Give'em Hell -- Hillary?
My anti-Hillary Clinton creds are a solid as anyone's. That said, her opponent, John Spencer, is an dissembling idiot. And so is Matt Drudge.
The Drudge headline reads, "HILLARY COMPARED TO BIN LADEN IN SENATE AD..." Which is a totally true statement, except for the words "compared" and "to." What we're left with is that two people are mentioned in the same ad. Thanks, Matt!
That's nothing compared to the wool Spencer has for your eyes. The thrust of his ad is, "But Hillary Clinton opposed the PATRIOT Act and the NSA program that helped stop another 9/11." As I understand it, the whole Anglo-American investigation was due to some brutal torture in Pakistan.* The rest of the investigation was "mere" followup. That followup was done mostly by Britain's MI-5. Yes, the American government did much to help, but little of it was covered by the PATRIOT Act. And none of it couldn't have been made legel with a court order even without PATRIOT.
At the end, Spencer promises he "won't play politics with our security." It seems he already has.
Look. If the Republicans want to get serious about stopping Hillary, then they've got to run somebody serious enough to stop her. Spencer is a joke.
Meanwhile, at least half of the likely Republican 2008 presidential nominees are jokes, too. Seriously unfunny jokes. The only guy I can stomach, Rudi, will almost certainly not win the primary. It's enough to make me think that if Hillary is the best New York has to offer, she might be the best the country has to offer.
I don't like it, but right now there isn't much choice.
*I do not support torture, end of statement. Unfortunately, rational people often have to stand by "our bastards" when they run a "friendly" country. IE, Saudi, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, old Marcos in the Philippines, etc.
Here's something to ponder: All those people who complain when we coddle friendly autocrats... where were they last week, when it was revealed that Pakistan helped us stop another 9/11, via needle-nose pliers and a car battery?