| CBS News | 0 | |
| WaPo | 0 | |
| Zogby | North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan Trails in Potential 2010 Senate Match-up |
0 |
| SF Chron | 0 | |
| KDVR | 0 |
Audacity of Truth
Yet another reason why Hillary Clinton should not be Commander in Chief
Sweetness and Light has the details of Senator Clinton’s plans for Iraq, should she get elected Commander in Chief.
*shudders*
This is, as S&L notes, a flip flop on her part (before, she wanted troops out of Iraq by the time the next President – presumably her – is sworn in) but it’s one of those flip flops that aren’t funny.
For anyone curious as to the depths of Senator Clinton’s contempt of the military, the book Dereliction of Duty, written by former ‘nuclear football’ carrier (under President Clinton) Lt. Col. Buzz Patterson, USAF, Ret. He focuses primarily on Bill Clinton’s disdain of the military (among other things), but there are some interesting tidbits about Senator Clinton’s hatred, too. The closest this woman should ever get to the WH is right where she is now.
Hat tip: ST reader NC Cop
RSS feed for comments on this post.
5 Responses to “Yet another reason why Hillary Clinton should not be Commander in Chief”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
I think I’m now in love with Hillary. She’s a hawk. She’s a strong protector of American interests. She’s what this country needs. A strong woman for president.
I’m duped.
Hillary for runner-up in ‘08!!!
She was for troops in Iraq, before she was against it, now that she’s for it again. Does that sound right? Basically check the polls to determine your stance, or at least check to see what special interest group your conning that day believes.
I truly cannot believe what is going on in this country. The dems are wasting time and money over a complete non issue like the firing of the federal prosecutors. I guess since their last non issue died out, the Plame fiasco, they need something else to keep themselves in the headlines. Especially since the surge of troops in Iraq seems to be working. How disappointed they must be.
Hillary is living proof of why there aren’t more women in politics, it’s just too difficult to have to put makeup on two or more faces every morning.
It’s the old Clinton triangulation technique. She’s trying to find a position that doesn’t get anyone too annoyed with her. If you opposed to the war, she’s for pulling out – maybe not as far as the other guy, but better than the eeeeevil Republicans. If you’re for winning the war, she’s for staying. Not as much as you’d like, but better than the complete nutroot candidates.
Of course, that means you have to sacrifice any principles, but they’ve never been very important to her anyway.