Clinton Goes To China

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Foreign Affairs
Posted on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 09:59:57 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Last week, the silly Dick Morris let his Hillary hate run away with him as he pronounced her irrelevant. Here is the way Morris put it:

So what is Hillary’s mandate? Of what is she secretary of State? If you take the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan out of the equation, what is left? One would have to assume that the old North Korea hands in the government would monopolize that theater of action. What, precisely, is it that Hillary is to do? The question lingers.

Next week, Clinton goes to China. Dick Morris may not have heard of it, but I am sure most of you have. Secretary Clinton spoke about her upcoming Asia trip yesterday (h/t andgarden. The video of her speech is here.

The Christian Science Monitor writes about Clinton's important China trip:

Hillary Clinton chose Asia, particularly China, for her maiden voyage next week as secretary of State. While the most urgent issue is Beijing's help to end a global recession, Mrs. Clinton's more planet-saving goal is to enlist China to set curbs on its carbon emissions. Without that, President Obama may not be able to win enough Senate votes for a cap on US greenhouse gases.

As the world's two largest emitters, China and the US will set the pace this year among all nations in make-or-break negotiations for a post-Kyoto treaty on global warming. The talks end this December with a summit in Copenhagen. . . .

The key role China plays regarding two of the major issues of our time make our relations with China critical. Clinton's trip this week could be the start of some very important things. Of course in the Beltway, stupid people would not know that.

Speaking for me only

< What Some Folks With Blogs Think | Saturday Afternoon Open Thread >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Clinton Goes To China | 73 comments (73 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Secretary Clinton (5.00 / 5) (#1)
by andgarden on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 10:07:37 AM EST

Gave a speech on the topic yesterday.

Thank you for writing about this. (5.00 / 2) (#2)
by Dr Molly on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 10:09:35 AM EST

I saw her speech on why she is going to China, and I am trying to be hopeful on the future of climate change legislation.

I'm also hoping that you may decide to write more about climate change and other important environmental issues that require pushing on very soon - early in Obama's administration.

I am sorry to disappoint you (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 10:15:35 AM EST

but I am not qualified to write about climate change.

So no, I will not be writing much about it.


: That's OK (5.00 / 4) (#17)
by Dr Molly on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:14:34 AM EST

I'm not really qualified either, but I still talk about it all the time!
:)

It was a wonderful speech, and she also (5.00 / 3) (#4)
by allimom99 on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 10:17:46 AM EST

took questions afterward. The audience at the Asia Society was THRILLED! Now that is change I can believe in. Having Hillary aboard seems to be one thing Obama got right.


It shows Hillary's (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by AlkalineDave on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:15:24 AM EST

complete grasp on foreign policy to start with an Asia trip. Our strategic future lies in partnerships with Asia. The best ally we could have in stabilizing Africa and bringing them into globalization starts with China. I will be watching this trip closely.

Strategic future (none / 0) (#22)
by SOS on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:33:16 AM EST

in what sense? I hope we don't continue with the practice-policy of just removing one corrupt regime then replacing it with another corrupt regime that talks a good game to "get in the game".


Morris' Claim (none / 0) (#31)
by BackFromOhio on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:05:17 PM EST

The appointments of Mitchell & Holbrooke were announced week 1 of Obama's presidency, at the State Dept at a meeting where Hillary was present. I.e., it seems to me, Hillary knew about the appointments beforehand, and gave them her public stamp of approval. Morris has chosen to interpret the appointments in the worst possible light for Hillary. Perhaps the appointments reflect the Admin's & Hillary's acknowledgment of the myriad foreign policy problems left over, the urgent need to address same, & thus the need for more than one highly skilled negotiator traveling around the world?


Hillary chose them (5.00 / 3) (#34)
by oldpro on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:13:47 PM EST

is my bet...and sold them to Obama.

Very wise. Two major headaches she doesn't have to keep daily tabs on, knowing they are in good, experienced and trustworthy hands...Democratic hands...unlikely to go behind her back and undermine her position or agenda.

Although I'd keep a closer eye on her close pal Holbrooke. Trust but verify!


I watched (5.00 / 7) (#41)
by JThomas on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:34:45 PM EST

her speech and Q & A afterward last nite on C-Span. She indicated that President Obama agreed with her recommendation of Holbrooke and Mitchell so yes, she chose them.

She was extremely impressive at this event.
I really think her experience on the campaign trail has honed her off the cuff responses to questions to a fine point.


