Tue Mar 25 2008 11:20 pm
Tue Mar 25 2008 7:19 pm
I wrote earlier this week that I did not believe Hillary Clinton was lying about her experience in Bosnia. Instead, I questioned her perception of the event. While others may have found the trip to be safe, she may have had a heightened threat perception. Today Newsweek adds another wrinkle to this theory in an article on Hillary Clinton’s Bosnia trip. Newsweek demonstrates that Hillary Clinton’s tale of Tuzla has grown in the telling. Each new retelling has been embellished further, until it has now become a story with fictional sniper fire and fictional ducking and covering. Her threat perception has grown as she has gotten further in time from her trip to Bosnia, and closer in time to the Democratic National Convention.
Looking through the First Lady’s remarks on her visit to the base in Tuzla, with Sinbad and Sheryl Crow, one finds a first hand recollection of the threat she was facing in Tuzla. In remarks at Dover Air Force base in 1999, Hillary Clinton recalled her visit to Tuzla. She said:
"You know, I went to Bosnia shortly after the peace accords were signed, when it was safe enough to go to our base in Tuzla, but not very safe to go anywhere else."
Somehow, over time, the "safe" trip to Tuzla has grown into a war story where Hillary Clinton is braving sniper fire to prove her foreign policy bona fides. It is as if the facts were being fixed around her campaign created myth of "experience".
bosnia
Sun Mar 23 2008 12:03 pm
Sat Mar 22 2008 9:05 pm

The Washington Post has exposed Hillary Clinton’s little fib about her Bosnia trip. Hillary Clinton told her audience earlier this week that her trip to Bosnia was dangerous. She said:
"I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."
The problem of course is what she said happened never happened. The Washington Post dug up pictures and video from the greeting ceremony in Bosnia. Sinbad was there, an 8 year old girl was there, Hillary Clinton was there. However, there was no running with heads down and there was no sniper fire.
Many have questioned Hillary Clinton’s credibility based on this account. I, however, question her threat perception.
I have no reason to believe that Hillary Clinton is lying. It may just be that her recollection of the events in Bosnia are different than the actual facts. She may have perceived a greater threat than actually existed. Perhaps she feared sniper fire and that fear has made her forget that indeed there was a greeting ceremony. She may have a heightened sense of threat perception. She may perceive threats as much worse than they actually are.
It may be the same kind of heightened and exaggerated threat perception that led her to vote for the resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq. She was susceptible to the propaganda that led the drum beat to war. It may have led her to the one percent doctrine, where possibility becomes probability. It is a view of the world where all risks take on equal likelihood of occurring. It is a view of the world that leads to overreaction - a trait that is dangerous in the hands of the person in charge of the world’s most powerful fighting force. To wit, George W Bush.
As I survey the behavior of the Hillary Clinton campaign during the primaries, I also see evidence of overreaction to perceived threats. For example, Hillary Clinton’s outburst over the Obama campaign mailers questioning her stand on healthcare and NAFTA. Taken together, it is a pattern of behavior that is alarming.
Of course I could be wrong. It is possible that Hillary Clinton was simply lying about her Bosnia trip.
bosnia
Tue Mar 11 2008 5:52 pm
Ever since Hillary Clinton cited her 1996 USO trip to Bosnia with Sinbad and Sheryl Crow as an example of her commander-in-chief qualifications, the pundits have been scratching their heads in bemusement. Today the Obama campaign responded forcefully to Mrs. Clinton’s so called commander-in-chief credentials. Then, unexpectedly, Sinbad has responded by ridiculing Mrs. Clinton for her characterization of the Bosnia trip:
In an interview with the Sleuth Monday, he said the "scariest" part of the trip was wondering where he’d eat next. "I think the only ‘red-phone’ moment was: ‘Do we eat here or at the next place.’"
Now, if you are like me, you might think that a would-be commander-in-chief should not be taking so much incoming from comedian like Sinbad. And you would be right. The Clinton campaign responded just as forcefully:
Still, defending Clinton against Sinbad the refuter, Singer said, "The sad reality of what was going on in Bosnia at the time Senator Clinton traveled there as first lady has been well documented. It appears that Sinbad’s experience in Bosnia goes back further than Senator Obama’s does. In fact, has Senator Obama ever been to Bosnia?"
It appears that the Clinton campaign is suggesting that both Clinton and Sinbad have passed the commander-in-chief threshold by visiting Bosnia. Mrs. Clinton already has stated that the Republican nominee, John McCain, has also passed this crucial threshold to the be President of the United States. This leaves Barack Obama as the only candidate left who has failed to cross this threshold.
Since I am a Barack Obama supporter, and since I have now been convinced by the Bosnia test that my candidate is not commander-in-chief material, I have gone googling to find my ideal candidate. I am still not sold on Hillary Clinton and I am also not comfortable voting for a candidate who goes by the one word name of a pirate. So, I have compiled a list of a number of people, who like Mrs. Clinton and Sinbad, have passed the crucial Bosnia test. I ask you the reader to help me decide who to vote for as our next commander-in-chief. All of the following have passed Hillary Clinton’s Bosnia test and should be considered commander-in-chief material:
bosnia