Because she's lying?

Talk is cheap.

Yes, savvy politicians realize that their future depends upon, at the very least, paying lip service to our positions on defense. That's what victory looks like. How else can we win, other than by accepting their surrender?

oj-

You're serious?

Without any closely divided votes in the Senate that make Hillary come down on one side or another on issues that stir the passions of the activists, there is no downside to her embasing Gingrich, since it helps her with the swing voters she'd need to win in the November '08 election. She can do a lip-lock with Newt on the steps of the Capitol and stll keep her Democratic constiuency, as long as she doesn't actually cast a vote for Social Security reform, abortion limitations and/or any Bush Supreme Court nominee.

The upside is less for Gingrich, who may also be seeking to bolster his image among moderates if he plans a 2008 run. But thanks to his diddling on the side while in office during the Clinton-Lewisnky affair, Newt needs to think more about not angering his base than he does making strategic moves for after the convention.

OJ, you have to use airplane glue in a well-ventilated area.

Newt just an hour ago finished speaking about health care reform here on campus.

I was impressed both with Newt (naturally) and with the way he won over some (but not all) of my more doctrinaire leftist collegues.

I kept thinking that it's an indication that the country has moved largely towards considering only free market reforms of health care if New Gingrich can be warmly and respectfully greeted at the campus of a liberal arts college, and in fact meet with little resistance to his proposals.

By the way, no one asked him about his plans for 2008, although clearly the fact we're in Iowa must be noted.

Re Hillary: trust, but verify. Re Newt: put your tray table up, your seatback in the full upright position, and securely fasten your seatbelt.

Luciferous - I don't get your metaphor about Newt. Are you saying, regarding his political propects, that the sky's the limit? Or that he's finally gone interplanetary?

Tom --

Turbulence (but not yet enough to pull out the airsick bag...)

Tom,

Sorry for the obscurity. Newt, how should I say, can be quite erratic. If he were your pilot and you his passenger on an airliner you would be well advised to take my advice, even when the plane was at the gate. No, I don't believe his prospects as a candidate are especially bright. Newt had his time in the cockpit, and there are many around who while grateful for his service still remember the ride.

They let him have airplane glue?

Her swing to the right will last about 1 minute after she utters the words: "I solemnly swear..."

Newt, the secret is never to look her directly in the eyes.

Tom:

Read somewhere in the last week or so that airplane glue ain't what is used to be (or used to be for).

It's an interesting quandry the Dems are in. Because they can't say anything to get themselves elected, they're having to say anything in order to get themselves elected.

Well I agree with OJ, I think. If the Clintons are forced to move to the right both rhetorically and executively then that is a win for the right and for the country.

Imagine what the Clinton presidency could have been had Bill not been forced to follow the conservative agenda forced upon him by our country. The two scenarios a president Hillary would face are following in Bill's footsteps and acquiescing. to the agenda of the right or pulling back to her liberal bulwark and getting none of her agenda pushed through. I'd say both situations favor conservatives rather than liberals.

Or - would you rather the American cultural battle be between liberals and conservatives or between moderates and conservatives. Maybe OJ is trying to say the battle line itself is moving more to the right every day. That's a good thing nay?

Wow, the airplane-related metaphors are really, uh, flying on this thread!

(Sorry.)

David Cohen:

The problem is, if she uses those false beliefs to propel herself into the presidency she'll jettison them rather quickly. I expect the GOP to continue dominating Congress and hopefully they can put the brakes on her schemes. But if I'm wrong about that, then we'll all reap the whirlwind. The potential for mischief here is great.

I have to agree with those that don't trust Hillary. Hanging out with Gingrich helps her to appear less left wing to moderates and help her gain their votes. Bill ran as a moderate (and even got to the right of Bush Sr on some issues) and promptly went hard left once he got in. Hillary, will do the same. This is how Dems get elected outside of deep blue states (look at Salazar in CO who also went hard left once reaching the Senate).

"would you rather the American cultural battle be between liberals and conservatives or between moderates and conservatives(?)"

Of course the latter is the better scenario. Unfortunately, the battle right now is between liberals and moderates, considering that President Bush and the vast majority of congressional Republicans are not actually conservatives.

Hillary may or may not believe in what she's saying, but if she wins a tight race, her promises matter.

If she governs hard-left, the moderates who helped vote her in won't take a second helping when re-election swings around, and even the first mid-term Congressional election might be brutal.

Agreed Michael - She can try to swing hard left after the election but it won't work with a republican congress and moderate electorate.

Why did Gingrich think he could get away with an affair when he must have known the media had him in their cross hairs. When the affair was made public, the media played it as the moral equivalent of Clinton's infidelities. They were able to reinforce the myth that Clinton was impeached for sexual misconduct instead of for the actual reason of lying under oath. Gingrich's forced resignation and the resignations of several of his potential successors for reasons of their own adulteries allowed Democrats to paint Republicans as hypocrites gave Clinton the "get out of jail" card he needed to be re-elected.

I believe if Gingrich is so addled he thinks he has a chance to be on the Republican ticket in 2008, he's addled enough to believe even Hillary, but what about the rest of us?

It's disturbing that oj and Stephen Green, among others, are speaking of Hillary as a possibly viable presidential candidate. One to be sure that will require close scrutiny, but nevertheless, a potentially good president.

This really is madness.

I'd prefer to see St.Hillary treated as a viable candidate, because that means for the next few years people will be paying attention to what she's up to. If she were not considered "viable", then she could operate unmolested and unnoticed (except by people who would be painted as crackpot "Clinton haters" and so ignored) and so be able to position herself so that come January '008 she's the Woman on the White Horse for the Dems if not for the country, by which time it will be too late to slow her down.