Yesterday, David gave the Snark of the Day [1]award to Vladimir Putin… and justifiably so, for his comment on Hillary Clinton:
“At a minimum, a head of state should have a head.”
Humor, of course, has to have a grain of truth at the center of it, else, it isn’t funny, and in laughing, we recognize that truth.
In our acknowledgment of that truth, however, let’s not lose sight of the fact that Putin is hardly alone in the world, in his perception of Hillary Clinton as a brainless idiot driven by pure avarice. And how is it that Mr. Putin who is arguably more socialist than any of America’s offerings can be so down on Mrs. Clinton, who was arguably among the most socialist of any of the American offerings? Perhaps there’s something of truht that his objection to the woman is rooted in?
Mr. Putin’s statement reveals a hostility that is formidable. A look round about suggests it is also hardly singular. His perception of Mrs. Clinton, is quietly reflected amongst many of the world’s leaders, including those amongst our friends, and our stated enemies.
It strikes me that at least part of the concern here is going to be our relationships with those who are hostile to the United States and its interests. These are the people that Mrs. Clinton is supposed to be making inroads with by “talking to them”? Also, keep in mind that Putin’s Russia has been among the more approachable nations. Imagine the reaction of Iran, for example, or Syria, to such kid-glove treatment.
The lack of progress involved in such talks is not limited to Hillary Clinton. Mr. Bush has been making the attempt behind the scenes, to talk to hostile nations, too, and none more than with Mr. Putin. Successes have been vairied at best.Invariably, progress has been best when running a bit roughshod over the issues, as Mr. Bush has discovered. Trouble is, Hillary Clinton doesn’t want to use that option. One cannot think but that Barrack Obama will be similarly stymied particularly given that the foreign policy actions proposed by Clinton and Obama are so similar.
Thus are the foreign policy arguments being made by both Democrats just now, exposed to the light of day. The history involved here is also noteworthy; We got into this situation not by way of Mr. Bush, but by way of 8 years of ‘talking to them’ by way of Mr. Clinton… and his co-president.
Perhaps this is a consideration point for this election.