HillBuzz

We’ve baked Hillary cupcakes and oatmeal chocolate chip cookies (from Hillary’s own recipe), and are camped out at Buzzquarters watching the Senate confirmation hearings for Clinton to become the next Secretary of State.

We debated whether or not to live-blog the hearings, but selfishly decided to enjoy them on our own — to sit back and watch our champ in action, away from the computer for a change. And Clinton’s been a force of nature all morning. The way she always is, really. No surprise to us, but still fun to watch.

Love. This. Woman.

We’ll continue to update our thoughts as the hearings continue. We should all be very grateful she’s rising to the challenge and accepting the Secretary of State position, when a tumultuous world needs her most.

UPDATE #1: It’s been so long since we watched either CNN or MSNBC that we forgot what terrible networks they are. Andrea Mitchell and Chris Matthews are, of course, especially stupid people. Everyone seems surprised the confirmation hearings have been so congenial for Hillary Clinton.  We’re not sure what the networks expected, but Mitchell, in particular, has some agenda to make a big issue over donations to the Clinton Foundation — an issue none of the Senators on the Committee are making. Senators Lugar and Vitter have said that foreign donations to the foundation should be transparent, and the Clintons themselves agree to that. So, there’s no issue there, try as Mitchell does to make one.

It’s amazing to us that Mitchell’s not only allowed to push her own agendas like this, but she’s treated as a credible journalist, instead of a crazy person. Years ago, FOX had a morning show with two live anchors, a weather person, and a puppet.  And they would read serious news, with the puppet commenting on the day’s events, too, saying ridiculous and inappropriate things. We don’t know whatever happened to that puppet on FOX, but Mitchell seems to fill that roll on MSNBC, with a cheaper wardrobe and slightly less felt.

We also forgot how terrible it is to have to listen to John Kerry talk for extended periods of time. We campaigned for him in 2004 around Pennsylvania, because we were good little Democrats who always supported the Democrat, no matter how terrible he was, and had to admit to people that yes, we only supported him because we were party partisans and, thus, it didn’t matter how Kerry conducted himself or what he actually brought to the table. John Kerry is not exceptional in any way, besides having a magnificent head of hair (and a knack for marrying well). Besides acknowledging Chelsea Clinton and being very nice to her, we don’t remember anything Kerry said this morning. There’s something about his voice that makes him completely forgettable. In high school, we had a principal like this who delivered a morning P.A. address from his office every morning that put everyone to sleep. Kerry, in this respect, missed his true calling. Somewhere in America, there’s a Catholic school full of insomniacs who could use the extra rest at 8:15 every morning, should he ever tire of boring people in Washington.

Not that these hearings are intended for entertainment, but to us of course they’re great fun.  Aside from just being thrilled to see and hear Hillary Clinton talking live on television in itself, we also loved seeing Chelsea there supporting her mother. Of all the things either Clinton has done in their lives, raising a daughter as poised, kind, smart, and dedicated as Chelsea is, in our opinion, their greatest achievement.

If people in New York want the daughter of a president to take Hillary Clinton’s place in the Senate, then Chelsea certainly seems like a much better first daughter to choose (than that other one, whom we won’t even mention).

It is always a joy to see Hillary and Chelsea interact.  They are obviously so proud of each other. We just love that — and love both of them — all throughout what’s basically a Senate lovefest for Clinton this morning.

The thing we love most about Clinton keeps shining through during these hearings: the woman works hard and does her homework. Though the Democratic Party fell for the guy with the big smile and the much applauded in the media charisma, the person we’ve always supported is the one who clearly stays up all night learning about the issues and figuring out what she can do about them. The one in the brown pantsuit, knocking every question put to her right out of the park, causing even that malicious little piggy Chris Matthews to repeatedly chime in how he’s so impressed with her and how she’ll be a terrific Secretary of State.

What’s most encouraging from what’s emerged from these hearings is that Clinton clearly is in her element as Secretary of State, and fully intends to throw herself into the job. The way she does with everything. Which is the reason we’re lifelong supporters of her, in whatever she does, whatever adventure’s ahead.

The two things we are most thrilled to hear Clinton address today in the confirmation hearing are:

(1) Pushing for smart use of the State Department and its resources, in what’s been buzzed as “Smart Power”

(2) Championing the rights of women globally, with notes going all the way back to Clinton’s 1995 speech on Women’s Rights in Beijing

In keeping with the priorities above, Clinton insists American security depends on a strong military, strong diplomacy, and strong development of all our resources. She outlines the beginnings of a very pragmatic, hard-working, budget conscious, collaborative, open, and forward thinking US foreign policy rooted in Clinton’s own impressive work ethic.

