pose direct threats to our national security and those where the mistreatment of half the population is a root cause,” said Philippe I. Reines, a longtime adviser who served as deputy assistant secretary of state. Mr. Reines said that while Mrs. Clinton often made this point, her team failed to articulate that connection publicly.
Yes, it’s called Islam.
That’s why you’re 1. Not articulating the connection 2. Doing anything about it.
He added that “people should not confuse the unique tools and attributes only she could bring to the job as a replacement for being a hard-core diplomat.”
Translated from Diplospeak… Hillary is a special unique sunflower. But she’s not a diplomat.
While at the State Department, Mrs. Clinton enjoyed generally positive media coverage and some of her highest approval ratings. She was often portrayed as a pantsuit-wearing globe-trotter, hitting the dance floor in Pretoria, South Africa, and partying in Cartagena, Colombia.
This is sadly an actual paragraph.
She took on the job at a time when the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan had given rise to widespread anti-Americanism abroad. In 2006, favorable opinions of the United States had fallen in most of the 15 countries surveyed, including France, Germany, Russia and Japan, according to the Pew Global Attitudes Project.
President Obama’s victory in 2008 and Mrs. Clinton’s frequent personal visits helped mend tensions, and by mid-2009 favorable opinions of the United States in Western Europe, Asia and Latin America were almost as high as before President George W. Bush took office.
And they dropped sharply before she left office. It’s called the Honeymoon Effect.
Whether the public will ultimately embrace that view of Mrs. Clinton’s role is unclear. But the fact that her supporters are eager to defend her tenure — and connect her work to Mr. Kerry’s — suggests a level of concern about her legacy should she decide to run for president in 2016.
Hillary supporters are actually so desperate and neurotic that they’re already trying to take credit for Kerry’s disastrous bungling.
But at least Kerry did something. Bad, bad things. But he did them. Still, what difference does it make?
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.
- John Kerry’s 2013 Is Cramping Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Style (thewire.com)
- Is John Kerry already a better secretary of State than Hillary Clinton? (theweek.com)
- Clinton Seeks State Dept. Legacy Beyond That of Globe-Trotter (nytimes.com)
- How John Kerry Could End Up Outdoing Hillary Clinton (mscyprah.newsvine.com)
- Senator Rand Paul Unplugged On Clinton & Benghazi – Rand Paul Weighs In Obamacare On Hannity (askmarion.wordpress.com)
- Kerry vs. Clinton as Secretary of State (wwlp.com)
- Is John Kerry a better secretary of State than Hillary Clinton? (theweek.com)
- Hillary Clinton and the sisterhood (cnn.com)
- Super PACs unifying behind Hillary Clinton (abqjournal.com)