Degree of Madness

Hillary Clinton's Pakistan confusion

Thomas Houlahan asks:    How credible is Hillary Clinton on Pakistan? 

Last weekend after returning to my office from the television studios of a major network where I had done a brief segment on the security of Pakistan's nuclear weapons, I turned on CNN to watch their coverage of the Bhutto assassination's aftermath.

Sen. Hillary Clinton was telling Wolf Blitzer that she didn't think "the Pakistani government at this time under President Musharraf has any credibility at all."

She then said something that betrayed a serious lack of knowledge about Pakistan and called her own credibility on the subject into serious question.

"If President Musharraf wishes to stand for election," she told Blitzer, "then he should abide by the same rules that every other candidate will have to follow."

My immediate reaction was: "Did I hear that correctly?"

As a Pakistan analyst, I know for a fact that Pervez Musharraf doesn't  wish to stand for election any time soon.

The upcoming elections are for the next parliament. Musharraf was just elected president of Pakistan, overwhelmingly, by popularly elected electors on Oct. 6. He's just begun his five-year term as the president of the country. Why would he ever want to run for one seat in parliament? It wouldn't make sense.

However, I checked the transcript of the interview later. That's exactly what she said.

Hillary made the same mistake on This Week with George Stephanopoulos.  Houlahan:

The interview produced this gem:

Referring to a possible delay in the elections, Sen. Clinton said: "I think it will be very difficult to have a real election. You know, Nawaz Sharif (leader of the PML-N, an opposition party) has said he's not going to compete. The PPP is in disarray with Benazir's assassination. He (President Pervez Musharraf) could be the only person on the ballot. I don't think that's a real election."

And then it hit me:

Sen. Clinton really didn't know that the upcoming elections were for individual seats in Pakistan's parliament. She actually believed that Bhutto, Nawaz and Musharraf would be facing off as individual candidates for leadership of the country in the upcoming elections.

Sen. Clinton didn't know that Nawaz Sharif isn't allowed to run for office in Pakistan because of a felony conviction. She didn't know that President Musharraf won't be on the ballot because he's already been elected.

Sen. Clinton, a candidate for the leadership of the free world, apparently doesn't know the first thing about the country referred to by some as "the most dangerous place on earth."

Via:  Powerline

Transcript of CNN interview here.

Happy New Year from Sweet Home Alabama

Happy New Year in Iraq

Iraqis celebrate the New Year:

2008 arrived in a less-violent Baghdad, and residents said it was the first real party they had seen in years.

At the stroke of midnight, exuberant locals fired into the air with automatic rifles, sending red tracer fire streaking over the city, as fireworks lit up the sky.

While the city is still far from peaceful and many of the festive gatherings had a tentative feel, many said it was a happier occasion than they could have dared to hope just a few months ago.

Average, ordinary Iraqis enjoying a party.  The first real party many of them have seen in years.  The extraordinary men and women of the United States military made this possible.  It is a tragedy so many paid the ultimate price and many more are in hospitals struggling to survive.  It is heartbreaking that so many families are facing the new year without their loved ones.  The happy news coming from Iraq is small comfort for those who lost so much.  But those who paid the ultimate price did so not only for Iraq but for us as well.  I hope and pray the families of those who have died in Iraq, and the men and women still fighting there, know how much they are loved and appreciated. 

Economics student Afir Ali, 21, turned up at the Palestine ballroom in a faux-suede blazer and jeans.

"We thank god. This is a beautiful feeling. We wish we could do this every day," he said.

"We want to enjoy life. We've had enough of violence."

A price must be paid for freedom.  Our troops have paid it and so have many Iraqis.  Here's hoping that price paid won't be forgotten and Iraq will continue to party on.  And our troops can come home and have a well deserved party too.

Hillary's Nanny State Agenda, "Man" in Iowa loves it...

Hillary the "caring peacemaker":

Democrat Hillary Clinton on Sunday portrayed herself as a caring peacemaker who teamed with Republicans to care for soldiers, who persuaded Catholic and Protestant women to sit at a table together in Northern Ireland, who got the drug companies to test medicine for children.

