About Me

Name: MAXINE
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Hillary Clinton's North Korea Foreign Policy Via "Shout-Out"

President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pictured with radical socialist revolutionary Che' Guevara as a backdrop. Image credit: Fr Loren Gonzales via overheardinthesacristy

Hillary Clinton's North Korea Foreign Policy Via "Shout-Out"

Last night, Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton made a plea during an interview she was having with Greta Van Sustern during Greta's program on FOXNews, On The Record.

What is striking about the interview and the plea, is that part of it took the form of a broadcast "Shout-Out" to North Korea and that nation's rumored attempt to launch a test of another intercontinental missile.

What we were treated to was an example of a foreign policy carried out in the most unorganized, sophomoric, ineffective, and unprofessional level ... a "Shout-Out"

This method of communication of our foreign policy to another nation reflects the level of disarray the 44th Presidency is in, some 67 days into the four year run.

President Barack Obama, while he campaigned for the job, at least stated a desire to sit down and talk without "per-condition" ... Secretary of State Hillary Clinton apparently really doesn't even need, or care to have, someone in the room!

This excerpted and edited from FOXNews -

Secretary of State Clinton Confronts the Problems with Mexico and North Korea
On the Record w/ Greta - FOX News - Friday, March 27, 2009

VAN SUSTEREN: Back home, headlines now about North Korea, and so I'm going to try to pry some answers out of you on North Korea. What are we going to do about North Korea?

CLINTON: Well, you and I were just talking before the cameras started rolling because you're one of the few people I know who's actually been there and who understand that it is a -- you know, it's a different environment.

You've got to figure out how to convince them to act in what we consider to be, you know, the interests of the people of North Korea but also the interests of the rest of the world.

I have been very clear, President Obama has been very clear, we would like to get back to the kind of talks that led to the initial steps in their de-nuclearization. The six-party framework that involves all of the neighbors, each of whom have a stake in what happens in North Korea -- we have offered that. I sent word that we would like to have our special envoy for North Korean policy go to Pyongyang. They didn't want him to come.

So we're working hard. And if they're watching you, I'm sure that since you were there, you made a big impression, went to a karaoke bar in Pyongyang.

(LAUGHTER)

CLINTON: They probably still remember you. If they're watching -- if anybody from North Korea is watching this program with you, Greta...

VAN SUSTEREN: I do a mean Elvis karaoke.

CLINTON: I bet. You know, we'd love for them to begin to talk about what we can do together to fulfill the framework of the six-party talks.

VAN SUSTEREN: But we've drawn a line in the sand, saying, If you launch that missile, there will be consequences. But I'm not sure what consequences because they don't have anything at this point. It's not like we can cut anything off. They're already hermetically sealed from the world. I mean, what kind of consequences short of military consequences, I guess?

CLINTON: No, I don't -- I don't -- I mean, we're certainly not talking about that. What we are saying is that we believe that a launch would violate the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1718. That would, you know, in our view, trigger certain actions by the United Nations.

They have sought help for fuel and food. It would be difficult to provide those necessities. So you know, we don't want to get there. I mean, the problem with their missile launch is that these provisions of 1718 don't distinguish between a missile with a satellite and a missile with a warhead. We think it covers any kind of missile launch.

And we would hope that the North Koreans would take a deep breath here, and you know, begin to reconnect and start working with us.
Reference Here>>

Video on North Korea "Shout-Out">>
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Just The Facts, Ma’am! – 2008 Debate #1

Image Credit: NPR

Just The Facts, Ma’am! – 2008 Debate #1

In this day and age of twenty-four hour, seven day a week communications, one would think that what politicians say while campaigning would be 100% accurate.

In the first time that the candidates from our two major political parties stood side-by-side, Senator’s Barack Obama and John McCain delivered answers in a debate format that allowed for responses beyond snippets from a typical stump speech. When answers to questions involve responses from a person’s memory, inaccuracies in the facts can … and will occur.

The Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania has a website designed specifically to sweep the floor and scrub down the answers from both gentleman to define the facts behind the statements these candidates make.