: Perhaps question was posed (none / 0) (#43)
by BackFromOhio on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:52:39 PM EST

so she could respond to the Dick Morris put-down.

: Good to know. I'll watch (none / 0) (#66)
by oldpro on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 07:27:37 PM EST

the rerun!

She just said that in an interview. That (5.00 / 2) (#42)
by masslib on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:39:36 PM EST

that was her plan when she spoke with BO about accepting the appointment.


What do you make of the fact (none / 0) (#40)
by BackFromOhio on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:32:20 PM EST

that Holbrooke & Mitchell each has a direct line to the President?


: They are both very experienced (none / 0) (#56)
by imhotep on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 01:34:03 PM EST

in the areas to which they have been assigned. Why should they have to filter their reports through Hillary? Certainly they will be reporting to her also and she will have input on those areas with BO.
There are so many trouble spots overseas today that one Sec'y of State can't really handle it all.

: Makes sense to me. (none / 0) (#65)
by oldpro on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 07:26:19 PM EST

They're both in 'hot spots' and may NEED to get to the President in some instances...and damn quick.
Standing on ceremony and routing thru the SoS would make sense if she had to screen their communiques but these are experienced people who won't waste the president's time in order to make themselves seem important. They already ARE important.

Yes she did. And in a speech she (none / 0) (#63)
by hairspray on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 05:45:16 PM EST

gave I heard her say as much in a speech last week. I wish I could say where I saw it. Probably Ytube. I could probably google it and find it. It was just in the last few days.


Dick Morris makes me believe in the existence of (5.00 / 5) (#36)
by kempis on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:22:01 PM EST

evil

Seriously. The guy looks like a forked tongue should slither out of his mouth.

And he (and most other CDS sufferers) have been proven SO wrong in most of their predictions and pronouncements, you'd think they'd have sense enough to STFU.

But I guess there's always a market for anti-Clinton conspiracy theories.

(What the Obamabots didn't realize is that there's a similar market for anti-Obama conspiracy theories. Post-partisanship my fanny.)

OT, but she looks fantastic. (5.00 / 2) (#44)
by masslib on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:56:12 PM EST

Dick Morris is just one of many Clinton haters (5.00 / 2) (#71)
by AX10 on Sun Feb 15, 2009 at 08:03:10 PM EST

left over from the 1990's. It's the infamous "liberal" media that gives them a platform to spew their hatred and propaganda.

I hope she says (none / 0) (#5)
by SOS on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 10:22:04 AM EST

"look Americans are tired of being poisoned with toxics when are you going to get it together?"

Dream On SOS

I absolutey trust (5.00 / 3) (#6)
by SOS on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 10:23:49 AM EST

NOTHING being imported into this country from China right now.

Sorry if that sounds extreme.


Extreme? (5.00 / 3) (#11)
by cotton candy on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:02:47 AM EST

Surely it couldn't be the toxic toys and other products and their non-existent regulatory standards that has made you so cynical of China?

Also: why does anyone listen to Dick Morris? Why does he even have a platform? This is a man who is ALWAYS wrong. I thought you had to actually know something other than how to get your toes sucked to get published.


It all started (none / 0) (#16)
by SOS on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:14:28 AM EST

with me when they killed off American pets in 07 and subsequent research led to the discovery that the same bastards who pulled this crap off on us still to this day import and supply "human grade ingredients", etc.

Very dark stuff.


: Personally, I was much more (none / 0) (#23)
by Inspector Gadget on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:39:49 AM EST

upset over the concrete pharmaceuticals being passed off as real medications.

: Oh gosh (none / 0) (#26)
by cotton candy on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:45:13 AM EST

I forgot about the pet food. Ugh. There is so much it is hard to keep track...

Great comment, cotton (none / 0) (#27)
by Cream City on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:51:25 AM EST

-- and re the pet food, I can't soon forget. Lost two beloved cats to sudden, mysterious stomach problems and decline to sad deaths. Soon afterward, word of the pet food problems with China became public, and my vet put it together (along with other sad cases he had handled) and said he was sure that was the source, as he knew the cats well and there had been no indication of such problems before. I have not forgiven the Chinese for that. And my current cats get much more carefully researched pet food, you can bet.


: I am so sorry to hear that (5.00 / 3) (#33)
by cotton candy on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:07:19 PM EST

It just makes me sick to my stomach to think about this stuff. We have got to do better.
A little off topic but did you see the guy from the peanut butter company testifying for Congress? Why wasn't he in handcuffs?

