Video: Smartest woman in the world doesn’t know the first thing about Pakistan
posted at 12:15 pm on January 1, 2008 by Bryan
This is from Hillary Clinton’s appearance on This Week, Dec 30th. She gets nearly everything about the Pakistani political situation and upcoming elections wrong. And by wrong, I am not saying that she’s a little wrong. She’s totally wrong. She doesn’t know what she’s talking about.
Let’s take this piecemeal. The Pakistani People’s Party, or PPP, is a hereditary party. Benazir Bhutto became its leader when her father was executed after conviction in a highly questionable trial (not “assassinated,” as Clinton has said), and upon Bhutto’s assassination, her son took the reins because Bhutto had left the party’s leadership to him in her will. Therefore, there was no choice to be made in the PPP’s leadership. It had been made before Bhutto’s death, because the PPP isn’t democratically run.
Second, Nawaz Sharif can’t run. He’s a convicted felon. His party can participate in elections, but he’s barred from running. Musharraf could have pardoned Sharif as he had pardoned Bhutto in late 2007, but he hadn’t, so according to the law Sharif was barred from standing for election.
Third, even if Bhutto hadn’t been murdered and even if Sharif could run, neither would be on the ballot to replace Pervez Musharraf, who isn’t on any ballot himself. Musharraf was just re-elected to a five-year presidential term back in October. The January 8 elections, which have now been postponed to February 20, were for parliament. Bhutto could have become Prime Minister again. Sharif couldn’t. Neither could have replaced the president, who is Musharraf.
So Hillary Clinton, smartest woman in the world and veteran of flying into the world’s dangerous hot spots alongside comedian Sinbad, got the Pakistani elections entirely, completely and utterly wrong in all respects.
Perhaps she should have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express on Saturday night.
What may be even more telling than how wrong Hillary got Pakistan is the fact that none of her Democrat rivals have called her out on it. She made her remarks in a high profile interview on the last Sunday morning before the Iowa caucus. It’s now Tuesday. Where are the Edwards and Obama camps to criticize her for getting everything on a vital story completely wrong? It’s reasonable to assume that none of the experts in either camp are even aware that Hillary is so disastrously wrong about the hottest foreign policy story of the moment.
Update: Politico’s Ben Smith picks up the story, but only reports on one aspect of it — that Musharraf won’t be on the ballot.
(h/t Powerline and Thomas Houlahan)
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
So Hillary supports Regeme Change of a Muslim Country ?
It was wrong to get rid of Saddam but we should get rid of Mushariff ?
Isnt a more proper way to go what GW is doing ? Backing Mushariff while increasing our ties with Pakistan’s neighbor who has the most to lose in India ?
Does Hillary know Osama hates Mushariff and that removing him helps Osama ? And if she is really upset over Bhutto’s assassination why not target the murderers in Al Qaeda by backing the war in Iraq which Osama himself said he wants to win now ?
William Amos on January 1, 2008 at 12:20 PM
But she’s a “Christian leader”! Oh, wait–that’s the other shameless fraud who’s completely ignorant about Pakistan. My bad.
ReubenJCogburn on January 1, 2008 at 12:21 PM
Doh
pat on January 1, 2008 at 12:23 PM
When Hillary calls for an independent investigation, she should heed her own advice.
infidel on January 1, 2008 at 12:28 PM
Are we suprised? answer, no
Will the MSM speak a word of this? answer, again no
The real question, where are Obama and Edwards on this?
They think the same thing, they are all idiots. I would expect someone on their staffs to pick up on it though.
They should read HotAir, lots of ammo here!
conservnut on January 1, 2008 at 12:30 PM
The other major curiosity to me is why no one on the other side has lambasted her on this.
bbz123 on January 1, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Even if she hadn’t been factually wrong she still would’ve told them to vote on the wrong day.
