Re "Stellar, but short of spectacular," Jan. 28
Being of the opinion that Hillary Rodham Clinton is among the best secretaries of State, I was completely taken aback by the article's finding that although she is very well thought of by the American public and the president, many so-called foreign policy experts don't think too highly of her performance.
Why should anyone pay attention to what these "experts" think? It happens that she has been dealing with many difficult and diverse problems, and she has come through very well.
A stellar performance? I'm not so sure about that. While she and her boss stood around, northern Africa was burning. By many indications, it may be burning out of control.
As I read this article, my thoughts went to Ike; I'm 75, so I remember President Eisenhower well.
Nowadays, doing a "spectacular" job means serving during a war. Keeping out of a war is, actually, spectacular, and Eisenhower did precisely that.
Let's hope for a spectacular Super Bowl and many less-than-spectacular years without war.
Karl F. Schmid
Letters: A nation of immigrants
Letters: Oh baby, let's talk marriage
Letters: Keep the Ballona Wetlands wild