Although all those rat infested (5.00 / 5) (#9)
by oculus on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 10:41:07 AM EST

peanuts make it kind of hard to be pointing fingers just now.


Yup (5.00 / 4) (#10)
by andgarden on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 10:49:26 AM EST

Apparently salmonella comes from the "real America" too.


: If your one of the lucky ones (none / 0) (#14)
by SOS on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:09:47 AM EST

who can actually take one bite of food with out getting nausea and having second thoughts fantastic.

No doubt about it (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by SOS on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:03:22 AM EST

Americans want Cheap Stuff!


HUNH? Peanut Corp. of America (none / 0) (#55)
by wurman on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 01:29:11 PM EST

Jack in the Box.
Oddwalla.
Natural Selection Foods, San Juan Bautista CA
Topps Meat Co, Elizabeth NJ

OK, I'm tired of it, but this deadly list could go on to more than 25 firms. Just which of these USA operations that poisoned & killed people is/was run by Chinese bureaucrats?


"Clinton Goes To China " (none / 0) (#7)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 10:37:47 AM EST

I wonder when it will be that I see that type of headline and don't automatically think it's about Hillary's husband.

Honestly? That's what you think? (5.00 / 6) (#13)
by masslib on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:04:29 AM EST

Odd. Hillary actually traveled to China before BC, and gave perhaps her most important speech there.


What can I say? He was potus for 8 years. (5.00 / 2) (#21)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:32:31 AM EST

and has been in the news pretty consistently for the 8 years since, and, I assume, he'll be in the news for the at least 8 more years to come.

No offense to Hillary intended, and there was no unintended offense given.

Considering the two of them, maybe headlines could indicate which Clinton the article's about...


Not just her most important speech (5.00 / 6) (#25)
by Cream City on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:44:04 AM EST

but the Beijing speech changed women's lives around the world -- "women's rights are human rights" -- and is considered one of the top 100 speeches of all time (found it on a site called that, with details of who was polled, etc.).

Good choice to return there for her first trek.


Yes A Great Speech (none / 0) (#30)
by squeaky on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:00:11 PM EST

And definitely from the heart and right on the money, but to claim that Clinton's words changed the lives of women around the world is fanclub adulation, and magical thinking, imo.

But if you have some way of demonstrating that your claim is correct, I am all ears. Certainly I would love for it to be true that a speech by Hillary could change the world.

Ordinary Chinese citizens did not see or hear Mrs. Clinton's speech, which was blacked out on official radio and television.

: I thought all that (none / 0) (#54)
by jondee on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 01:24:54 PM EST

mattered was that they're our good trading partner.
However many people are kept in the dark or however many were hung yesterday pales in importance next to that.

Feigned Ignorance and Denial (none / 0) (#24)
by squeaky on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:42:23 AM EST

Is all it is IMO. Kind of like when some men's IQ goes down to 20, and they go autistic when it comes to helping in the kitchen, especially when there is sports on the teevee.


And we all know what your opinion is worth. (5.00 / 2) (#28)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:52:58 AM EST

Sure (5.00 / 0) (#32)
by squeaky on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:06:48 PM EST

And anyone who is confused about who is the head of State, or would be confused about the headline Clinton goes to China after weeks of the story being out there, is embarrassingly so removed from current events that at best their opinion is equal to an infants gurgle, cute.


Are there no more Pumas to hunt that (5.00 / 3) (#35)
by tigercourse on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:14:12 PM EST

you've been reduced to randomly picking fights?


: And You? (5.00 / 0) (#37)
by squeaky on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:23:01 PM EST

Playing innocent bystander?

I think I understand now why he's watching so (5.00 / 1) (#39)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:32:04 PM EST

much teevee, instead of helping you in the kitchen...


Mmm, it's simple initial name recognition. (5.00 / 1) (#47)
by EL seattle on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 01:03:03 PM EST

I think. I know that whenever I see a headline saying something like "Gates discusses Iraq pact", my first thought is hmmm, why is Bill Gates intereted in Iraq? Maybe there are malaria concerns, or he's offering help with the infrastructure?

Nothing personal against Robert Gates, of course. It wasn't until 1992 that I started to automatically initially associate the word "Clinton" with "Bill" instead of "George".

P-Funk rules!