Image Credit: NPR

This excerpted and edited from Fact Check dot Org –

FactChecking Debate No. 1
Facts muddled in Mississippi McCain-Obama meeting
September 27, 2008 - University of Mississippi at Oxford

Summary

McCain and Obama contradicted each other repeatedly during their first debate, and each volunteered some factual misstatements as well.
----
Analysis

The first of three scheduled debates between Republican Sen. John McCain and Democratic Sen. Barack Obama took place Sept. 26 on the campus of the University of Mississippi at Oxford. It was sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates. It was carried live on national television networks and was moderated by Jim Lehrer, executive editor and anchor of the PBS "NewsHour" program. We noted these factual misstatements:
Did Kissinger Back Obama?

McCain attacked Obama for his declaration that he would meet with leaders of Iran and other hostile nations "without preconditions." To do so with Iran, McCain said, "isn't just naive; it's dangerous." Obama countered by saying former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger – a McCain adviser – agreed with him:

Obama: Senator McCain mentioned Henry Kissinger, who's one of his advisers, who, along with five recent secretaries of state, just said that we should meet with Iran – guess what – without precondition. This is one of your own advisers.

McCain rejected Obama's claim:

McCain: By the way, my friend, Dr. Kissinger, who's been my friend for 35 years, would be interested to hear this conversation and Senator Obama's depiction of his -- of his positions on the issue. I've known him for 35 years.Obama: We will take a look.McCain: And I guarantee you he would not -- he would not say that presidential top level.Obama: Nobody's talking about that.
So who's right? Kissinger did in fact say a few days earlier at a forum of former secretaries of state that he favors very high-level talks with Iran – without conditions:

Kissinger Sept. 20: Well, I am in favor of negotiating with Iran. And one utility of negotiation is to put before Iran our vision of a Middle East, of a stable Middle East, and our notion on nuclear proliferation at a high enough level so that they have to study it. And, therefore, I actually have preferred doing it at the secretary of state level so that we -- we know we're dealing with authentic...CNN's Frank Sesno: Put at a very high level right out of the box?Kissinger: Initially, yes.But I do not believe that we can make conditions for the opening of negotiations.

Later, McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin, was asked about this by CBS News anchor Katie Couric, and Palin said, "I’ve never heard Henry Kissinger say, ‘Yeah, I’ll meet with these leaders without preconditions being met.'" Afterward Couric
said, "We confirmed Henry Kissinger’s position following our interview."After the McCain-Obama debate, however, Kissinger issued a statement saying he doesn't favor a presidential meeting:

Kissinger: Senator McCain is right. I would not recommend the next President of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the Presidential level. My views on this issue are entirely compatible with the views of my friend Senator John McCain.
----
Image Credit: NPR

Other responses handled in the above detailed manner are summarized as follows:

Obama denied voting for a bill that called for increased taxes on “people” making as little as $42,000 a year, as McCain accused him of doing. McCain was right, though only for single taxpayers. A married couple would have had to make $83,000 to be affected by the vote, and anyway no such increase is in Obama’s tax plan.

McCain and Obama contradicted each other on what Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen said about troop withdrawals. Mullen said a time line for withdrawal could be “very dangerous” but was not talking specifically about “Obama’s plan,” as McCain maintained.

McCain tripped up on one of his signature issues – special appropriation “earmarks.” He said they had “tripled in the last five years,” when in fact they have decreased sharply.

Obama claimed Iraq “has” a $79 billion surplus. It once was projected to be as high as that. It’s now down to less than $60 billion.

McCain repeated his overstated claim that the U.S. pays $700 billion a year for oil to hostile nations. Imports are running at about $536 billion this year, and a third of it comes from Canada, Mexico and the U.K.

Obama said 95 percent of “the American people” would see a tax cut under his proposal. The actual figure is 81 percent of households.

Obama mischaracterized an aspect of McCain’s health care plan, saying “employers” would be taxed on the value of health benefits provided to workers. Employers wouldn’t, but the workers would. McCain also would grant workers up to a $5,000 tax credit per family to cover health insurance.
Reference Here>>
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »