Hillary’s Decision?

Senator Hillary Clinton faced a dilemma. John Edwards apologized for his war vote. The liberal left has screamed she renounce hers. On Saturday, Clinton responded, “There are no do-overs in life,” she said. “I take responsibility for having voted to give him that authority. My focus is on what we do now. That is the proper debate. I do think we are engaged in a war against heartless, ruthless enemies. If they could come after us again tomorrow they would do so.”

This quandary and response illustrate Clinton’s tortured position. She is an Armed Services Committee member. She has spoken with generals and soldiers. She is imminently qualified in foreign policy. However, she refuses to renounce her war vote. She rejects cutting funding. She dismisses an immediate withdrawal. This has infuriated the liberal left. Clinton is also a woman. Properly or improperly, voters will ask… Can a woman, inside the Oval Office, lead America’s foreign policy?

Clinton also bears her husband’s international legacy. Following Black Hawk Down, President Clinton became gun shy. He nibbled in Bosnia and Haiti. He ignored the slaughter of thousands in Rwanda. Following the embassy bombings and USS Cole, his retaliation was minimal or nonexistent.

Presidents are judged on domestic policy and defined on foreign policy. Vietnam tarnished Lyndon Johnson. Iran haunted Jimmy Carter. Communism’s conclusion and Gulf War One illuminated Ronald Reagan and George H. Bush. Healthcare and Social Security may be pressing issues. However, terrorism and Islamic extremism are the 2008 Presidential election.

Senator Clinton is straddling the unimaginable. One cliff is the liberal left. They are activists. They are democratic organizers. They are tantamount to money. On the opposing cliff are males. Thousands who believe a woman cannot handle the office. Thousands who are leaders and believe men should lead. The Senator must choose. The decision is hers. The decision is impossible.