Please...... (5.00 / 7) (#38)
by michitucky on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:28:01 PM EST

Use better judgement and sensitivity. As the mother of an autistic child, your flipant use of the word is offensive...As is your application of "tard" in reference to Hillary Clinton supporters.


Sorry To Offend You (1.00 / 4) (#45)
by squeaky on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 12:56:32 PM EST

But I stand by my comment. I see no problem with using autistic people in a comparison. If anything it was an unintended insult to autistic people in comparing them to SUO.


It would be honorable (5.00 / 4) (#46)
by oculus on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 01:01:41 PM EST

to apologize.


Apologize For What (1.00 / 2) (#51)
by squeaky on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 01:07:30 PM EST

The only people I would feel the necessity for apologizing to is a high functioning autistic person who was either insulted that I compared him or her to SUO, or who pointed out that I should have used low functioning autistic person as an apt comparison, or a low functioning autistic person who took offense because somehow they were excellent at helping in the kitchen and or also was insulted that I compared him or her to SUO.


You've entirely missed the forest. (5.00 / 4) (#52)
by oculus on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 01:08:48 PM EST

: Why's That (none / 0) (#57)
by squeaky on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 01:38:09 PM EST

Because autistic is a holy word? A slur? Hardly. Usually I use the term autistic spectrum as that is the more accurate terminology today. And I did fail to locate where on the spectrum the in my comparison, but I think the point was made.
I am quite up to date on the field of autism spectrum, and I maintain that my analogy was apt. If anything I believe that people on the spectrum are blessed, certainly a product of neurodiversity. I also believe that people on the low functioning end of the spectrum have lots to offer, the main problem is communicating and figuring out how to tap into the power they have.

Hmmm, let's see. (5.00 / 1) (#60)
by Fabian on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 02:40:58 PM EST

I've got a five year old autistic spectrum disorder son (ASD or PDD-NOS for those who know the lingo) who loves to help me cook, but can barely string together the sentence "I want some juice, please.".


Well Wait Until He Loves F'ball (none / 0) (#69)
by squeaky on Sun Feb 15, 2009 at 04:51:16 PM EST

My story is from direct experience of a late friend who was an adult on the spectrum. He was a pro musician, taught philosophy and math at university, expert at all sciences and math, master of several martial arts, and basically genius level except for certain things where he was a moron.

Asking him for help with certain tasks like chopping garlic, or doing something menial out of his range of expertise, was futile and pursuing it always took way more time than was worth it with poor results.

Most people I know on the spectrum who are high functioning will not do anything that they do not want to do. It appears as stubborness but is different. Maybe your son is an exception.


I don't know (none / 0) (#72)
by Fabian on Tue Feb 17, 2009 at 08:39:36 AM EST

about what he doesn't like to do. Some things he just doesn't do because he gets "mommy time" when I help him. (I'm not fooled.) It's easy to see what he is highly motivated to do though.

He's a smart and sneaky kid. Instead of asking for something, he'll figure out a way to do it himself. So far we haven't had any problems with him attempting anything dangerous.


Well One Thing For Sure (none / 0) (#73)
by squeaky on Tue Feb 17, 2009 at 08:55:53 AM EST

Is that there is tremendous variety of people on the spectrum. One expert I know has said that he has never seen two identical cases and each one always is surprising in some way.


My two are both (none / 0) (#74)
by Fabian on Tue Feb 17, 2009 at 12:17:59 PM EST

on the undiscovered ADD/autism spectrum.

If you take ADD and push it far enough, you get certain autistic symptoms. Certainly some autisms are related to input processing problems which is a large part of ADD. ADD is more than just problems with impulse control, it's also being unable to efficiently "shut off" extraneous inputs. If you couldn't shut off (or ignore) ANY environmental inputs, then you'd be in a permanent state of over stimulation & distraction. You'd probably figure out ways to try to deal with this problem, but the more extreme the problem, the more extreme the solution is likely to be.


: My Experience (none / 0) (#75)
by squeaky on Tue Feb 17, 2009 at 02:54:12 PM EST

It is super common to misdiagnosis those on the spectrum who are high functioning and ADD is the most frequent misdiagnosis. That is not to say that some have both ADD and are on the spectrum.
My understanding is that the two are not linked in any way neurologically.I prefer to think about them in terms of neurodiversity. There is some controversy about the term. IMO, people on the spectrum are wired differently than neurotypicals who have ADD. Apples and oranges.

Tard (1.00 / 2) (#53)
by squeaky on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 01:11:36 PM EST

As in retard, as in slow, as in higher brain functioning disabled due to cultism.