The turf wars of the last 8 years between the State Department and Pentagon will come to an end. In what was one of the most interesting parts of her testimony, Clinton talked about instances where the US military has been distracted from its chief duties, where military units have been tasked with hiring contractors to build bridges or work on other development projects, that none of these troops were trained to do. The State Departments does have people trained to do this, but the Bush Administration didn’t use those resources. One of Clinton’s big focuses will be to address these kinds of overlap, so money and other resources are no longer wasted with such redundancies.

That’s going to be a big job, because it seems like many new fiefdoms have evolved in the Pentagon and the White House that have usurped roles and duties previously held squarely in the State Department.

Senator Webb brought up one of the most interesting salient points, one that’s almost never discussed in the media, and that’s the burden place on the US military by being sucked into so many situations that don’t benefit the United States directly. One instance he gave was the US military being perceived as global protector in Asia, for countries wishing to develop beneficial economic ties with China while simultaneously being protected militarily from China by the US. Webb, quite rightly, asked why the US should do that, and why that’s being done in what he called other “protectorates” around the world. It’s another area, like the development fiefdoms, that needs to be addressed in the new administration.

One thing Webb didn’t raise, and that we’ve never heard anyone else mention but something we think should happen, is why countries in Asia aren’t paying the US some sort of fee for the protection they’re enjoying from China. A sensitive issue, we’re sure, but if they are reaping economic benefit from the arrangement in place, and if they aren’t devoting resources to their own protection because they enjoy the American umbrella, then perhaps going forward there should be some way for them to defray our military costs for those overseas operations. If we are serving as global policemen indefinitely, then we should not be shouldering that cost alone.

That’s something we’d like to look into and explore in better detail in the weeks ahead — along with taking a closer look at the development projects the military’s been tasked with, that Clinton mentioned earlier.

UPDATE #2:  Senator Feingold in the second half of the hearing brought up Somalia, and earlier in the hearings there were references to Darfur, Ethiopia, Kenya, Nigeria, and Al Queda (and pirate activity in various parts of Africa as well).  Clinton was very deliberate in what she talked about, saying the State Department would work closely with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in determining a path forward. Private shippers need to do more to combat pirates, along with cooperation from China, India and others. Clinton said, specifically, that much thought needs to be put into these matters — with great caution used before anyone talks about going ashore in places like Somalia.

This is an area that deeply frightens us, because we do truly believe Samantha Power, a longtime advocate for American military intervention in Darfur, has Obama’s ear and will lead America into a quagmire in Africa. Power’s husband just accepted an official position in the administration, while Power herself is still in the shadows (if only ostensibly) — we assume sidelining her is only going to be until after the Inauguration. She does not appear to be going anywhere anytime soon — and remains, in our opinion, the most dangerous woman in the world (because Obama is fond of her to the point of quite possibly allowing her to steer him into a mess more bloody than Iraq, with no quick solution, requiring longterm drain on our resources and thousands of boots on the ground). There are DEFINITELY shades of Power’s opinions coming out in the new administration’s take on Africa. This, and Power herself, needs to be watched closely.

Clinton is too smart to get sucked into a mess of Power’s making, but it appears likely at some point in the next four years we’ll see military action in Darfur, if not in Kenya and Somalia as well. And that is frightening. If the media’s still treating Obama as the messiah, and it rediscovers the military action cheerleading it pumped out from 2001-2003 in the leadup to the invasion of Iraq, America will find itself in another challenging years-long military engagement (and, of course, everyone will be surprised when it goes terribly wrong).

UPDATE #3: There was a funny bit at the beginning of the hearings where, instead of calling Kerry “Mr. Chairman”, she referred to him as either “President Kerry” or “Mr. President”. Kerry laughed, and Clinton called it a Freudian slip. Kerry said those are “want to happen in this body”, especially with this issue — alluding to both his, Senator Dodd’s, and Clinton’s own presidential ambitions. Around the same time, Kerry noted both Obama and Biden were members of the Foreign Relations Committee, and this was the first time two committee members graduated to the highest levels of the Executive.  Not that membership on the committee is any guarantee of ever doing that — another humorous bit that got a genuine laugh from all, and of Clinton’s own exuberant chuckles. Kerry also noted that President Clinton was once an intern on the committee, so he offered, jokingly, for Chelsea to be a Senate Intern for a Day and take a seat up on the dais with the Senate staffers.  Chelsea was seated behind her mother the whole day, where Clinton couldn’t see her without turning around, so Kerry said that would be a way for Chelsea to be visible to her mother as she supported her. Chelsea smiled, but never took him up on it, and spent the day in her seat right by her mother.

