to being a "petty moron".

consider 3 scenarios: 

scenario-1: samantha power criticizes clinton for her (clinton's) opposition to nafta.

in this scenario, power is opposing a policy position that clinton holds, and her opposition should be evaluated on its own merit. as long as power herself is on record supporting nafta, her criticism is on sound footing (although it still needs to be evaluated for validity on other, factual grounds).

scenario-2: samantha power criticizes clinton on the mismatch between her (clinton's) public stance of nafta and her private assurances to corporations that might benefit from unrestrained free trade.

in this scenario, it does not even matter what power thinks of nafta (she may be for it, or against it); all that matters is the inconsistency between public and private pronouncements of a candidate, and this mismatch is worthy of criticism by anyone.

scenario-3: samantha power crticizes clinton for being a monster.

the appropriate response here is a 'meowrrrrrrrrrrrrr' cueing a cat-fight, paradoxically initialized by a petty moronic bitch.

just as carl sagan said that "having an open mind" is not the same as "having a hole in the head", one cannot automatically assume that all criticism is cynicism.

a cynic, in these times at least, is a realist who is prepared for disappointment, and not a deluded optimist who is in for a whole lot of dream shattering in the near future.