Tag Archives: hillary clinton

The Hundred Days

Several bloggers have commented on the first hundred days of the Obama Presidency, especially in context of the edited volume Threats in the Age of Obama, to which I contributed a chapter.

I want to give particular attention to posts by Sam Liles, Mark Safranski, , Mike Tanji, as well as ubiwar and Mark Curtis.

The threat I wrote about was the collapse of the military-industrial complex, possibly as a result of financial crisis.

My evaluation of President Obama, with regard to keeping the military-industrial complex strong, is in two parts. First, his foreign policy, and second, his economic policy.

Obama’s foreign policy has been brilliant. The team of Secretary of State Clinton and Secretary of Defense Gates may be unmatched in modern times. A coherent, and frankly brilliant, policy of reaching out to important partners while focusing our defenses in sensible ways has contributed to an astonishingly safer world. An example of this one-two punch is Clinton’s “G-2” meeting with China while Gates pushes kill the F-22 (in spite of corrupt Congressional opposition). This helps incorporate China into the global regime we created, helps establish them as partner, and paves the way for (among other things) Taiwan’s best stock market rally in 19 years.

And when the chance permitted itself, we killed some pirates too. We are clearly signaling who are friends are, who are enemies are, and what we can do about it.

Obama’s foreign policy grade is a high A. Absolutely brilliant.

Part of keeping the military-industrial complex relevant is making sure it is aimed in ways that are not intolerate to future policy makers.


Obama’s economic policy has been disastrous. As America’s economy experienced echoing shocks, as the incompetence of New York bankers (many of which were under the jurisdiction of New York Fed President Tim Geithner) were compounded by give-aways and bailouts lobbied for by Tim Geithner (among others), Obama’s choice was inexplicable: he named Tim Geithner as the Secretary of the Treasury.

Geithner’s response have not merely been made in a technical sense: for worse, they have been aimed at destroying the free-market financial system in the United States. Nearly every day brings new of a new scheme by Geithner to prevent banks from experiencing the consequences of their bad bets. The latest conduit for Geithner’s capital-laundering is Chrysler. While Geithner’s Treasury Department extended saved Chrysler from an bankruptcy for a time, they never used secured loan. That means that the “loan” to Chrysler is in fact a gift to Wall Street.

I was ignorant of the depth of Geithner’s belief that bankers should not lose money regardless of the decisions they make. Obama should not have been. Further, when Geithner actually proposed to guarantee all debt in the banking system, Obama should have used all that opportunity to begin nationalizing the zombie banks, taking back the grants we have to Goldman Sachs and other large institutions, and re-establishing a free market.

Obama absolutely as failed at this, and his policy is authoritarian-leftist. Obama’s economic hostiles appear designed to increase governmental control over the economy, destroy the middle class as an independently wealthy sector of the economy, and establish a statist model of economic stasis.

Obama’s economic policy grade is F. It can hardly get worse.

All other things being equal, Obama’s foreign policy brilliantly helps modernize the military-industrial complex that lies ahead.

All other things being equal, Obama’s economic policy is the operationalization of the greatest threat to American power in the Age of Obama.

Chinese and Russian Reactions to Russia’s sinking of the Chinese ship ‘New Star’

Entries in bold are from the Russian Information Agency Novosti. Entires in italics are from Xinhua News Angecy.

January 15
13:25: Foreign ship sinks of Russia’s pacific coast, 8 sailors dead
21:36: Eight sailors drown in Sea of Japan

January 18
11:31: Captain of sunken ship crosed Russian border fearing trial
23:58: Chinese FM confirms cargo ship in a “sea accident” near Vladivostok

January 19
12:49: China demands Russia investigate sinking of Chinese ship
16:34: China demands Russia investigate sinking of Chinese ship – 2
17:44: China says Russia’s investigation into sea acident still going on
20:53: Chinese sailors rescued off Russian coast in good health, 7 still missing
21:56: Moscow blames captain of China’s New Star for tragic sinking

January 20
00:18: China lodges urgent representation again to Russia on cargo ship sinking
13:12: Russian rescuers halt search for sailors on sunken Chinese ship
17:44: Chinese consul general urges Russia to probe sea accident
21:37:China says Russia’s attitude on cargo ship incident “unacceptable”

January 21
20:36: Russian border guards fired on Chinese ship legally – ministry

All of this overlaps with Secretary of State Clinton’s visit to Asia, and the major flurry of news overlaps specifically with Clinton’s’ visit to Beijing.

Further meditations on Biden and Palin

Courtesy Patterico and Andrew Sullivan, the stage is being set by some commentators for Joe Biden to drop out for “medical reasons” and be replaced on the Democratic ticket by Hillary Clinton

Now, Biden would not be a terrible Vice President, and Hillary would be a threat to Obama once they are elected. Still, Hillary Clinton is a good politician, so replacing Biden with Clinton on the Obama ticket would be all for the best. It would signal weakness in the Obama camp — but I think everyone’s figured out that Obama is in trouble now.

On the Republican side, I still have my suspicions about Sarah Palin serving as Vice President.. but she seems to be an effective campaigner.

Plus, Sarah allows McCain to hammer with this sort of ad:

Before McCain’s pick of Palin, only Barack could get away with that sort of touchiness.

Good Politicians II

I supported John McCain and Hillary Clinton for the Nobel Peace Prize back in 2005.

I still do.

Why do Clinton and McCain admire each other? Because both support a centrist, principled, and professional foreign policy.

