Florida Dem Who Suffered a Meltdown When New Maps Were Passed Has Been...
Former Mumford and Sons Member Was Not Happy With What This Guest Said...
Law Professor Calls Out Democrat Lawyer for His Insane Take on the VA...
You'll Never Guess What the Anti-Gunners are Trying to Ban Now
Gavin Newsom Is Lying About California's 'Balanced' Budget
After Failing to Pass a Radical Gun Control Bill, a Minnesota Democrat Responded...
Yale Faculty Report Admits Higher Ed Trust Crisis Self-Inflicted
U.S. Secret Service Seized 14 Skimmers, Stopped $14.5M of Fraud in Houston Area
McMorrow Pushed Water Affordability While Racking Up $3,000 Unpaid Utility Tab at Million-...
USDA SNAP Data Integrity Team Finds About $3B of Fraud Across 20+ States
The Virginia Democrat Behind the Illegal Theft of Republican Seats Launches Fundraiser for...
THE BOYS: A Love Letter to People Who Hate You
Maryland Woman Gets 3.5 Years for $3.5 Million COVID Unemployment Fraud Scheme
Anti-Police Remarks From This Arizona Democrat Resurface During National Police Week
Is This Anti-Trump Republican Now Hiding His Payments to His Democrat Consultant?
Tipsheet

Hillary's Troubling Legacy

Hillary's Troubling Legacy

Hillary Clinton is currently the darling of Democrats and their 2016 hopes, but should she be? Her record as a public servant should cause all Americans concern. Fred Lucas reports for Townhall Magazine.

Advertisement

-------------------

While testifying before Congress about the terrorist attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya, outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sought to frame her four years on the job in impressive rhetoric.

“Today, after four years in this job, after traveling nearly 1 million miles and visiting 112 countries around the world, my faith in our country and our future is stronger than ever,” Clinton told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in January. “Every time that blue and white airplane carrying the words ‘United States of America’ touches down in some far-off capital, I feel again the honor it is to represent the world’s indispensable nation.”

Earlier that month, The New York Times eagerly reported the State Department talking point of Clinton being the “most widely traveled secretary of state in American history,” adding, “Mrs. Clinton holds the record for the most countries visited by a secretary of state, 112, though her total of 956,733 air miles will fall short of the 1.06 million logged by her predecessor, Condoleezza Rice.”

It’s true that when taking into account such strategically important countries as Togo and Laos, Clinton indeed can cross more countries off her list than previous secretaries of state—if that’s the MO. But The Washington Post thankfully took a more critical view of the claim than the Times. The Post, using the metric of days spent abroad rather than miles traveled, reported she is in fact the fifth most-traveled— behind George Schultz, Rice, Henry Kissinger and Madeline Albright. Further, the Post reports, Clinton made just five visits to Israel, “the least of any full-term secretary of state since William Rogers”—who interestingly enough served under Richard Nixon, the president a young Hillary Rodham worked to impeach in the 1970s when going after Tricky Dick was fashionable.

Advertisement

Related:

HILLARY CLINTON

Perhaps for Tricky Hill, stressing quantity over quality of travel is the last, best hope of clinging to anything resembling success as the nation’s top diplomat. When this liberal junior senator from New York introduced her husband, former President Bill Clinton, at the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston, she claimed, “In 1992 and 1996, Americans chose a president who left our country in better shape than when he took office.” It would be very difficult to argue that Clinton has left American foreign policy in better shape than when she took office, considering the State Department’s involvement in the Benghazi coverup and that she leaves behind a still-emboldened North Korea and a more uncertain Middle East.

The question for the likely presidential aspirant is: Does it matter?

Her 2016 presidential bid will still be based largely on her celebrity, her husband, her gender and the supposed inevitability of it finally being her turn after she failed to seal the deal in 2008. But any other presidential candidate would be expected to run on his or her record, which she now has after running the Obama administration’s foreign policy and serving as a senator for one of the nation’s most economically important states.

...continue reading in the July issue of Townhall Magazine.

Advertisement

 

 

 

 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement