Was it wrong for Dennis Hastert to go to Colombia when Clinton was President and bypass the White House?

Question

WASHINGTON –– While the Clinton administration was pressuring Colombia to stop human rights abuses, Rep. Dennis Hastert was telling the country's police and military leaders that rights concerns were overblown, a newly declassified government document says.

In a May 1997 visit to Colombia before becoming House speaker, Hastert "decried 'leftist-dominated'" U.S. Congresses of years past that "used human rights as an excuse to aid the left in other countries," according to a cable signed by then-Ambassador Myles Frechette.

Hastert "vowed that he was committed to correcting that situation," it said.

Hastert also encouraged Colombian military and police to bypass the White House and deal directly with Congress, the cable said.

http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/headlines02/0504-02.htm

Did you cons. complain about this visit too?

At least Nancy was taking the advice of the bi-partisan Iraq Study Group, doing the Pres. and Condi's job b/c they won't.

Hey blind neo-con...the original news story is from the AP...you don't trust them either, I guess. If something doesn't agree with you it's just liberal media bias, how convenient to be able to live in your own little world.

Answer 1

Though the President is the "commander in chief of the armed forces" and head of the Executive Branch, he does not hold absolute power or right in negotiations or expressions of solidarity with other nations. When it comes to foreign affairs, legislation, and the future of the country a congressman almost always has more insight, objectiveness, and opportunity for relations as a President will control policy usually no longer than 8 years.

With that said, Dennis Hastert is a dumba$$! While Pelosi had the interests of the American people in mind, the reccomendations of the Iraq Study Group, AND the post of Speaker of the House- Third in line to the President, Hastert's visit was purely ideological and politically motivated. Yes, the right argues the same about Pelosi, but Pelosi wasn't in Syria excusing the human rights violations of that country or softening the country's position on it's views of Syria as a state sponsor of terrorism- she was attempting to do what many neo-cons themselves has recommended which is bring other countries in the region into this mess and ask them to help resolve the conflict instead of fueling the fire. Calling people evil, adding them to an "axis of evil", blockading them politically, etc. just makes more enemies which we can't afford to have.

Answer 2

"At least Nancy was taking the advice of the bi-partisan Iraq Study Group, doing the Pres. and Condi's job b/c they won't."
Ummmmm, where exactly in the Iraq Study Group's report did they advise Speaker Pelosi to go to Iraq and to do what?
Just more of the same 'ol social progressive BS lies!

We "cons" despise any congressional interference in foreign affairs, regardless of the political affiliation of said congressman/congresswoman. Do you?
You, madam, are a hypocrit!
A bit of advice for the person that posted this question....: Maybe you could try a bit of original thinking instead of copying and pasting articles from liberal biased newspapers and blogs..!

Answer 3

Thats a fantastic question... i don't have all the documents and could could do more advantageous study. i could say you may seem at heritage in a particular eye. no longer all activities would properly be compared to at least one yet another with an similar scale. that's logical. i could say that situations were diverse then. the phobia probability wasn't very seen then. The adversaries are diverse. All i know is that some center-jap States take advantage of opportunities to instruct u . s . of america adversarial to itself. they are going to use Nancy Pelosi in spite of her solid purpose. that's how deceptive those human beings are.

Answer 4

"before becoming House speaker"

Is the Key.

Everyone has seen Congressmen and Congresswomen go here and there and it is no big deal.

But, When the Speaker takes it upon themselves to conduct foreign relations they have gone overboard. They have effectively said to the World at Large "The State Department does no Matter, Come see ME!"

Do you not see a Problem with that?

Answer 5

Excellent information, but the cons will just ignore it, they are in denial or just not intelligent enough to know that what is happening now that they complain about are actions similar or the same actions they do or did. Hypocrisy and denials = Republican Cons = Loyal Bushies.

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Daily_Show_defines_term_loyal_bushie_0321.html

Answer 6

Too bad Speaker Pelosi can't follow her own rules at home. She had no business going to Syria, of all places, (known to support terrorism throughout the world.)

She condemns anyone who speaks out against union labor but she herself hires non-union migrant workers to tend her vineyards.

She's a joke...

Answer 7

of course it was.

hastert told the columbians to ignore clinton and deal with him.

the republicans are getting more and more desperate.

the oddest thing of all is that cons have no problem at all with the REPUBLICANS who are travelling with pelosi.

cons are increasingly transparant these days.

i think their 'a' team has moved to dubai...

Answer 8

Do you always get your info from Communist Party news sources, Comrade?

Answer 9

NO