"So why do I tell you all this?" she asked an audience of about 400 in Vinton using a hushed, concerned storyteller's voice that seemed a little exaggerated at times. "Because if you want to know what kind of changes I will make as president, look at the changes I have made for 35 years, long before I was ever in public office, long before all these cameras showed up or before anybody really cared what I was doing.

[...]

She recited the "stack of problems" she believes the next president will face - end the war in Iraq, resolve the war in Afghanistan, bring the troops home quickly and responsibly, secure health insurance for 47 million uninsured and fix the economy.

"It's not only these big issues that I'm concerned about. I'm concerned about the issues in the daily lives of families," she said.

On a day her campaign designated "for honoring families," she described how she would work for health care and mental health care for everyone, better care for returning soldiers, ensuring paid family leave by 2016 and access to sick days for everyone.

Paid family leave?  Sick days for all?  Not only will President Hillary come into your home, she'll show up at your workplace too.  As for her concern about the "issues in the daily lives of families", a President doing the job he (or God forbid she) was elected to do would not have time to worry about the "daily lives of families".   Most Americans, except for the Stupids, can handle their daily lives themselves.  Freedom loving Americans want the federal government OUT of their daily lives.

But a helpless stay-at-home-sucker mom, whose 9 year old daughter was dissed by Chelsea, is swept away by Hillary's "concern":

Her message hit home for Robyn Rieckhoff, a 36-year-old stay-at-home mom who lives in Cedar Rapids. This was her seventh campaign rally - she had already seen Republicans Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani, and Democrats John Edwards and Barack Obama, as well as Bill Clinton stumping for his wife."I came in very open," Rieckhoff said. "But I'm decided. I'm going with Hillary. I like her family values. I feel like she's going to get the job done. Some of the others just felt like they were talking."

And the Stupids gave Hillary "multiple standing ovations with wild applause". 

A man yelled: "Iowa loves Hillary!"

No real man could love Hillary's plan to control every aspect of our daily lives. 

When Hillary is in the White House, no American will be invisible to the president of the United States.

That's what worries me.

The Sunday Telegraph Person of the Year...General David Petraeus

The Sunday Telegraph gets it right:

The critics said it couldn't be done, but the vision and determination of General David Petraeus have brought greater security and cause for optimism to the people of Iraq. He is The Sunday Telegraph's Person of the Year.

How could The Telegraph choose General Petraeus over Vladimir Putin?  After all, Putin is so steely and determined.  What makes General Petraeus so special?

Maybe because "he has given another last chance to a country that had long since ceased to expect one."

And for that, Gen Petraeus is Person of the Year.

Damn right.

Fred Thompson, just listen to him

I like this comment by Tim Zank at Hot Air:

For Gods sake, Just listen to the guy. He actually answers questions, calls a spade a spade, doesn’t have a boatload of baggage, doesn’t pander at all, he knows how to lead and make decisions, and he didn’t just become a conservative recently for this election.

The fire in the belly bullsh$t is just that, bullsh$t.

ugadawg at RedState:

There is not much to add to this. It is just another example of Fred being Fred, talking about his love for America and his hope for a greater tomorrow. It was truly refreshing to watch a politician speak from his heart, and not according to the latest poll or focus group. I hope everyone, especially those voters in Iowa, will take the time to listen to Fred and his vision for America. I know it is lengthy, but some things just can't be condensed into 30 second sound bites.

And these principles are the foundation of the conservative movement that I’ve been faithful to throughout my adult life. These are not principles I decided on a few years ago. They are not concepts that I learned from a focus group. And they’re not ideas I came up with to curry favor or to win an election. These principles are a part of who I am….....Fred Thompson

First Lady Hillary Clinton was provided classified information

On ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos, Hillary Clinton was touting the experience she gained as First Lady during Bill Clinton's eight years in the White House.  During the interview Stephanopoulos pointed out that she did not have national security clearance.  Apparently Mrs. Clinton didn't need it:

" I was briefed on a range of issues, often provided classified information".

Here is the video.

I'm not a national security expert but wouldn't that be a violation of federal law?  Of course laws do not apply to the Clintons.