While Clinton and McCain have done the hard, behind-the-scenes work that’s important to get things done, Obama’s camp engages in the audacity of nothingness. From Obama hyping “a speech that he gave in 2002” to his supporters complaining that McCain did not praise him enough, Obama has done a lot of things other than hard, behind-the-scenes work.

Props to Weekly Standard for linking to the video on Obama’s “high-falutin'” rhetoric.

The Logic of Clinton’s Rightist Rhetoric

Chris Bowers of MyDD, a liberal pundit as smart as all get-out, notes that Hillary Clinton appears to be running as a Republican:

Open Left:: Who Are The Elites?
It fits into a larger pattern where Clinton is using right-wing conceptualizations of elitism to attack Obama. Now, for example, she is sending out direct mail attacking Obama for being an elitist who wants to take away rural people’s guns. That is a pretty stark right-wing turn for Clinton in this campaign.

A true nightmare scenario for progressives is when the leader of the Democratic Party participates in, gives credence to, and “closes the triangle” on the centerpiece of conservative ideology over the last forty years: the Great Backlash Narrative against civil rights and “liberal elites.”. While Obama has engaged in some right-wing talking points of his own on “Hillarycare,” a social security “crisis,” and the rather absurd notion that the Clintons are ultra-partisan super lefties, Clinton is stepping into far more dangerous territory here. Her arguments border on holding liberalism and progressivism itself in the same sort of narrative contempt that conservatives have long done through the Great Backlash Narrative. This very much reminds of me when the DLC was dominant in the Democratic Party in the 1990’s, and it is not a place to where I long to return.

Christ is right.

Clinton did poorly enough between Super Tuesday and Virginia that merely putting in a good show would result in her losing. Rather, Clinton needed to demonstrate that Obama was a uniquely incompetent candidate who would surely lose to McCain in a general election. Her strategy for doing this was to run as John McCain in the Democratic primary, demonstrating that if Obama cannot even hold onto Democratic partisans, he has no shot in November.

Not only is Hillary Clinton’s advertisement titled Kitchen

nearly identical in tone to John McCain’s “624787 “

McCain could use Clinton’s attack ads as is, simply searching-and-replacing her name for his

The reason is to drive one point home: If Barack Obama can barely win Democratic Party elections against John McCain in the spring, how can he defeat John McCain in the Fall?

Democratic Congress against Colombia

Colombia is close to winning the war against Marxist rebels.

Let’s see if the Democrats in Congress can put a stop to it.

The silence from the Democratic presidential candidates is understandable, but still disappointing. From Hillary Clinton the silence sounds like hypocrisy: her husband did so much to advance free trade during his years in the White House. From Barack Obama it seems like a continuation of a pattern: fitting the rhetoric against middle-classness that has agreed with his actions for the past two decades.

Obama and Clinton good, McCain Unclear, on Medical Marijuana

Props to the major Democratic candidates for being clear on their position in favor of medical marijuana.

Presidential Candidates on Marijuana – TierneyLab – Science – New York Times Blog
Bruce Mirken, who has been tracking the issue for the Marijuana Policy Project, says John McCain has been dismissive of marijuana’s medical potential and has been unclear on whether he’d continue federal raids against clinics in states that have legalized medical marijuana. Of the two leading Democratic candidates, Mr. Mirken says, Barack Obama has been clearer in his support for medical marijuana

Neither seems to support legalization or decriminalization, but atleast (unlike John McCain) thay are clear that it should be a medical option.

Clinton’s Security Umbrella

Props to Hillary Clinton, the best Democratic candidate when it comes to national defense, for reiterating and emphasizing that the United States has as a goal the elimination of state-on-state warfare in areas of the world we consider important. (I heard this on Meet the Press, where the analysis was political as opposed to strategic. This sort of reaction underlines Clinton’s bravery when it comes to protecting the country.)

Political Punch
Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, said that the U.S. “should be looking to create an umbrella of deterrence that goes much further than just Israel. Of course I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States, but I would do the same with other countries in the region.” …

That umbrella of deterrence would be offered, Clinton suggested, in order to deter other nations in the region “from feeling that they have to acquire nuclear weapons. You can’t go to the Saudis or the Kuwaitis or UAE and others who have a legitimate concern about Iran and say: ‘Well, don’t acquire these weapons to defend yourself’ unless you’re also willing to say we will provide a deterrent backup and we will let the Iranians know that, yes, an attack on Israel would trigger massive retaliation, but so would an attack on those countries that are willing to go under this security umbrella and forswear their own nuclear ambitions.”

This is an old strategy by the United States. But a good one.

Way to go, Hill.

Economics Lesson

John Robb and Elizabeth Warren may ignore it, but all real growth comes from growth in productivity.

The debate about the “stimulus” is bizarre, because it does not matter. Or more precisely, it lessons economic growth slightly while making people slightly happier about it. If you want economic growth, then invest in capital improvements, such as better communications, better machines, and better people. The stimulus does two things: it borrows money that would otherwise be invested to spend, and it makes peopel feel a bit better, so they are less likely to support some even crazier law. Fortunately, it looks like much of the stimulus/rebate checks will be used to pay-down debt, minimizing the displaced investment and hopefully keeping the opium-like mood benefits “free money” provides.

If you want economic growth, import high-skill workers. Currently, the Congress limits the number of high-skill workers who can help our economy.

If you want economic growth, trade more with other countries. Currently, the Congress is refusing to vote on a free trade deal with Columbia.

If you want economic growth, make it tax-free to invest. Currently, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton support raising the capital gains tax.