Scott: Funny how Monty Python mirrors life. This might as well be talking about the Democrats:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcxKIJTb3Hg

The problem with another Clinton Administration is that it would put the clones of many of the same people who brought us the first Clinton Administration in power.

And you know they’ve put the Jamie Gorelick Wall back up faster than you can say “Patriot Act.”

We’d be back to “global tests” and trying to make everyone love us again instead of do the hard work that real leadership implies.

Terrorism would become more of a “crime” problem and the military would be neutered.

And I don’t ever expect the lamestream “news” media to ever hold Democrats to the same standard of accountability they daily demand of Republicans.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I agree, it will most definitely start once the two nominees are decided but I just don’t see Hillary getting the WH. Won’t happen. Every single Republican from coast to coast would drag themselves, would crawl if needed, to get to a booth and ensure that women never gets into that office.

But I do agree with ya, IF she did the MSM would quickly change their tune, as they did with Billy. Suddenly staying on offense in Iraq would be a great idea.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I believe so Mike, and like the military said that border is quite porous so it will be difficult to stop the intrusions but not impossible. Obviously they are getting good intelligence now and as long as that keeps flowing hopefully they will be able to slow the tide.

I did read about that French contingent visiting, looks like the new PM is making a difference huh?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Mike, either way, it’s a no lose.
1) if the msm cheerleads a Clinton admin and supports the war, then the Islamic Holy Warriors have less reason to hope and continue their fight there.
2) if the msm suddenly decided to play hardball instead of softball with a Dem admin, then not only would the new Dem admin be held to account, but they’d be held to account for the previous 7yrs of jerkin around opposing without viable alternatives (see also the much ado over the New Direction in Iraq that never even existed). The result…Dems finally have to put up, and with every poll we’re seeing that the American people have less stomach for defeat than they do for the war. People want it over (intelligently so), but they want and expect leaders to lead to victory-not lead the way running from a fight. Monty Python wasn’t inspiring when he lead his men away from the big hairy beast with long ears and two giant fangs to the cry of, “RUNAWAY!” And with over 52% of the population already unfavorable towards Hillary, she’s gonna have to pander harder to the right, than to the left.

Either way the msm plays a Dem admin, the US wins and Dem leaders lose. I think it’ll start on 2/6/08. When Hillary and Fred face off in a debate or Rudy and Hillary, it could be pay per view, and I’ll have the popcorn ready! Dems have almost nothing to run on, and are quickly losing their list of things to run against. Taking Congress was a coup for them (literally), but they simply suck at leading Congress, and the American voter will be reminded of that in spades.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Scott: If Hillary Clinton is elected, you can count on the media to begin cheerleading openly for VICTORY in Iraq. You know it and I know it.

It would almost be fun to watch if a Hillary presidency wouldn’t be worse and more damaging than her husband’s.

Curt: Didn’t we just kill some Iranians in a firefight last week? That on top of the captured Quds “diplomats” from earlier this year. No doubt this current 50 are “students” or more “diplomats” or workers for the Red Crescent proving relief supplies.

One thing that is overlooked in that WSJ story is the unprecedented arrival of the French Foreign Secretary in Iraq. Quite a signal that things have changed between Paris and Washington.

I’ll see if I can’t come up with more details and post something if you don’t beat me to it.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Why are we tracking 50 terrorists instead of killing them all within an hour? Iran’s murdering guard units will be just like Saddams, cowards to the core unless they’re in the process of killing women and children. The U.S. needs to launch one nuclear missile ‘from the U.S.’, and take out half of the Iran’s nuclear sites. One multi warhead will do it. I don’t care how deep they bury them, they’ll be deadly hot for the next few hundred years. Then see how much mouth you get from the cowards in Iran’s army of Islamic murderers.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

“Of course none of this is easily found in our MSM because they choose to ignore it.”

Not a day goes by where I don’t wonder what the msm will do if Sen Clinton becomes Pres Clinton? How will they cover Iraq?

Will they rave about the decision to invade-the decision she and President Bush promoted, authorized, and supported?

Will they rave about the surge-the temporary sending of more troops to Iraq that Sen Clinton called for, and Pres Bush did?

Will they suddenly start reporting on the good things that happen there, or will Iraq become an albatross on the Democrats? If the latter, then the Achilles heel is pegged since for the last 5yrs, they’ve been dancing around any and all responsibility for what happens in Iraq. It’s the last thing Democrats want people to remember:

…that Sen Clinton and Sen Edwards saw the intel and more, promoted and authorized the war, supported it, and never did anything to help bring about success there.

Will the msm suddenly start with woohoos about how many AQ have been killed in Iraq, or will they ask Hillary how she could have been wrong on WMD etc with former President Clinton on the pillow beside her?

Like or Dislike: 0  0