Evangelicals, the ball is in your court

Dee at Conservatism With Heart:

The last time evangelical Christians pulled the lever for a presidential candidate just because he was an evangelical we got Jimmy Carter.

Is history about to repeat itself?

It could be.  Evangelicals, understandably hesitant to pull the lever for Rudy Giuliani, have found their candidate, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee.  When Rudy's nomination appeared likely, the Christian wing of the Republican party was expected to ignore his obvious shortcomings and vote for him to keep Hillary Clinton out of the White House.  RightwingSparkle:

Many in the Republican party ask Christians to look at the big picture. To think how much worse Hillary will be than Rudy. To think how much better Rudy is on the war on terror. But let's face it, the MSM has convinced most Americans that we don't have much to fear with the war on terror. Americans take our safety for granted once again. Christians aren't immune to this. Conservative Christians tend to see an even bigger picture, which specifically involves eternity. So all these things, even war, come and go, but our decisions and our actions go with us into eternity. This is why they will stay home, and this is why Hillary will win.

Don't say I didn't warn you.

It would surely be a disaster for our country if evangelicals stayed home on election day but it would be hard to blame them if Giuliani were the nominee.  His liberal leanings, not just on moral issues, are glaring and cannot be denied. 

Virginia Patriot, commenter on a post by John Hawkins at Townhall.com:

There are millions of us who usually vote GOP who WILL NOT vote for Rudy, for a variety of reasons. For me it's the amnesty issue, for others it's life, still others, homosexuality or gun rights. Whatever the issue is, it is a bright line we will not cross. No amount of Hillaryscare, intimidation, name-calling or cajoling will get us to vote for Rudy. He's in the wrong party. He is a liberal. I don't vote for liberals. When he loses, don't blame us, we tried to warn you. Flipping off half your voters is not a winning strategy.

If the polls are to be believed, the tables are turning.  Ignoring the obvious shortcomings of Mike Huckabee, conservative Christians are bound and determined to vote for him.  Politics abroad foreign to Huckabee:

White House hopeful Mike Huckabee is pretty good with a shotgun - at least when he's aiming at a pheasant and not his own foot.

Polls show his bid to win Iowa conservatives with folksy charm heading into the Jan. 3 caucus - including a recent pheasant hunt - has worked, but he may be hounded by repeated fumbles on foreign policy matters.

Huckabee erred when he questioned whether Pakistan should continue martial law in the wake of Benazir Bhutto's assassination - a declaration that was lifted two weeks ago.

[...]

He raised eyebrows by offering his "apologies" to Pakistan and by tying the uproar in the country to U.S. border security.

And in a morning TV appearance, Huckabee said Bhutto's slaying brings "a new level of instability to the Middle East, and particularly to Pakistan."

Pakistan is in South Asia.

Jim Conklin, chairman of the Linn County GOP, said he's hearing local concerns about Huckabee's foreign policy chops.

"He doesn't always have his facts there," Conklin said. "He is very weak there."

"Very weak".  Does this bother his supporters?  Apparently not:

...Cary Covington, a political science professor at the University of Iowa, said Huckabee needs to stay the course.

"What's his appeal to voters? His authenticity," he said. "The last thing he needs to do is start telling these people things that they can see through. He has to remain true to the reason they're supporting him - they trust him."

Covington predicted Huckabee voters are unlikely to be turned off this late in the cycle mainly because they're supporting him with their hearts.

That's the case for 72-year-old Max Batterson of Unionville, Iowa.

"None of this affects me as much as [his] standing by his beliefs," said Batterson, adding, "his leader is Jesus Christ, and that's who he's going to fall back on, and I believe in the same Jesus Christ. So I believe he'll be led the right way."

Standing by one's beliefs is a good thing but being clueless on critical foreign policy matters is dangerous and deadly.  Huckabee's naivety on foreign policy is by no means his only weakness as his record as governor of Arkansas proves.  His tax policies alone should be enough to raise serious doubts about his candidacy:

The evidence for the former Baptist minister's tax raising ways is indisputable. The Arkansas Journal uncovered a video of him discussing a broad menu of levies that he would welcome to help increase revenues. The New York Times reported Sunday that while some taxes were cut during his term, "on balance, tax increases outweighed the tax cuts by some $500 million, and many of the cuts that Mr. Huckabee heralds owe little to his efforts."

