Replies

I would invite you to consider what every realistic Democrat knows. Defeating George W. Bush in 2004, would be a disaster for Democrats.

That is the big reason that Hillary will not run in 2004 even if she could defeat George Bush in a landslide.

Does any Democratic leader think that pulling out of Iraq mean we would be safe? Would it occur to Hillary and Bill, for example, that all the attacks on the US in Iraq would be redirected to attacks on the US in Afghanistan?

Would it occur to Hllary and Bill that a withdrawal from the Middle east would encourage the Militant Muslims to make major attacks on the United States mainland. Would the stories that the attacks on our troops in Afghaniistan were coming from Iraq endear Hillary to the voters for pulling out of Iraq.

Consider the consequences of a full or even partial pull out. The Muslims would have total proof that our Colors do run. If they thought it before 911 they would know it now. Would they then pull back and leave us alone, or would they attack in the U.S. with all the force they could muster?

They could surely recruit a few non Arab looking people already in the U.S. They could use truck bombs to destroy 20 elementary schools and 10 shopping centers in one day. Ten thousand dead American children and 10 thousand dead American adults would not aid Hillary's popularity. Would that have the socker mom's screaming hatrid at a President Hillary or what? Can you imagine the people understanding that when the choice was fight them over there or fight them over here, Hillary chose over here?

The other option for a President Hillary would be to stay and fight. The problem is Republicans would not offer a President Hillary much support and the Democrats would turn on her. Hillary would get luke warm suport from Republicans. She would get Teddy Kennedy and Sentor Byrd like support from Democrats. She would face real critism from both the left and the right. She would be in a no win situation. After a terrible attack on the US, Democrats would be in the EAT OUR OWN mode and Hillarys's butt would have an "OUR OWN" tattoo in big red letters.

Democrats have spent the last 4 years burning bipartisan support bridges. There would be few if any pro war votes for a President Hillary from either side of the isle. To win in the middle east will take support from Congress and the people that no Democrat including Hillary could get.

Hillary winning the presidency in 2004, could be compared to crowding in to get to the head of the line for the Gas Chamber at Auschwitz. It is not a good thing to do. She will not do it.

I have to disagree with you on one point out of a well-written post: The majority of Republicans would support the Hildebeast in continuing the effort against the war on terror if she were (ack! Heaven help us!) to be elected POTUS. Most are at least principled enough to do what's right in something that important. Just my opinion.

As to Steyn's brilliance, I loved this: The 9/11 Commission? Nobody cares. You can't drive the car when you're staring in the rear-view mirror. And, as those polls showed, if Americans are forcibly plonked in front of that rear-view mirror, they lay more blame on eight years of Clinton administration policy than eight months of Bush administration policy.