Speakup on January 1, 2008 at 12:35 PM
Maybe they’d rather face Hillary than Obama ? But think they are in the same boat as Hillary they cant push too hard for war because that will upset the nutroots so they push for investigations
William Amos on January 1, 2008 at 12:36 PM
This may be the funniest thread of the year Bryan. Well done. She’s not wrong. She’s always right. The Clintonistas will wave a magic ‘revisionist history’ wand just like in Men In Black and viola’. Done deal. You must have been tying your shoes when they were waving their wand. They missed you. I hope someone is e-mailing this post to the future leaders of the free world. O’BamBam or EddieWad. However if this issue becomes national after this post you’ll be in grave danger. You may very well end up in a crypt in the lower levels of the Clintonistas Library. Ever been to Little Rock Arkansas? I can’t stop laughing. To think that the biotch wants to be our president and she is literally ignorant. My goodness.
Griz on January 1, 2008 at 12:37 PM
Taking a refresher course so they don’t make the same mistakes as Hillary has. Once they graduate…..they will come out and speak with some knowledge on the subject.
The MSM is MIA.
subbottomfeeder on January 1, 2008 at 12:41 PM
Leave it to the former(?) Clinton handiwipe Stephanopolis (sp?) to not know what the heck is going on with Pakistan either.
If the Obama and Edwards camps don’t use this to slay the dragon lady, they are undoubtedly suffering from paranoia and a simple case of ignorance. Same old same old.
Christine on January 1, 2008 at 12:43 PM
Damn, for someone with one of the most expensive political machines ever…to slip in that the PPP is in disarray…cmon any politician should be better than that. A hereditary party in disarray??? eishhhh
ernesto on January 1, 2008 at 12:47 PM
Other people in media have also made it seem like Musharraf is on the ballot too.
terryannonline on January 1, 2008 at 12:48 PM
I can’t wait to hear the story of how Hillary and Sinbad fought the one-eyed Centaur and the animated statue of Kali. Now that’s Presidential experience.
ReubenJCogburn on January 1, 2008 at 12:48 PM
Just the facts, ma’am.
windbag on January 1, 2008 at 12:49 PM
First no questions, next no talking. Experience …
tarpon on January 1, 2008 at 12:49 PM
It’s just like when Dhimmicrats try and quote the bible. Inevitably they screw it up because they haven’t the foggiest notion what’s actually inside the pages of their dusty scriptures.
Mojave Mark on January 1, 2008 at 12:50 PM
Good analysis, Bryan
bnelson44 on January 1, 2008 at 12:52 PM
Hey, isn’t she wearing Monica’s old blue dress?
I wonder if its ever been cleaned or is the stain still there?
My bet is that its still filthy.
SouthernPride on January 1, 2008 at 12:55 PM
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the story of her entire life.
Zorro on January 1, 2008 at 12:57 PM
I give her a pass on this one. I don’t think anyone really understands WTF goes on in Pakistan. I would say that currently Pakistan is more or less in a state of anarchy.
jones on January 1, 2008 at 12:59 PM
This post lays out what’s going on politically in Pakistan. It’s not that hard to understand, and we should certainly expect our leading presidential candidates to have a clue.
Bryan on January 1, 2008 at 1:02 PM
Well, that about knocks all of em’ into the “clueless” category.
SouthernPride on January 1, 2008 at 1:06 PM
Your insolence to Great Mother will not go unpunished. Pray that you are not judged “unredeemable” and make the most of your opportunity to change and grow during your time at the Diversity Education Center.
ronsfi on January 1, 2008 at 1:07 PM
Oh, ok, lets give B. Hussein Obama and Huck a pass on this as well. That’s like a teacher allowing her kids to advance to the next grade just because the subject was too darn hard!
SouthernPride on January 1, 2008 at 1:09 PM
Agreed.
terryannonline on January 1, 2008 at 1:13 PM
w00psy
trailortrash on January 1, 2008 at 1:22 PM
EXACTLY.