Although on the record as supporting strong enforcement of our borders, his record on illegal immigration in Arkansas is troubling.  Governor Huckabee in 2005:

Gov. Mike Huckabee on Thursday heaped criticism upon immigration legislation in the Arkansas Legislature, describing it as "inflammatory . . . race-baiting and demagoguery." He also challenged the Christian values of its main sponsor.

Huckabee said the bill, seeking to forbid public assistance and voting rights to undocumented immigrants, "inflames those who are racist and bigots and makes them think there's a real problem. But there's not."

The bill is modeled after Proposition 200, approved by Arizona voters in November. The Arkansas measure was filed by Republican Sens. Jim Holt of Springdale and Denny Altes of Fort Smith.

Huckabee, also a Republican and a Baptist minister, said Arkansans should be welcoming hard-working immigrants of all races. He singled out Holt, who often talks of his strong Christian beliefs, saying, "I drink a different kind of Jesus juice. My faith says don't make false accusations against somebody.

Jesus juice.  How many kinds are there? 

Sister Toldjah:

Up until a couple of months ago, Mike Huckabee didn’t stand out much for anyone. He wasn’t polling well, and the mediots and his opponents paid very little attention to anything he did. However, since he's risen in the polls and the spotlight’s brightened considerably on his campaign, what’s shone the most is not an image a potential president should want to emulate. Before I go any further, a few nice comments about Huckabee are in order: I’ve said before that Huckabee is a likeable guy. But likeable guys don’t always make good presidents. He’s someone you could take to the buffet breakfast at Shoney’s and shoot the breeze with. Somebody you wouldn’t mind being your neighbor. If he were still a minister, he’s someone you wouldn’t mind going to hear preach his Sunday sermon. But presidential material he isn’t.

Not by a long shot.  Hugh Hewitt:

Whether the evangelicals who like Huck abandon him or not, the campaign is over.  You can't run for president in a time of war and particularly at a moment of international crisis and appear so obviously unprepared for the job.

Just as conservative Christians rightly refused to embrace Rudy, warts and all, this conservative refuses to embrace Huckabee.  His negatives are too big and too important to ignore. Our country desperately needs a strong, conservative leader and Mike Huckabee is not the man for the job.  Not only that, there is no way he could defeat Hillary in 2008.  Maybe Hugh is right and Huckabee's campaign is effectively over.  It would be encouraging, however, if the evangelicals who are driving his campaign would come to their senses.  We are electing a President.  Not a Sunday School Teacher.

“Let the candidate who is most clueless be the next to step out of the presidential race."  Mr. Huckabee she's talking about you.

The Man of the Year sends a letter to the Men and Women of the Year

The Weekly Standard published the letter General David Petraeus sent to his troops in Iraq.  "Hope has been rekindled."   Here is an excerpt:

Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen, and Civilians of Multi-National Force-Iraq:

As 2007 draws to a close, you should look back with pride on what you, your fellow troopers, our Iraqi partners, and Iraqi Coalition civilians have achieved in 2007. A year ago, Iraq was racked by horrific violence and on the brink of civil war. Now, levels of violence and civilians and military casualties are significantly reduced and hope has been rekindled in many Iraqi communities. To be sure, the progress is reversible and there is much more to be done. Nonetheless, the hard-fought accomplishments of 2007 have been substantial, and I want to thank each of you for the contributions you made to them.

In response to the challenges that faced Iraq a year ago, we and our Iraqi partners adopted a new approach. We increased our focus on securing the Iraqi people and, in some cases, delayed transition of tasks to Iraqi forces. Additional U.S. and Georgian forces were deployed to theater, the tours of U.S. unites were extended, and Iraqi forces conducted a surge of their own, generating well over 100,000 more Iraqi police and soldiers during the year so that they, too, had additional forces to execute the new approach. In places like Ramadi, Baqubah, Arab Jabour, and Baghdad, you and our Iraqi brothers fought--often house by house, block by block, and neighborhood by neighborhood--to wrest sanctuaries away from Al Qaeda-Iraq, to disrupt extremist militia elements, and to rid the streets of mafia-like criminals. Having cleared areas, you worked with Iraqis to retain them--establishing outposts in the areas we were securing, developing Iraqi Security Forces, and empowering locals to help our efforts. This approach has not been easy. It has required steadfastness in the conduct of tough offensive operations, creative solutions to the myriad problems on the ground, and persistence over the course of many months and during countless trying situations. Through it all, you have proven equal to every task, continually demonstrating an impressive ability to conduct combat and stability operations in an exceedingly complex environment.

