2005/08/08

Hillary Clinton has now become irrelevant

The letter in the Inquirer "Fighting terrorism" Aug 7th, completely misses the point. The writer states that:

[Liberals] should stop worrying about detainee's rights, possible prison abuse and civil rights violations until after our enemy has been eradicated. They should let our leaders help solve the awful situation that our country and indeed, the entire world is facing.

Let's try to keep the attention focused on the brutality and death that our countrymen and world allies are facing rather than what may be happening to these wicked and evil perpetrators of terrorism.


The WOT (That old description that was kicked aside and then reinstated) cannot be effectively fought at the same time that detainee abuse is taking place. It's not a question of "and", it's a question of "either, or". The US can either engage in detainee abuse or it can effectively pursue the WOT. For the US to engage in detainee abuse means that people who might object to "wicked and evil perpetrators of terrorism" have absoluely no reason to give the US information about what these perpetrators are up to. If the US is seen as being just as bad as the opposition, then the WOT is hopelessly lost. The British investigation against Islamic extremists in their midst is only going well bcause they have not lost the trust of the British population. Brits are confident that when their police are given information about possible terrorists, that information will be used only against lawbreakers who threaten the British people.

The Left Coaster correctly points out that Hillary Clinton, by sending out a "support me for President" letter that does not even mention Iraq, that Clinton is leaving herself wide open to being defined by the Republicans on this issue.

To spend contributors' funds mailing out perhaps millions of letters with no mention of Iraq is nothing short of asking for another Democratic defeat in 2006. [emphasis in original

Clinton's website on the issue is hopeless. She makes no direct mention of Iraq and only glancingly tackles the issue of "radical Islamist extremists". She completely fails to draw a distinction between different ways to fight the WOT, ignores the clearly documented fact that there is a right way that is consistent with American values AND that is effective and a wrong way that Bush & Company have been engaged in for the last several years. By carefully skirting the question and not dealing with it directly, Clinton is missing an opportunity to draw clear distinctions between Democrats and Republicans, a distinction that Joe Biden has, to his great credit, drawn. By coming out foursquare against permanent military bases in Iraq, Biden has drawn a clear and bright line, a line that Clinton would do well to toe.

By remaining with the old, tired, long-since-obsolete 1990's strategy of fudging the differences between oneself and one's political opponent, Clinton is setting the stage for resounding and permanent defeat.

No comments: