Posted on 02/01/2005 6:00:20 PM PST by wagglebee
A friend of mine sends me a note. It's actually a story, our old buddies at Newsmax, Carl Limbacher and the boys. "While top Democrats continue to downplay the impact of a historic Iraq elections on Sunday, New York senator Hillary Clinton has taken an early step to set herself apart from naysayers. In a statement posted to her website two days before the vote's smashing success, Clinton said, 'No matter what you think about the war there's one thing we can all agree on for the next days. We have to salute the courage and bravery of those who are risking their lives to vote and those brave Iraqi and American soldiers fighting to protect their right to vote.' Neither Clinton nor her husband has commented since throngs of Iraqis turned out to vote, but her statement stands in marked contrast to comments by Senator Kerry, as well as other top Democrats." My friend's note says, "I think we have a case of Sybil here, multiple personality. Depending on the day we're going to get a different Hillary Clinton."
And then, ladies and gentlemen, there is this from our old friend Sally Buzbee of the Associated Press. Guess what the press is all concerned with now? Well, let me just read this to you. You'll figure it out. "They sent nine suicide bombers; they killed more than 40 people; they claim to have shot down a British military plane; and they threatened to wash the streets with blood. Insurgents' threats against Iraq's historic election appeared to have some impact, keeping Sunni Arab turnout low, yet the rebels did not stop the balloting altogether, raising questions of just how much ability and influence they have. 'There will be some acts of violence,' said the Iraqi prime minister, 'but the terrorists now know that they cannot win.' Nevertheless, the insurgents' failure to launch a catastrophic attack on Election Day may be a sign their power 'has been more localized than thought previously, said Paul Sullivan an Iraq expert at the U.S.-funded National Defense University in Washington." Really? You think so? Let me ask another question.
If the terrorists didn't stop the election and couldn't stop the election, could they possibly be losing? And if it's possible that they are losing, is it also possible that we are winning? Well, let's send a reporter to find out. No, scratch that. Send a reporter to find out, we won't find out. Can we find anything? Can we point to anything resembling a success track for the terrorists in Iraq? Can you really? It is localized. You've had the press. Folks, this has been my point all along. We have cited letters from soldiers on the ground. We have taken phone calls from them when they're here on leave. The story they tell bears no resemblance from the story we've been getting from most of the reporters on the ground over there. You know, when I was at the CNP speech on Friday night in Orlando, some people said, very trepidatious, "Well, what do you think about Iraq?" Iraq's great! Iraq is going to be fine. "Well, why do you think that?" Because we're the United States of America. It's going to be fine. The ease with which people slink into doom and gloom and pessimism. I mean, obviously there, but there's all kinds of evidence that contradicts the doom and gloom, and now, now people in the media say, "Maybe we overestimated the terrorists. They didn't come out with their big blow. They didn't stop the election. Maybe it's just more localized than we thought," and that's what we've always heard.
It is localized! It's not nationwide or country-wide in Iraq, and it never has been. There have been pockets -- and, of course, we hear about that. One bomb can go off and the networks call a halt to everything and go to a reporter standing on his hotel balcony and show the smoke in the background, and we think, "Oh, my, a helicopter!" How many helicopters we lose a day in World War II? We got a helicopter that goes down or this or that, even if it's an accident, not even a war related incident. These things get piled on top of one another and the general consensus, man, we're getting kicked, and, "Oh, this is horrible. I mean, this is bad! Why, it's really, really bad. What are we going to do?" And none of it is really accurate. None of it comes close to representing the whole picture. So the elections come off, record turnout, and everybody is surprised. The terrorists must not be able to stop it. Yeah, I wonder about that. Could it be maybe they're losing? Could it be maybe they're losing. Could it be maybe that we are actually winning?
Just more of the same re: the HildaBeast. What a joke she is, beyond laughable and tragically real. And just imagine her as the Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces of this country. Need I say any more??? (bucket please)
And wasn't it just a year or so ago that Hillary got on the floor of the Senate and shrieked "I'm sick of all this patriotic crap."
Enough already! I just got done eating!
Ick, what a picture. She looks like a hostage.
Was that picture taken after she got smacked in the face by the floor?
Well my God, the dead has arisen!
I agree with the thrust of this piece, but really now, we didn't lose any helicopters in WWII.
Case in point ~ The battle for Iwo Jima was 36 days of the fiercest and bloodiest fighting in Marine Corps history and approximately one-third of all Marines deployed on Iwo Jima were casualties!!!
6,821 Killed
19,217 Wounded
2,648 Combat Fatigue
Total Allied Casualties: 28,686
The criticism of the operations in Iraq never cease to floor me - I've no doubt that if this were a clinton initiate operation we'd be hearing a completely different view of what is happening and has happened there.
Unngh. One is enough for me.
Criticise Hildabeast all you want...she dangerous. The best strategy, and it should be taken very seriously, is to defeat her senatorial run in '96.
I agree, she MUST be defeated in her senate run next year. If Rudy Guiliani can beat her in NY, her political future will be basically over. My concern is that she will decide not to run, "so she can focus her full attention on her campaign for the presidency." Which would be the biggest crock of sh*t ever, she doesn't give a damn about anybody but herself, she could care less about the people of New York.
1996=2006
I think you can read through the rest of my errors.
So sorry
IMHO the selection of Dean as DNC chair is designed to take Hillary off the national spotlight as she travels around the US attempting to convince America she is something she is not. Howie, if elected, will serve only two years being replaced by someone more mainstream. Throughout all this Hillary gets to fly under the national radar while presenting herself as somewhere to the right of weird Howie.
I hope the Republicans have the good sense to have someone shadow her. Should appear on talk shows immediately after her town hall/listening tour appearances, reminding the voters of the positions she has taken on issues in the past. Leave doubt in the minds of voters. Undermine her at every turn.
I think we have a modern day "Eve" on our hands.
This woman is a danger to society. Idiots won't see through her.
"Criticise Hildabeast all you want...she dangerous. The best strategy, and it should be taken very seriously, is to defeat her senatorial run in '96."
You do realize it is 2005?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.