Hillary on Iraq

The Wall Street Journal ^ | February 8, 2007

[MinorityRepublican]

One pleasant surprise of Hillary Rodham Clinton's tenure as New York Senator has been her tough-minded approach on national security. She responded to 9/11 by supporting President Bush's strategy of taking on not just terrorists but the states that harbor them. She also voted for the war in Iraq and has refused to follow much of her party in alleging that Mr. Bush "lied" about weapons of mass destruction.

Mrs. Clinton bids to win the Democratic Presidential nomination, she is taking a marked turn to left. Pressured by other candidates and by her party's left wing, she is walking back her hawkish statements and is now all but part of the antiwar camp. The polls show her to be the favorite to be the next Commander in Chief, so what she really believes, and how firmly she'll stick to it, deserves to be debated. Here's a summary of the arc of Mrs. Clinton's public thinking on Iraq:

- October 10, 2002. Mrs. Clinton addresses the Senate on the use-of-force resolution. "The facts that have brought us to this fateful vote are not in doubt," she declares, citing Saddam's record of using chemical weapons, the invasion of Kuwait, and his history of deceiving U.N. weapons inspectors. "As a result, President Clinton, with the British and others, ordered an intensive four-day air assault, Operation Desert Fox, on known and suspected weapons of mass destruction sites and other military targets," she continues, adding that Saddam "has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members."

While she expresses her preference for working through the U.N. if possible, she adds, "I believe the authority to use force to enforce that mandate is inherent in the original 1991 U.N. resolution, as President Clinton recognized when he launched Operation Desert Fox in 1998."

[IrishMike]

Glad you liked it,

made my day too !!!!

[Winged Hussar]

Maybe Hillary's drift to the left on Iraq has something to do with the campaign money she has taken from George Soros, Jane Fonda, and Michael Moore.
http://www.israpundit.com/2006/?p=3937 for why Hillary Clinton is a potential national security risk. If Soros, Fonda, and Moore are getting their money's worth from her, she is a problem.

(Please COPY, don't link; it uses the site's bandwidth.)

[Winged Hussar]

It's easy to understand why Hillary stays with Bill; they have the French arrangement. I thought of this while watching a movie about 17th century France, in which the young Louis XIV tells his mistress that he will have to put her aside when he marries. My immediate reaction: "What do you mean? This is FRANCE!"

Anyway, here is how the French arrangement works. Pierre comes home with his mistress to find his wife having sexual intercourse with her lover on the couch. Pierre says, "Bon soir; go ahead with what you are doing, we will use zee bed."

In the Clintons' case, Hillary comes home to find Bill having sex with his mistress. She says, "Oh, you are using the bed? I will use the television." She puts in a tape of a Nazi rally in which the chanting crowd is facing the camera, and has sexual fantasies to the effect that she is the one receiving the straight-arm salutes.