Bob's Kid on January 1, 2008 at 1:23 PM
No pass.
She’s a presidential candidate. It’s her business to know these things, or at the very least, keep quiet until she can find out.
And that goes for all of them.
Bob's Kid on January 1, 2008 at 1:27 PM
But Bill told us she is a genius and we know he wouldn’t lie to us…..
Her and Huck graduates of the Arkansas Foreign Policy Institute and Chicken Plucking Academy.
CommentGuy on January 1, 2008 at 1:56 PM
Funniest thing I have heard all year!
infidel on January 1, 2008 at 2:00 PM
Experience doesn’t matter when you never have to take a stand on anything as a matter of principle!
Gosh. I thought EVERYONE knew that! You backwards thinking cavemen types…
thareb on January 1, 2008 at 2:14 PM
On a side note
http://wonkette.com/politics/dept%27-of-grumpy-old-men/ted-kennedy-cares-about-the-chicken-pluckers-262969.php
ronsfi on January 1, 2008 at 2:18 PM
Arkansas is also one of the states that grows a surprising amount of the Turkeys the country consumes. Most of the turkeys we cook for meals the political ones are raised for export.
CommentGuy on January 1, 2008 at 2:25 PM
clueless as always. I thought she was the smartest woman in the world?
The only sad part of this is that the Republicans will not dare to go after her since they will be accused by her enablers in the MSM of ganging up on a woman.
jdsmith0021 on January 1, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Actually Brian this Post lays out what is going on politically on the surface in Pakistan. What it fails to do is laying out what is really going on. Musharrif isn’t in power because he is President; he is in power because he has the support of the nations military. The military has no control of the northern tribal areas of the nation. Al Qaeda has a veto power in that they seem to be able to assassinate even the most protected political leaders. From a practical stand point, political control of Pakistan is very much contested. As a result of the contested political situation I would judge Pakistan to be a state of anarchy much like Somalia. Given that the Pakistani parliament has little real power at present, I have difficulty viewing the parliamentary elections as anything more than window dressing. And yes I will forgive a candidate for not being an expert on the window dressing elections of a foreign country.
jones on January 1, 2008 at 2:49 PM
Look what happened when she was in the White House before. See, we have a track record for her in the White House already. It was nothing but scandles and queries into everything that went on in that place. She had shredders working overtime and Bill was chasing skirts in the back rooms. No more of that folks PLEASE! Keep her out.
johnnyU on January 1, 2008 at 2:51 PM
Okay second try:
Pakistan Government for dummies:
Pakistan has a parlimentary system of government similar to canada, australia, etc. However, they have replaced the position of Governor General (i.e. the queen’s representative) with a popularily elected president. The position of President controls the military, and signs laws into effect. The parliment makes laws. Parlimentary elections and presidential elections don’t happen at the same time in all cases.
Canadian Imperialist Running Dog on January 1, 2008 at 3:01 PM
Do they have military coups and political assassinations in the Canadian and Australian systems as well?
My point is that there is a huge gulf between how the Pakistani goverment is supposed to operate and how it actually operates.
jones on January 1, 2008 at 3:12 PM
How can this be? Hillary’s running on the basis of her WH experience. Plus, she says she knew Benazir Bhutto.
petefrt on January 1, 2008 at 3:20 PM
I’m thinking that none of these critters (politicians) have even the bare bones knowledge of how a parliamentary government is set up, hence the Musharaf mistake. Didn’t these people (Hillary, et al.) go to Harvard?
baldilocks on January 1, 2008 at 3:39 PM
Hillary doesn’t even know that. And it’s ‘Bryan.’
We know this. Does Mrs. Clinton? That’s the point of the post.
baldilocks on January 1, 2008 at 3:45 PM
Stop trying to change the subject by asking stupid questions. Mrs. Clinton didn’t (doesn’t?) know what’s going on. Get over it.
baldilocks on January 1, 2008 at 3:47 PM
Smartest Women in the world as follows:
1. Hillary Clinton
2. Benazir Bhutto
DfDeportation on January 1, 2008 at 3:55 PM
If she is the smartest woman in the world then all the others are …. ?
