web analytics

Hillary Sticks Her Beak In

By ATWadmin On December 29th, 2007

beak.jpe

I’ll pander to anyone!

Well, that didn’t take long.

Maybe Janet Reno and her crack team of super-sleuths are available.

 

Democrat Hillary Clinton called on Friday for an international probe of Benazir Bhutto’s killing and candidates in both parties sparred over foreign policy six days before Iowa kicks off a close presidential nominating race.

Clinton, battling rivals Barack Obama and John Edwards for the lead in Iowa, questioned the reliability of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf’s government after opposition leader Bhutto’s assassination.

"I don’t think the Pakistani government at this time under President Musharraf has any credibility at all," Clinton said in an interview with CNN as she campaigned across Iowa. "Therefore I am calling for a full independent international investigation."

Considering Obama threatened to invade Pakistan a couple of months ago, calling for an investigation may be a no-lose proposition.

But seriously, Pantsuit, everyone wants to know what happened.

It’s not as if you’re going out on a limb here.

And tell us, how exactly would this independent international investigation take place and under whose jurisdiction?

Bhutto’s killing on Thursday prompted candidates to flex their foreign policy muscles and, in the case of Clinton and Edwards, tout their experience. Several other Democrats leveled harsh criticism at Musharraf.

Muscles?

Huh?

I suffered through a couple of Democrat debates and cannot honestly recall Pervez Musharraf’s name ever coming up.

Now we’re supposed to take these Democrats seriously when it comes to foreign policy and the dire situation in Pakistan and the region?

Please.

At least one sober adult weighed in.

Republican Fred Thompson, a former Tennessee senator who is lagging in Iowa polls and trying to make up ground, warned against rushing to a conclusion on Musharraf and said candidates should be more "deliberate" on Pakistan.

"I don’t think it would be a good idea to call for him to step down now," Thompson told CNN. "I hope that we as candidates out here don’t start lobbing these ideas that get plenty of attention but are not very sound."

At this point when we have several different accounts of what happened Thursday in Pakistan, it’s wholly irresponsible for presidential candidates to start sticking their noses into an investigation.

It’s to be assumed the White House and State Department are fully informed of developments. Should they choose to brief top candidates, it’s their choice.

At this time, however, Mrs. Clinton and the rest of the shameless Democrats ought to step back and stop being so reckless with our foreign policy.

After all, she and her husband’s first and foremost priority is to "repair our image" with the rest of the world, no? How exactly will that be accomplished by making reckless statements and proposing absurd ideas as a full independent international investigation?

I’ll assume some reporter might flesh this out, but word is she’s not taking any questions.

 

 

Also at JWF

 

27 Responses to “Hillary Sticks Her Beak In”

  1. Do not be fooled by the strawmen; Edwards, Obama, Richardson.

    She is the fist inside the glove; the authoritarian inside every leftist academic.

    Remember that great Englishman who once wrote of "streamlined men who think in slogans and talk in bullets."

  2. Excellent site!

    Would you like a Link Exchange
    with The Internet Radio Network?
    At the IRN you can listen for
    free to over 50 of America’s top
    Talk Shows via Free Streaming
    Audio…
    http://netradionetwork.com

  3. Whatever the Democratic candidates failings may allegedly be on foreign policy, as I recall Bush couldn’t even give the leader of Pakistan’s name when he was running.

    Surely some independent review of events is an acceptable suggestion in this instance. The present government has serious redibility issues.

  4. of course she is going to comment, of course she is going to blame Bush, and of course no one will point out all the failings of foreign policy while she was "co-President"…LOL

  5. "Surely some independent review of events is an acceptable suggestion in this instance. The present government has serious redibility issues."

    Why? A political leader in a country infested with Islamists is assassinated by Islamists. Islamists who had spent the entire time leading up to her return making it very clear they were *going* to do it. Islamists who have claimed responsibility for doing it.

    Yet suddenly for some reason we need a slide rule and some kind of bogus ‘investigation’ to do the math on who is responsible? Absolutely and utterly ridiculous!

    The Left is determined to use this as a Trojan Horse to topple Musharraf and install another Islamist regime in the Middle East. Musharraf has ushered in some very serious reforms such as the rolling back of Pakistani Sharia – this comes under the heading of aiding human rights and personal freedom as opposed to the obsessing over ‘democracy’. The same lawyers and judiciary that people were defending when he cracked down on them are hand in glove with the Islamists – and if you are against them and for the ending of Sharia then you’re all right by me.

  6. The Left is determined to use this as a Trojan Horse to topple Musharraf and install another Islamist regime in the Middle East.

    What utter tripe. I suppose the left supports Bin Laden as well?

    Get a grip pal.

  7. Peter

    You’ve got to remember that many of the brainwashed Right wingers who post here aren’t actually interested in the unvarnished truth , they will happily blame any and every world problem on the left. It is an ignorant and silly standpoint but for them a satisfying way of pinpointing all the causes of the world’s ills.

  8. oh nonsense colm, it was the left in the semblance of Barrack the Abomanation that came out and said she was killed because we were in Iraq I think that speeks for the lefts one minded Blame America First.

    The war is against terrorists whether they are Islamofacist or Irish it is your country with it’s high standing leftest socialist morality that welcomes one into office and one with special immigration rules and a new Mosque

  9. Troll

    You’re almost coherent, but not quite.

