« Clarence Thomas: Lord Of The Nazgul | Main | Dummitude At Columbia »

January 20, 2006

KerryWatch: Mullah-ing It Ovah

Yesterday, the ever-vigilant Charlottesvillian tipped us off to the fact that fave Senator Hil's visit to TigerHawk's old scratching ground had made her go all tingly:

A tough-talking Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton yesterday suggested she would back a military strike on Iran if that country's radical Islamic government attempts to build nuclear weapons.

Clinton's speech seemed to position her somewhat to the right of the Bush administration, which has stressed diplomacy without ruling out any other option. Most experts on the region say a military strike is not feasible and therefore unlikely.

"We cannot take any option off the table in sending a clear message to Iran that they will not be permitted to acquire nuclear weapons," she said.

Dear Lord. Get this woman out of the Blue States and before you know it she's brandishing ballistic missiles and making Clintonesque threats to raize Tehran in a fashion reminiscent of a 1998 John Forbes Kerry:

Senator John Kerry appears on ABC News' This Week and speaks about the situation with Iraq: "I think there is a disconnect between the depth of the threat that Saddam Hussein presents to the world and what we are at the moment talking about doing. If indeed he is as significant a threat, as you heard him characterized by the president (Clinton), the secretary of state, the secretary of defense-can threaten London, threaten the peace of the Middle East, that he is really a war criminal who is already at war with the civilized world-then we have to be prepared to go the full distance, which is to do everything possible to disrupt his regime and to encourage the forces of democracy." Kerry also voices his support for sending ground troops to Iraq because a mere bombing attack would not end the threat. "I am way ahead of the commander in chief, and I'm probably way ahead of my colleagues and certainly of much of the country," Kerry declares. "But I believe this." Further, "If we don't face this today, we will face it at some point down the road."

Pardon us while we wipe a patriotic tear from our eye. The half-vast editorial staff bets her newfound hawkishness is every bit as heartfelt as that of the Junior Senator from Massachusetts, too. But wait!!! There's more where that came from:

She also blasted the Bush administration for allowing European countries to lead negotiations with the hard-line regime of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

"I believe that we lost critical time with ... Iran because the White House chose to downplay the threats and to outsource the negotiations," she said. "I don't believe ... in standing on the sidelines."

...because we don't want any of that dangerous multilateralism, do we?

Apparently not. The arrogant, unilateralist Cowboy President who rushed us into war last go-round is now being criticized for.... [wait for it] listening too much and not rushing us into war fast enough:

The approach the Bush administration has pursued towards Iran -- multilateralism, private and public diplomacy, occasionally deferring to allies -- is besotted with the very tropes that liberals like to see in their American foreign policy. I'm still not sure what the end game will be with regard to Iran, but to date I can't see how a Kerry administration would have played its cards any differently than the Bush team.

Tom Bevan comments that after offering Iran a "grand bargain" and mucking about with our "special friends" in Europe (these would be the ones who refused to join the coalition...you know, the ones whom Monsieur Kerry was finally forced to admit wouldn't help him either, were he were elected), we'd very likely be in exactly the same place we are now.

Up the creek.

Which makes all this ridiculous talk of the Iraq War diverting resources we haven't the slightest intention of using rather silly, now doesn't it?

Posted by Cassandra at January 20, 2006 12:10 PM

Comments

It just goes to show that liberals/progressives/whatevers will do and say anything, regardless of whether it makes sense or is hypocritical to a previous position, to score cheap political points. They have no principles, no guiding light of morality, and have no position other then "we stand foresquare against anything and everything Bush says or does." If Bush said "I am all for abortion, including late term ones, and am totally against parental notification," you can bet that by the end of the day the Dems would be completely against abortion, exuse me, choice, in all manners.

Posted by: William Teach [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 21, 2006 03:06 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)