Wade on January 1, 2008 at 4:08 PM
And Benazir Bhutto is unavailable for comment.
Wade on January 1, 2008 at 4:11 PM
First of all, Hillary didn’t get “stumped” on anything. This interview’s questions and answers were scripted from start to finish.
Of course Hillary and the other Democratic candidates (or at least their advisors) already know this stuff. But none of them can or will say it publically because it doesn’t match the current Democrat/media story line.
There is a REASON this stuff is being kept out of the papers and the alphabet news. And no Democrat leader is going to put it there.
logis on January 1, 2008 at 4:17 PM
What a lame and whiny argument.
Republicans have spent more than a decade calling Clintons on their BS. Any Republican candidate who would not call Hillary on this because they are afraid of MSM media scrutiny is not worth one hanging chad.
I can’t stand it when Republicans whine about being discriminated against. Yes, it happens. Yes, the MSM are left-leaning. But misplaced accusations of discrimination are just as unsavory when we do it as any other group of whiners.
The Race Card on January 1, 2008 at 4:34 PM
The smartest woman in the world just jumped out of the plane with a backpack.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on January 1, 2008 at 4:49 PM
So you misspell my name en route to building a post that at least shows more info about Pakistan than Hillary Clinton evidently possesses. That doesn’t help your case.
Bryan on January 1, 2008 at 4:50 PM
No, but if they did I’d expect any American presidential candidate to know what the heck they were talking about before they opened their mouths to spout nonsense.
If you can’t be credible on what is going on in the world–admittedly a daunting task, but that’s part and parcel to the president’s job–then you’ve got no business running for top-tier public office of any sort, let alone POTUS.
And like I said before, that goes for anyone. I’d be as critical of any conservative running. Probably more so, as I hold them to a higher standard.
Bob's Kid on January 1, 2008 at 5:01 PM
Sorry I misspelled your name Bryan, my case was that Pakistani parliamentary elections are somewhat like English coronation procedures. That is to say they are mostly for show. I am concerned with a candidates knowledge of the Pakistani parliament like I am concerned with their knowledge of Britney Spears (I hope I didn’t misspell her name lol)
jones on January 1, 2008 at 5:10 PM
Ummmm….okay, how does this make sense? Like it or not, Pakistan is a player on the world stage, one who can sabotage the whole play. Our president NEEDS to be up on what is going on in Pakistan, just like he does everywhere else. Britney Spears is a joke, but how potentially troublesome countries function and what is going on in them is no joke.
It’s deadly serious. Trouble spreads much faster and easier than peace, and it’s harder to stop.
Bob's Kid on January 1, 2008 at 5:15 PM
I agree that a candidate needs to be up to speed on how Pakistani politics works. My point is that there is more to the politics of pakistan than the parlimentary elections. In fact the elections are more of a smokescreen than anything else. Pakistani politics has alot more to do with coups, military loyalty, assassinations than it does with parlimentary elections.
jones on January 1, 2008 at 5:23 PM
I heard that Hilary has initiated an internal investigation to discover why she had all the facts wrong while talking to George about Pakistan on Sunday morning.
This post is not sarcasm. Its just a joke.
Or maybe it is a comment on how some people, in and out of politics, can pontificate with confidence about which they know nothing.
slp on January 1, 2008 at 5:30 PM
Remember the grief Bush took after the interviewer asked him who the world’s leaders were and he only knew that Pakistan was headed by a general who had staged a coup?
And that was prior to 9/11 and no headlines were coming out of Pakistan.
Now this time Pakistan, an unstable Muslim nation with nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them, fertile breeding ground for Al Quada, and a country in the headlines in the GWOT every week, has a violent political assasination and Hillary’s team fails to brief her before a major interview?
