Don't Confirm Her!
By Quin Hillyer on 12.4.08 @ 6:10AM

The idea of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State ought to make conservatives 
tremble with foreboding. It is truly bizarre to see so many on the right 
unquestioningly accepting a notion that just a year ago would have been 
laughable, namely that she is a relative "moderate" on foreign policy. And it's 
even more astonishing that any reasonable news organization, or any serious 
senator, would consider her manifold ethical lapses as being anything other 
than immediately disqualifying for such a lofty appointive position. 

The more comprehensive case against her appointment remains to be made, 
sometime between now and when she faces Senate hearings. But as a 
tip-of-the-iceberg, almost top-of-the-head review, consider all these reasons 
why she ought to be overwhelmingly rejected for the job. 

* Hillary Clinton was nearly fired from the Watergate Committee staff for 
outrageously unethical behavior. 

* Hillary Clinton was directly cited for false testimony by an independent 
counsel, who used prosecutorial discretion not to actually seek the indictment 
she deserved for prevaricating about her role in the White House Travel Office 
firings. 

* Hillary Clinton was the recipient of the moral equivalent of bribery (every 
bit as bad as the $100,000 apparent payoff to U.S. Rep. "Dollar Bill" Jefferson 
of New Orleans) in making off with just shy of a cool 100K in her preposterous 
dealings in cattle futures. For more on this issue, see the excellent work of 
Deroy Murdock as published earlier this year in The American Spectator's print 
edition. 

* Hillary Clinton probably deserved to be indicted in one of the facets of the 
Whitewater investigation, but the infamous Rose Law Firm billing records with 
her fingerprints on them mysteriously disappeared until produced, quite 
conveniently, just days after the statute of limitations had run out on the 
charges that could have stemmed from the clear evidence those records 
contained. 

* Hillary Clinton was caught on tape engaging in legally dubious coordination 
of campaign fundraising activities that led to charges against several others 
involved in the big Hollywood event at issue. For more, see "Hillary: The 
Movie," by Citizens United. 

* Hillary's roles in a plethora of scandals as she and her husband left the 
White House were so egregious that even liberal news organizations pronounced 
her positively "unfit" for office. For a voluminous record of her skullduggery 
since the beginning of 2000, read Spectator founder R. Emmett Tyrrell's 2007 
book, The Clinton Crack-Up. 

* Hillary's presidential campaign was caught red-handed accepting huge sums of 
money bundled and/or donated from convicted felon Norman Hsu. In many ways the 
sneaky dealings with Hsu were reminiscent of other odiferous dealings with a 
host of other Asian donors and influence peddlers through the years, from the 
Riadys to Johnny Chung to John Huang to Pauline Kanchanalak to Charlie Trie. 

Again, that's only a sampling of the turgid record of Hillary Clinton's 
skunkery (to coin a word) on matters of ethics. And that's not even getting 
into the myriad conflicts of interest inherent in her husband's apparent 
acceptance of donations for his presidential library and his eponymous 
foundation from numerous foreign sources, including perhaps (we will find out 
soon enough) the Saudi royal family. And that's not to mention the foreign 
speeches, at tens of thousands of dollars a pop, paid by foreign sources, that 
are included in the $100 million or so the Clintons have racked up in recent 
years. How could such entanglements not distort Mrs. Clinton's behavior if she 
is made Secretary of State? 

Meanwhile, Hillary is no moderate. The evidence for that strange proposition 
comes only from her careful positioning, while a senator, to maintain her 
"viability" as a presidential candidate. Yet for every bit of hemming there has 
been an equal amount of hawing -- except when she repeatedly refused, until 
utterly embarrassed, to withdraw the absurd contention that she (and Chelsea 
and Sinbad the comedian) had been subject to sniper fire while on one of her 
foreign excursions. She has a long record of advocating an expanded role for 
the United Nations or other international organizations in areas where 
conservatives see threats to American sovereignty. And in the 1980s she served 
on the board of, and for a time as chairman of, the leftist New World 
Foundation, during which time the foundation gave money to the far-left 
Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador, which in turn openly 
supported the radical-left (for all intents and purposes, communist) FMLN armed 
guerrillas against the official, U.S.-supported government of that country. The 
New World Foundation also supported a host of other far-left causes during that 
time period, including the radical National Lawyers Guild and also a group that 
in turn donated money to affiliates of the Palestinian Liberation Organization 
when it was known almost exclusively as a terrorist organization. 

This last is fitting in retrospect, seeing as how it was the Clinton 
administration that first effectively gave diplomatic recognition to the PLO's 
terrorist thug, Yasser Arafat. 

Again, this horrendous record ought to be amply filled out in the next month or 
two. But the conclusion is inescapable: Hillary Clinton likely would be the 
most leftist American Secretary of State ever, and certainly the most ethically 
conflicted and unqualified. For her to be confirmed for the position would be a 
travesty. And it would be profoundly dangerous for American interests. 

Quin Hillyer is an associate editor at the Washington Examiner and a senior 
editor of The American Spectator. He can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://spectator.org/archives/2008/12/04/dont-confirm-her/print
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to