Every time I think we know everything about Hillary's Bosnia lies something else seems to turn up. To be fair, this actually has less to do with her constant lies about her trip there, and more to do with her husband's overall policy of sitting on his hands while watching the unfolding genocide in Bosnia. Evidence seems to suggest that the reason Bill reneged on his campaign promise of stopping the genocide was because he didn't want to waste precious political capital on stopping the genocide in Bosnia when he needed that capital to help get Hillary's ill-fated (and ill-managed) health care pet project off the ground. (Similarly, Hillary has stated that around that same time she was also worried that NAFTA's passage might take focus off of her health care plan, although there is no evidence that she ever let those concerns get in the way of her unequivocal support for NAFTA).
The following excerpt is from Sally Bedell Smith's biography of the Clintons For Love of Politics (emphasis mine):
Taking the advice of Al Gore and National Security Advisor Tony Lake, Bill agreed to a proposal to bomb Serbian military positions while helping the Muslims acquire weapons to defend themselves—the fulfillment of a pledge he had made during the 1992 campaign. But instead of pushing European leaders, he directed Secretary of State Warren Christopher merely to consult with them. When they balked at the plan, Bill quickly retreated, creating a "perception of drift." The key factor in Bill's policy reversal was Hillary, who was said to have "deep misgivings" and viewed the situation as "a Vietnam that would compromise health-care reform." The United States took no further action in Bosnia, and the "ethnic cleansing" by the Serbs was to continue for four more years, resulting in the deaths of more than 250,000 people.
Christopher Hitchens corroborates the course of events:
I can personally witness to the truth of this, too. I can remember, first, one of the Clintons' closest personal advisers—Sidney Blumenthal—referring with acid contempt to Warren Christopher as "a blend of Pontius Pilate with Ichabod Crane." I can remember, second, a meeting with Clinton's then-Secretary of Defense Les Aspin at the British Embassy. When I challenged him on the sellout of the Bosnians, he drew me aside and told me that he had asked the White House for permission to land his own plane at Sarajevo airport, if only as a gesture of reassurance that the United States had not forgotten its commitments. The response from the happy couple was unambiguous: He was to do no such thing, lest it distract attention from the first lady's health care "initiative."
Now the Clinton penchant for political calculation is well documented, but I must say that this takes the cake. Even worse is that her poor handling of her health care project, and her attempted credit stealing for the FMLA and SCHIP shows that all of this wasn't done out of an honest passion for fixing our broken health care system, but out of a desire to pad her resume with policy bona fides while looking ahead to a carpetbagging Senate run as a stepping stone back into the White House. Now I know that is a cynical view, but it is a view that is taken in light of her tendency to introduce legislation (on health care issues, among other things) in the Senate, and then put in absolutely no effort to fight for it to ever be heard from again, let alone passed, while at the same time bragging about introducing said legislation in order to hype her legislative prowess as well as her "sincere and deep commitment" to health care, and children, and education, and veterans, etc, etc (while never mentioning that introducing legislation is easy and means next to nothing if one doesn't put in the leg work to see that it gets off the runway).
So yes, you tell me how far she would go for her political ambitions. I know all signs (from this election to her entire political life before that) point to the fact she would say and do anything anything to get ahead.
Christopher Hitchens, never at loss for words or opinions sums it up nicely in light of her most recent exploitation of the Bosnia crisis for political gain:
It's hardly necessary for me to point out that the United States did not receive national health care in return for its acquiescence in the murder of tens of thousands of European civilians. But perhaps that is the least of it. Were I to be asked if Sen. Clinton has ever lost any sleep over those heaps of casualties, I have the distinct feeling that I could guess the answer. She has no tears for anyone but herself. In the end, and over her strenuous objections, the United States and its allies did rescue our honor and did put an end to Slobodan Milosevic and his state-supported terrorism. Yet instead of preserving a polite reticence about this, or at least an appropriate reserve, Sen. Clinton now has the obscene urge to claim the raped and slaughtered people of Bosnia as if their misery and death were somehow to be credited to her account! Words begin to fail one at this point. Is there no such thing as shame? Is there no decency at last? Let the memory of the truth, and the exposure of the lie, at least make us resolve that no Clinton ever sees the inside of the White House again.
But I sure am glad she was able to support NAFTA through all this. Political capital is not without its costs.
0 comments:
Post a Comment