Here're useful classifications. (5.00 / 6) (#58)
by wurman on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 01:38:34 PM EST

Mental deficiency used to be more finely classified using the following technical terms that later began to be abused by the rest of society (5):

IQ Range Classification

"Tard"
70-80 Borderline deficiency
50-69 Moron
"Squeaky"
20-49 Imbecile
below 20 Idiot

These are now largely obsolete and mental deficiency is now generally called mental retardation. The following is the currently used classification of retardation in the USA (5):

"Tard"
50-69 Mild
35-49 Moderate
"Squeaky"
20-34 Severe
below 20 Profound

Most of these folks are developmentally disabled; folks who use the term "tard" are culturally disabled.


: Thanks (none / 0) (#59)
by squeaky on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 01:43:13 PM EST

I always wondered where I fit in.

Heh... (none / 0) (#64)
by weltec2 on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 06:12:50 PM EST

Squeaky, have you been talking to my wife? Sheesh, I can't hide anywhere.


: lol (none / 0) (#70)
by squeaky on Sun Feb 15, 2009 at 04:52:09 PM EST

Hillary IMO (none / 0) (#8)
by SOS on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 10:38:02 AM EST

China would be best served, and so would we, by granting Americans the right to sue Chinese people and corporations on American legal theories in American courts over products made in China and aimed for American markets. That China's production practices and standards are so deplorable that it has now risen to the level of criminal allegations is a sad sign of how badly we need this right immediately.

Of course, in U.S., you can (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by oculus on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:12:48 AM EST

sue anybody for anything. Wonder if anyone has tried suing Chinese government or Chinese manufacturers/distributors in U.S. federal courts for product liability


Sure (5.00 / 2) (#19)
by SOS on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:17:00 AM EST

Xuzhou Anying Biologic and Suzhou Textiles were charged with 13 counts of introduction of adulterated food into interstate commerce and 13 counts of introduction of misbranded food into interstate commerce.

ChemNutra, along with owners Sally Quing Miller and her husband, Stephen S. Miller, (Las Vegas) face 13 counts of introduction of adulterated food into interstate commerce, 13 counts of introduction of misbranded food into interstate commerce and one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud.

Miller trial is coming up in March 2009.


: Business as unusal (none / 0) (#20)
by SOS on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:18:38 AM EST

http://www.fuzing.com/vci/0015040d2288/Xuzhou-Anying-Biologic-Technology-Development-CoLtd

Old hands in North Korea :)? (none / 0) (#29)
by Militarytracy on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 11:57:58 AM EST

That's real cute. New studies indicate that North Korea has driven itself into the dust and everything standing ready in line on the DMZ is old, rusted shut, unmaintained. All evidence is now beginning to indicate that what stands between South Korea invading North Korea is that meddlesome United States of America. South Korea has a working economy, a strong, loyal, and perceived by me from face to face dealings fierce military while Kim Jong the absent is what?

: I thought China was the local bully (none / 0) (#61)
by Fabian on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 02:47:16 PM EST

The United States has a rep as international bully, but the truth is Russia and China both have more clout than we do in some places.

Since the comments here are (none / 0) (#48)
by oculus on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 01:04:50 PM EST

wide-ranging, as opposed to centered on Clinton going to China, I take this opportunity to tell you today's Met radio broadcast of "Eugene Onegin" is most enjoyable. Although, in Martin 's opinion, Mattila, who sing Tatiana, sounded stressed in the Letter aria, she sounds wonderful to me. Different performance, of course.

: Martin Bernheimer, Financial Times. (5.00 / 1) (#49)
by oculus on Sat Feb 14, 2009 at 01:05:33 PM EST

The gold standard in classical music criticsm.

dick morris = dick (none / 0) (#67)
by datura0001 on Sun Feb 15, 2009 at 04:24:12 AM EST

she gave a great speech!!

she is doing a wonderful job making sure that there are lots of people working for her and on behalf of the obama administration. that has been central to her entire goal at the state dept. she is deploying her special envoys to different parts of the world and she herself is going out to where they are not.

is this the same guy that said her trip to asia was "un-sexy"??

Dick Morris' first name... (none / 0) (#68)
by KoolJeffrey on Sun Feb 15, 2009 at 12:23:52 PM EST

...suits him perfectly. Dude has been so wrong on politics you can pretty much use him as a reverse oracle.