No excuse whatsoever.
Hillary’s “experience” credentials, weak as they were, are toast. Where ARE Obama’s and Edwards’ attack ads??
fred5678 on January 1, 2008 at 5:40 PM
“What may be even more telling than how wrong Hillary got Pakistan is the fact that none of her Democrat rivals have called her out on it. “
You sure nailed that one, Bryan.
jones: “My point is that there is a huge gulf between how the Pakistani goverment is supposed to operate and how it actually operates.”
I wouldn’t call your own synopsis particularly sophisticated (this piece on Bhutto’s murder from an Indian perspective is not a bad place to start), but that’s not the central point either. Hillary is out there talking about the to-do-list we ought be handing to Musharraf, when, in fact, she lacks even a superficial understanding of the front page news from Pakistan. So much for her highly touted ability to hit the ground running vs. learning on the job.
JM Hanes on January 1, 2008 at 5:47 PM
Perhaps she should have told George. . .
“I’m sorry, I don’t talk to the press and that applies to you, unfortunately. Even though I think you’re cute,”
Texyank on January 1, 2008 at 6:04 PM
The other candidates haven’t picked up on it because it would have forced them to admit the realities, complications and consequences of the pakistan situation.
peacenprosperity on January 1, 2008 at 6:34 PM
And Dan Quayle got massacred for not knowing how to spell “potatoes”?
SouthernGent on January 1, 2008 at 6:47 PM
A few major points missing on this thread:
1) Hillary claims that her time in the White House gives her the experience needed to be president.
2) In 1998 the Clinton White House (where Hill got all her experience) spent a bunch of time and energy on the whole issue of Kashmir and nuke tests in India & Pakistan (really big stuff at the time).
3) Seems to me that Hill’s experiences from that time would inform her understanding of Pakistan today.
I guess she wasn’t paying attention in 1998. Ya think??
dung.
Moose Dung on January 1, 2008 at 6:59 PM
I wonder if Hillary knew Benazir was on her way to see OPEN BORDERS ZEALOTS Sen. Arlen Spechter and Rep. Patrick Kennedy at her poor flophouse in………………….DUBAI?
DfDeportation on January 1, 2008 at 7:25 PM
I can’t wait to see Hillary offered up as a sacrifice in the general election. She’s toast people.
Mojave Mark on January 1, 2008 at 7:48 PM
But Hillary and Bhutto were BFFs! Just ask Hillary or wait until she spins it into the discussion to suggest that being first lady of an insignificant Southern state and the US is the same thing as being a policy maker.
highhopes on January 1, 2008 at 7:49 PM
Nice summary, Bryan!
drjohn on January 1, 2008 at 8:17 PM
The thing that makes Clinton’s mistakes so ridiculous is that this whole flareup started with Musharraf’s reelection and the Pakistani Supreme Court’s response to it (though it appears that Bhutto’s return was in the works before then).
baldilocks on January 1, 2008 at 8:20 PM
The woman was tired by 1998. She’d already had to roll Vince Foster up in a carpet and fire the travel staff. She was just ramping up to defend the fact that her husband was screwing the interns and committing perjury over it. She probably just needed a vacation! ;-0
highhopes on January 1, 2008 at 8:29 PM
I don’t know if the terrorists have figured this out yet or not, but they now have the ability to dictate when elections will be held.
ericire12 on January 1, 2008 at 9:32 PM
Thank you! I was waiting to see if someone posted that little nugget before bringing it up. Once again, the MSM will hear what it wants us to hear…
Captain Scarlet on January 1, 2008 at 9:54 PM
Mitt is going to wait until the general to compare his knowledge to hers…and he will destroy her. If she gets the nod and goes up against Mitt, Mitt wins. No doubt about it.
JustTruth101 on January 1, 2008 at 10:49 PM
If Britney Spears becomes a potentially hostile islamist nuclear power, I darn sure hope that the Presidential Candidates will be VERY knowledgeable about her.