    The left does not support Bin Laden and his islamic fanatics. Inconvenient for you neo-cons, but true.

  10. So why do the leftist terror suck ups types protest brave troops in Iraq and not the vile brutality of the Islamic hordes.

  11. Peter my comments were directed directly at this comment from Colm

    You’ve got to remember that many of the brainwashed Right wingers who post here aren’t actually interested in the unvarnished truth , they will happily blame any and every world problem on the left.

    if your to daft to follow that, than it is not I who is incoherent.

    As for your statement that the left does not support Bin Laden you are correct However the left also do not oppose him, the left would rather sit in their homes and blame their own country for the bombs that rip their children to shreds as school busses blow up in the name of Allah… Than actually support the people that have volunteered to go fight the bastards where they live.

  12. Troll: The problem is that the brainwashed far right (or Troll for short) are incapable of making distinctions between the far left and the mainstream left. Indeed, the far right essentially can’t come to grips with any views that don’t match their own (a mirror problem exists on the far left).

    Clinton’s suggestions in this instance are not dramatically different from the White House.

  13. Mahons
    The Mainstream Left, are like the Mainstream Muslims you know they exist but it’s the loonies that are in control and the "Mainstreamers" aren’t doing anything to seperate themselves from the fanatics Therefore making all on the left that are not moveoners irrelavant. and just like the moderate Muslims if they don’t condemn the actions of the few they are painted as non-indighted co-conspirators

  14. Troll: In part isn’t the way you portray the mainstream left as loonie based on your inability to see any value offerd on any topic by the Democrats? You dismiss 50% or greater of the voters of your own country. Some might suggest you’d want a one party state (much like the Soviets "enjoyed"). IN your eyes politics is a war, and not merely competing ideas. That explains the level of disdain in your comments, but doesn’t excuse it.

  15. BTW, mahons, what’s your call on Iowa at this stage?

  16. Avoid it at all costs. Oh, you mean the election?

    Romney and Huckabee are the two players in Iowa. I suspect Romney will squeak out a win but Huckabee will be portrayed as a serious contender (even though he isn’t) by virtue of his second place finish.

    Clinton will suprise Obama, but it will be close. Edwards needed to win and I don’t think he can.

  17. Good old Troll. Always good for a laugh!

    Roll on the Iowa poll. Like a few other Irish people I know (and Noel it seems!), I’m fascinated by the US election process. Who are the bookies’ favourites to win in Iowa?

  18. Appears Scotland Yard (no joke) has been called in for an independent review. Whose Sari now?

  19. >>Like a few other Irish people I know (and Noel it seems!), I’m fascinated by the US election process<<

    Reg, for some reason it’s all quite heady this time (tho I suspect turnout will be low).
    I could live with most D or R candidates in the White House but plan to become the first Irishman in space if Mitty Romney gets elected.

  20. Mahons:"The problem is that the brainwashed far right (or Troll for short) are incapable of making distinctions between the far left and the mainstream left."

    The right isn’t "nuanced" enough for you?

    Your argument might have some validity were it not for the fact that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi – the modern day new "mainstream" Democratic leaders in Congress – appear beholden to Moveon.org and to Code Pink, which is about as far left as it goes.

    Noel: Mitt Romney rocks. Brainy, handsome, socially conservative and fiscally conservative, a loyal family man, an optimistic and kind individual. What’s not to love?

    Although, in my experience people are loved for their flaws, not their virtues..some kind of cosmic joke…but maybe just this once, for a leader in difficult times, we could pick the one with the least amount of human flaws.

  21. "but maybe just this once, for a leader in difficult times, we could pick the one with the least amount of human flaws."

    You didn’t last time 😉

  22. Patty: Reid and Pelosi aren’t my cup of tea, and each should win undying love from Republicans everywhere for their ability to mess up Democratic election gains in Congress. I find Pelosi to be especially grating. None the less, they are hardly radical leftists.

    As for Romney – he’ll say whatever he feels he needs to say to get elected, changing his tune on gays, guns and abortion. And since style is more important than substance to certain voters, he’ll get their votes.

  23. Mahons: "he’ll say whatever he feels he needs to say to get elected"

    I think you must be confusing him with your girl, Hillary.

    Romney’s changes in policy opinion reflect his intelligence; he is thoughtful. The ability to change in face of new facts or differing circumstances is one of the reasons he was successful in business. It’s one of the reasons our military is successful. And it’s a valuable trait in a leader.

    It’s quite different from pandering.

  24. Patty: Hillary is not my girl, and she indeed panders. Of course that isn’t the point. We are focusing on your hero at the moment.

    If you think Romney underwent some conversion akin Paul on the Road to Damascus that was of an intellectual nature and not a practical one to get elected in a Republican primary season (where he has turned his back on prior recently held value issues) then you probably beleive his sons service to the nation equals those in the military as he suggested.

  25. Mahons: Can you be specific? I forget what the cause of the "flip flop"charge in the media was. (serious question)

    I remember he was pro-abortion before he was anti-abortion — but then so was I. (And I changed my mind not because I was running for election anywhere.)

    Is that the "flip flop" that you are referring to?

  26. Mahons,

    When did you say the election was, next month, March?

    I know it must be really soon now because you Americans are going apeshit over it—or rather your media chappies are. With all the fuss in 2007, I thought it was to be held last November, but no.

  27. You need to get over your concerns about Hillary. She’ll be your President soon.