UPDATE #4: Since the media keeps pushing this, and even though it is a non-story, we’ll chime in on the issue of foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation and the recently spun-off Clinton Global Initiative.

The Clinton Foundation’s mission is “to strengthen the capacity of people throughout the world to meet the challenges of global interdependence”. It has offices in New York, Boston, and Little Rock. It’s four areas of focus are: health security, economic empowerment, leadership development and citizen service, and ethnic and racial reconciliation. Unlike other foundations you hear about, the Clinton Foundation is not about raising money to give to other organizations. Instead, the Foundation is mainly “an incubator for new policies and programs”, where those working for and with it formulate new approaches to dealing with longstanding development problems in troubled nations throughout the world, with particular emphasis on battling HIV/AIDS.

One area of confusion that repeatedly came up all day during the hearings is the difference between the Clinton Foundation itself, and the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI).

The Clinton Foundation created the Clinton Global Initiative in 2005, as an annual conference of heads of state, non-profit organizations, charities and business leaders. At the conference, held in New York, the Foundation asks the various attendees to commit to specific projects over the course of the next year, to make progress on the Foundation’s goals. This is CGI’s “Commitment to Action”, where the Foundation then is charged with following up with the various committed individuals to ensure action is taken and work is being done as promised.

2008’s CGI goals were: energy and climate change, global health, poverty alleviation, and education. CGI has proved so effective that a second annual meeting, CGI International, was conceived to supplement the New York meeting with various regional meetings around the world (the first one in Hong Kong last December, focusing on Asia).

The Clinton Foundation has raised almost $600 million to work towards its stated goals. Of that, the largest donations have come from The Children’s Investment Fund Foundation, UNITAID, AUSAID, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Hunter Foundation, the Radcliffe Foundation, the ELMA Foundation, and others.

The media keeps emphasizing contributions made by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, but the government of Norway also contributed an almos equal amount. Andrea Mitchell harps about donations from other Arab nations, from Quatar to Bahrain, but she fails to mention the contributions from the Elton John AIDS Foundation or the Princess Diana Memorial Fund.

Obviously, Elton John and the ghost of Princess Diana have nefarious plans to influence US foreign policy by contributing to the Clinton Foundation.

Elton John is plotting to take over the world, with his ghost queen upon his arm, and will rule it from a hot pink condo drilled into Mt. Haleakala. Release the bedazzled sequin-encrusted flying monkeys and the Rocket Men! Goodbye Yellow Brick Road, and the whole of Manhattan too! Bwahahahahaha!

As usual, the media is not telling you the real story, and is attempting to make news, not just report it. If saner heads prevailed, they’d see that a $10 million donation from Saudi Arabia to assist with global health and poverty alleviation is not going to make US policy any more friendly to Saudi Arabia than it already is. Considering the trillions the Saudis have available to them, giving $10 million, for them, is like a regular person sending the Foundation $45 (the median donation amount from all contributors). $10 million is a small fraction of the nearly $600 million the Foundation has raised.

If Andrea Mitchell and her pals are going to harp about the Saudis, why not the Norwegians? Why not Elton John? Why not the ghost of Princess Diana? Why not Bill Gates?

The Clinton Foundation is doing good around the world that the US government can’t or won’t do. Just because someone is Arab, it doesn’t mean their contributions are evil, or that they are up to something nefarious. The Saudis and other wealthy Arab states do have a vested interest in battling poverty and HIV/AIDS in Africa, though: if these problems aren’t brought under control, they could destabilize other surrounding countries.  Somalia is 20 miles from the Arab penninsula. Where will refugees go if there is a massive pandemic or other health or poverty related crisis? The sparkling, wealthy Arab states flush with food, cash, and clean water sure look appealing for those who could mount sustained emigration efforts to escape their current situations. We’re sure the people of Saudi Arabia, Quatar, Bahrain, and other wealthy nations want their borders to be as secure as possible — and part of that security’s rooted in mitigating the problems of their African neighbors. If not out of the goodness of their hearts, but out of longterm senses of lifestyle preservation.