Given Dubya's popularity around the world, it may be a good idea, but we're pretty sure Hillary meant it as a protest against Chinese actions in Tibet.
Sadly, we'll probably hear Obama make a similar statement before too long.
Yet, if either one of them was the actual President, we doubt they'd boycott the opening ceremonies, as it would be silly to do so. We certainly HOPE they wouldn't do so.
Yes, China's record on human rights leaves much to be desired, and it's policies in Tibet are not exactly progressive. Likewise, the U.S. doesn't exactly shine like a beacon to the world either.
China is a huge, and important, nation. It has about 1.2 billion people, and despite its problems, it has come a long way over the past 30 years. Furthermore, China shows every sign of evolving in the right direction. While the political system in China is wanting, many Chinese have unprecedented economic freedom.
As a nation, the U.S. gains nothing by being petty and petulant toward the Chinese, as we would by having our head-of-state snub the Olympic games in Beijing. Indeed, we'd only encourage the Chinese leadership to dig in its heels, while once again demeaning the message the Olympics are intended to convey. We can attend the opening ceremonies and still register our issues with Chinese policy toward Tibet. Not that the Chinese might legitimately view us as complete hypocrites.
In any event, Hillary's boycott call appears motivated by a certain knee-jerk political correctness aimed at pleasing a small number of activists. We'd like to see a more mature response.