A Comment On My Commenter

Commenter Ryaison claims that I have misrepresented Hilary Clinton's views on the importance of diplomacy in yesterday's post on the subject, which caused me to have to actually read up on the subject, an act I found to be truly distasteful. Here's a bit on Politico which makes for a good summary of the controversy.

However, as a bit of mea culpa, I do have to admit that he's actually, you know, right. Clinton and her subordinates have gone out of their way to indicate that it's important to conduct diplomacy, including high-level envoys. In fact, I don't really have a huge problem with her position.

My point, however, still stands, I think. Obama got first chance to answer this question, and what he said was eminently reasonable. Clinton chose to take issue with what he said, and magnify one specific section. Obama didn't say anything riduculous. Clinton tried to manufacture a controversy with a statement saying that meetings with the American president will be used for PR purposes by the leaders of rogue nations.

I think, essentially, I agree with Obama. Meetings with foreign leaders can be a good thing whether or not you are on best of terms with them and their countries. If nothing else, occasional reminders that there are actual human beings on the other end of the wire are an overall good.

While I don't think Clinton's position is particularly problematic, I do dislike the way she chose to try and create a big controversy over a relatively minor issue. I think it makes it look like there's a big disagreement on the Dem side about this, which makes the casual observer think that this might lend some credence to the Bush diplomatic doctrine. Which is a Very Bad Thing.