Sheesh.
LegendHasIt on January 1, 2008 at 11:20 PM
I think it is fair to say that I’m a bit of right of center for Hotair on foreign policy towards muslim countries. Admittedly, I’m left of center for Hotair on Hilary, since I don’t think you have to hate Hilary to oppose her. Despite that, I just don’t know that Bryan’s analysis about Hilary and Pakistan is convincing. So Hilary spoke loosely about Pakistan? Have you listened to how Bush speaks? For that matter, even Reagan was often more than a little vague about the details.
I suppose I’m always thinking about what would convince someone who is undecided. I guess Bryan is about rallying the base. These are very different activities, and I think I’ll just refrain from commenting on these threads in the future, unless I feel the attacks on Hilary are too counter productive to Fred’s, Rudy’s, or even (with reluctance) Mitt’s chance of winning in 2008. I don’t wish to be a downer.
thuja on January 1, 2008 at 11:23 PM
Biden is the only one with enough experience to even be expected to know how wrong Hillary is on the subject. And I wouldn’t even bet more than a dollar that he knows it.
As to the rest of the Democrat field; Even if you gave them the answers today, and told them there would be a written test on it tomorrow, they’d still be lucky to ‘get a C’.
LegendHasIt on January 1, 2008 at 11:32 PM
BacaDog on January 1, 2008 at 11:50 PM
Clinton didn’t “speak loosely.” She got facts wrong, facts that are pertinent to intelligently discussing the matter at hand.
The word ‘how’ is highlighted for this reason: the subject of how Mrs. Clinton spoke is not under contention here. Either President Musharraf was up for election last year or he wasn’t. Either this year’s Pakistan election is a parliamentary one or it isn’t. Either one knows these facts or one doesn’t. These subjects of discussion fall under the heading of ‘what,’ not ‘how.’
It sounds as though you think everything put up for public consumption is part of a game. That’s not a criticism. However, the trick is to be able to discern what is game-playing and what is straight-forward. It wasn’t difficult to figure out which was which in this case.
baldilocks on January 1, 2008 at 11:56 PM
wow she makes a box of rocks look like rocket scientist.
is it any wonder she spewed this crap on snuffilufiguses
posshowMojack420 on January 2, 2008 at 1:09 AM
2001-09-11 was supposed to be the mayoral election in NYC, but Rudy thought the city employees were a little busy that day, and it would be best under the circumstances to postpone it until 2001-11-06.
The Monster on January 2, 2008 at 2:01 AM
The Clintons have always operated in their own reality. When their self-serving reality doesn’t match objective reality, they simply lie their way through it to the applause of their followers. Let’s move on.
Tantor on January 2, 2008 at 2:18 AM
This raises questions about her gravitas.
Some say this raises questions about her gravitas.
Critics say this points to her lack of gravitas.
Gravitas.
Gravitas.
Gravitas.
Gravitas.
Gravitas.
benrand on January 2, 2008 at 7:34 AM
I too had to refresh my memory on the timeline of Ms. Bhutto’s past and present. Bryan’s facts are impeccable and correct.
If my hearing and reading was correct, Hitlery was the first to jump on the Ms. Benazir Bhutto’s assassination and turn it political. Hitlery claimed to have known Ms. Bhutto and has a similar view of the country (U.S.) and she (Hitlery) feels entitled to rule.
Hitlery has met Ms. Bhutto, however she has never taken the personal efforts it requires to actually know a person.
MSGTAS on January 2, 2008 at 8:19 AM
What possible connection are you trying to make to Crankles being ignorant about Pakistan?
Wade on January 2, 2008 at 8:31 AM
Sorry, there will be no misspelling of names on hotair, as per the Jones/’Brian’ incident.
tlynch001 on January 2, 2008 at 8:32 AM
Bush isn’t on the ballot. Hillary is.
Bryan on January 2, 2008 at 9:06 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »