Hillary's 2016 dilemma
If Hillary Clinton runs in 2016, the failed Obama Doctrine will drag her down.
Whether "Obama Destabilized the Middle East on Purpose," as the title of a recent article posted on American Thinker suggests, or, the failure of the Obama Doctrine -- whatever that means in the intellectually-rarified air of Foggy Bottom -- is a result of the arrogant naiveté of a man who thought his years growing up in a Muslim nation entitled him to respect from radical Arabs, negative consequence will befall a potential Hillary Presidential candidacy in 2016.
She now owns a significant share of the failed Obama Doctrine.
Her positive foreign policy success list was, at best, short. Her foreign policy failures list is expanding. She gets no respect, worldwide.
Hillary, Stephanie Power, and Susan Rice were credited with advocating military intervention in Libya to remove Colonel Gaddafi from power. On March 11, 2011, the New York Times noted their influence:
"The change [in Obama's policy toward Libya] became possible, though, only after Mrs. Clinton joined Samantha Power, a senior aide at the National Security Council, and Susan Rice, Mr. Obama's ambassador to the United Nations, who had been pressing the case for military action, according to senior administration officials speaking only on condition of anonymity."
The "doctrine" is destined to have no clear, lasting definition -- unlike the "Monroe Doctrine -- but America's Middle East policy during the Obama regime will be remember, like Jimmy Carter's behavior toward Iran, as a debacle of major proportions. And it's the "Hillary-Power-Rice Doctrine," too.
Should Hillary become a candidate in 2016, voters will remember how she stood solidly behind Obama and he led the country into the foreign policy equivalent of the place where Adam and Eve were sent after the apple episode in the garden -- The Land of Nod. Nod was the ancient Hebrew word for "wandering".
Is there anything she can do to redeem her image as the smartest candidate among the '08 Democrat Presidential candidates -- according to Howard Fineman back then?

She needs to distance herself from the Obama Doctrine and its evolving negative consequences as soon as she can. But how?
And therein is the dilemma she faces. One moral of this story is: Be careful what you lobby for.
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- Deep State Anatomy and Physiology
- Sisterhood of the Traveling Pronouns
- Trump’s Tariffs: A Chance to Bring Back Lost Jobs
- Trump's Six-Point Plan for Making America Great Again
- Make IRS Sauce The Same For Both Citizen Goose and Politician Gander
- 'Battle at the Border' Documentary is an Insightful Look at Immigration
- The NYT Prefers its Own Conspiracy Theories
- Would the FDA Pass Its Own Audit?
- War By Other Means: Demographics
- The Trump Administration’s Support for the Israel-Azerbaijan Strategic Partnership Can Benefit America
Blog Posts
- The Atlantic's phony migrant tear-jerker about a pitiful 'Maryland father' shipped back to El Salvador falls apart
- Rep. Luna, forgets she’s on the Republican Team!
- Veruca Salt politics or the inevitable result of ‘the personal is political’
- Taliban justice in the streets of Bordeaux, and a Sharia ‘mega city’ comes to Texas
- French judge releases an accused rapist because he’s ‘fairly integrated’
- The Luigi cult is still out there, gushing and festering
- In New York, a tax service company targets illegal aliens as potential customers for child tax credits
- When antisemitic leftists play the ‘Jewish card’
- FDA’s vaccine-rubberstamp Peter Marks forced to resign, and Big Pharma stocks take a nosedive
- Will Colorado pass what’s essentially a ‘trans blasphemy’ bill? *UPDATED*
- Elie Mystal thinks every law before 1965 should be labeled ‘unconstitutional’ and defunct
- The gift that keeps on giving
- Wasting time is hard to do – leftists still manage it
- Give Trump a chance
- Nina 'Scary Poppins' Jankowicz's ex-NGO partner makes clear 'bankrupting Tesla' is his most important accomplishment