I am no foreign policy expert by any means, but Bill Clinton certainly seems to have done a lot to strengthen the relationship between the US and countries south of the United States. The previous century had been defined by an ever-expanding hegemony and dominance of the United States' influence over its hemisphere neighbors. It's worth remembering the CIA-backed overthrows throughout Central America and Brazil, Chile, etc. After all of that time, which includes a good amount of the Reagan administration and Bush, Sr. (who was the head of the CIA when the CIA-backed coups were taking place!!!!), Clinton actively worked towards repairing the trust gap between the US and its neighbors to the south. I have eard people say nothing but respectful and positive things abut Bill Clinton in my travels throughout South America. I also haven't seen anything that would give me the idea that Hillary would approach things differently...
One interesting thing for me is that Hillary is basically the female version of Bill in many aspects; she is single-minded about attaining as much power and influence as possible and will step on anyone, say anything, compromise herself, etc. to acheive it. However, Bill is looked on favorably (well, his public perception seems to have taken a nosedive in recent weeks) while she is very much reviled, even within her own party. My question is, is it because she's a woman? I don't know if it is, but there's a powerful argument to be made that the preception of women in power is a tight rope to walk...
|