[...]

The way ahead will not be easy. Inevitably, there will be more tough days and tough weeks. Unforeseen challenges will emerge. And success will require continued hard work, commitment, and initiative from all involved. As we look to the future, however, we should remember how far we have come in the past year. Thanks to the tireless efforts and courageous actions of the Iraqi people, Iraq's political and military leaders, the Iraqi Security Forces, and each of you, a great deal has been achieved in 2007. Thus, as we enter a new year, we and our Iraqi partners will have important accomplishments and a newfound sense of hope on which we can build.

As always, all or your leaders, our fellow citizens back home, and I deeply appreciate the dedication, professionalism, commitment, and courage you display on a daily basis. It remains the greatest of honors to serve with each of you in this critical endeavor.

    Sincerely,

    David H. Petraeus

Hillary Clinton accuses President Bush of mismanaging Pakistan diplomacy

Hillary Clinton "knocks" President Bush's "handling of Pakistan":

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton hurled a dart at President George W. Bush that seemed also aimed at her Democratic rivals, saying the president's mismanagement of Pakistan diplomacy has contributed to instability in that nuclear-tipped nation pocked with Taliban redoubts.

"This is one of the most dangerous and difficult regions in the world, we know that," Clinton told a receptive audience that packed an elementary school gymnasium here Friday. "We have suffered and experienced what that means here at home. I am urging President Bush to adopt a new policy."

In attacking Bush over turmoil in Pakistan one day after the assassination there of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, Clinton suggested that her eight years as the nation's first lady gave her a timely familiarity with world diplomacy that her Democratic rivals lack.

Clinton repeatedly reminded the audience that she had met with leaders from the region as recently as the past year, including Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf and Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai, and said her efforts to get Bush to broker smoother relations between them had proved fruitless.

Clinton accused Bush of failing to hold Musharraf accountable for deteriorating political stability in Pakistan, and urged him to demand an "international, independent investigation" of Bhutto's death.

I wonder if President Clinton's mismanagement of Yeman diplomacy contributed to the bombing of the USS Cole?  Did Hillary blame her husband for mismanagement when the World Trade Center was bombed in 1993?  What about the 1995 bomb in Riyadh that killed five Americans?  Or the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing that killed 19 U.S. servicemen?  Wonder what Hillary thought of Bill's decision to bomb an aspirin factory in Sudan in retaliation for the bombings of two US embassies in Africa, where more than 200 people were killed and thousands injured?  Does she place any blame on her husband for the September 11, 2001 attacks for refusing to capture bin-Laden when he had the chance?  Richard Miniter:

The Clinton administration simply did not want the responsibility of taking Osama bin Laden into custody. Former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger is on the record as saying: "The FBI did not believe we had enough evidence to indict bin Laden at that time and therefore opposed bringing him to the United States." Even if that was true — and it wasn't — the U.S. could have turned bin Laden over to Yemen or Libya, both of which had valid warrants for his arrest stemming from terrorist activities in those countries. Given the legal systems of those two countries, Osama would have soon ceased to be a threat to anyone.

After months of debating how to respond to the Sudanese offer, the Clinton administration simply asked Sudan to deport him. Where to? Ambassador Carney told me what he told the Sudanese: "Anywhere but Somalia."

In May 1996 bin Laden was welcomed into Afghanistan by the Taliban. It could not have been a better haven for Osama bin Laden.

Talk about "mismanagement".  Hillary also criticized Barack Obama for, get this, "politicizing Bhutto's death":

"I just regret that [Obama and his chief strategist] would be politicizing this tragedy, and especially at a time when we do need to figure out a way forward," Clinton said Friday in an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer.

Projection?