And Libs Call BUSH A Lousy Diplomat?
Take a look at this cow in a china shop:
New York Senator Hillary Clinton has caused an international incident after she criticized Iraq's leading candidate to become prime minister as a result of last month's historic election, prompting a sharp rebuke.
"Hillary Clinton, as far as I know, does not represent any political decision or the American administration, and I don't know why she said this," Dr. Ibrahim Jafari, who is expected to become prime minister, told the Times of London on Thursday.
"She knows nothing about the Iraqi situation," he added.
During an interview last Sunday, Clinton complained about Jafari's nomination by the duly elected Shia coalition.
"I think that there are grounds both for concern and for, you know, vigilance about this," she told NBC's Meet the Press. "It is a historical fact that he, along with the Dawa Party, have had connections with Iran . . . There are also family ties and religious ties."
The comments angered Dr. Jafari, a physician from Karbala who fled to Iran only after Saddam Hussein had members of his party killed. He blasted Mrs. Clinton as ill-informed.
"We are not at an American traffic light to be given a red or green signal," Jafari told the Times. "I am speaking on behalf of a collective decision. I will stop when the Iraqi people say to stop."
It's worth pointing out that a number of commentators who ought to know whereof they speak on this matter, such as Ralph Peters and Amir Taheri, are backing Dr. Jafari. And, apart from that, even if you're not sure about the incoming Iraqi PM's leanings, don't you have to admit that he has a point? If we're genuinely committed to democracy in the Middle East, don't we have to respect the choices Iraqi voters have made? And haven't we ensured that the constitutional foundation has been established that will minimize the chances of a "one man, one vote, once" situation from arising?
Isn't Mrs. Clinton's the sort of cynical, hamfisted, meddlesome imperiousness that one would expect libs to impute to George Bush and the "neocons"?
Meanwhile....
The Bush Administration has not expressed concerns similar to Mrs. Clinton's, said the New York Sun, which first reported Dr. Jafari's comments in the U.S.
I said it before, I'm saying it now, and I'll continue to say it over the next few years: this is the next President of the United States, and interludes like this one give us a window into what her administration is going to be like.
We can only hope and pray that such memory markers will be enough to overcome the vaunted Clinton propaganda machine.
Otherwise, we might need Prime Minister Jafari and his people to come and liberate us.
New York Senator Hillary Clinton has caused an international incident after she criticized Iraq's leading candidate to become prime minister as a result of last month's historic election, prompting a sharp rebuke.
"Hillary Clinton, as far as I know, does not represent any political decision or the American administration, and I don't know why she said this," Dr. Ibrahim Jafari, who is expected to become prime minister, told the Times of London on Thursday.
"She knows nothing about the Iraqi situation," he added.
During an interview last Sunday, Clinton complained about Jafari's nomination by the duly elected Shia coalition.
"I think that there are grounds both for concern and for, you know, vigilance about this," she told NBC's Meet the Press. "It is a historical fact that he, along with the Dawa Party, have had connections with Iran . . . There are also family ties and religious ties."
The comments angered Dr. Jafari, a physician from Karbala who fled to Iran only after Saddam Hussein had members of his party killed. He blasted Mrs. Clinton as ill-informed.
"We are not at an American traffic light to be given a red or green signal," Jafari told the Times. "I am speaking on behalf of a collective decision. I will stop when the Iraqi people say to stop."
It's worth pointing out that a number of commentators who ought to know whereof they speak on this matter, such as Ralph Peters and Amir Taheri, are backing Dr. Jafari. And, apart from that, even if you're not sure about the incoming Iraqi PM's leanings, don't you have to admit that he has a point? If we're genuinely committed to democracy in the Middle East, don't we have to respect the choices Iraqi voters have made? And haven't we ensured that the constitutional foundation has been established that will minimize the chances of a "one man, one vote, once" situation from arising?
Isn't Mrs. Clinton's the sort of cynical, hamfisted, meddlesome imperiousness that one would expect libs to impute to George Bush and the "neocons"?
Meanwhile....
The Bush Administration has not expressed concerns similar to Mrs. Clinton's, said the New York Sun, which first reported Dr. Jafari's comments in the U.S.
I said it before, I'm saying it now, and I'll continue to say it over the next few years: this is the next President of the United States, and interludes like this one give us a window into what her administration is going to be like.
We can only hope and pray that such memory markers will be enough to overcome the vaunted Clinton propaganda machine.
Otherwise, we might need Prime Minister Jafari and his people to come and liberate us.
posted by JASmius at 8:37 AM
<<< Home