Remember Hillary’s reaction to Barack Obama’s declaration during the July Democrat debate that he’d meet with leaders of rogue nations like Iran “without preconditions” if he were elected? She called it “irresponsible and frankly naive.”

Democratic front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton on Tuesday called rival Barack Obama’s debate claim that he’d be willing to meet with leaders of rogue nations “irresponsible and frankly naive.”

And when she was asked the same question at that debate she said she wouldn’t do such a thing:

In the debate, Obama was asked if he would be willing to meet — without precondition — in the first year of his presidency with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea.

“I would,” he responded.

Clinton said she would not.

But poll numbers must be telling her something different these days. Here’s her response (twice) to the same question yesterday:

But asked about it Thursday by a voter, the New York senator said twice that she, too, would negotiate with Iran “with no conditions.”

“I would engage in negotiations with Iran, with no conditions, because we don’t really understand how Iran works. We think we do, from the outside, but I think that is misleading,” she said at an apple orchard.

So is she directly contradicting her own response from July?

…or just admitting she’s irresponsible and frankly naive…

A letter signed by over a hundred Muslim scholars sent to Christian leaders around the world declares that the survival of the world is at stake if they don’t make peace with Muslims.

Prominent Muslim scholars are warning that the “survival of the world” is at stake if Muslims and Christians do not make peace with each other.

We non-Muslims sincerely apologize if our women and children have been getting in the way of your exploding backpack bombs in cafes and discos in a less-than-peaceful manner.

Everytime Democrats want to implement bad policy, they have to trot out some phoney victim to make their case. Whether it’s opposition to the war using phoney soldiers, or using kids, elderly or poor people (who aren’t quite the victims the Democrats paint them to be) to peddle government-run healthcare.

In 1996, Hillary Clinton propped up young Jennifer Bush, a seven-year-old with mystery ailments whose mother coached her to lobby for universal health care Jennifer was trotted out to present the Clintons a lucky silver dollar “to bring you good luck so everyone can have good insurance.” Jennifer’s mother was later convicted of aggravated child abuse and welfare fraud for misrepresenting $60,000 in assets on Medicaid forms.

In 2000, Al Gore propped up elderly widow Winifred Skinner to lambaste high drug prices. Gore repeated her claim that she had to pick up cans on the side of the road to pay for medicine. Dan Rather bemoaned: “She’s no child, but she belongs on a poster about high drug costs.” One problem: Winifred’s own well-to-do son, businessman Earl King, debunked those claims.

In 2004, John Kerry propped up Mary Ann Knowles, a breast cancer patient who he claimed “had to keep working day after day right through her chemotherapy, no matter how sick she felt, because she was terrified of losing her family’s health insurance?” The conservative Manchester Union Leader editorial page reported: “Knowles chose to work through most, but not all, of her chemotherapy because her husband was out of a job…She and husband John did not want to take the pay cut that would have come with disability leave, so Mary Ann kept working.”

Democrats have to sell their policies on emotion… they won’t get any traction otherwise. But in this day and age of instant access to information and the ability for average citizens to easily disseminate the facts to a large audience, that tactic just ain’t gonna cut it anymore.

…more customers for Hillarycare!

And don’t expect to hear any outrage from Democrats over such shameless politicization of 9/11 when it’s one of their own doing it…

As Carol rightly points out:

Remember when the Democrats screamed bloody murder, like this time and that time, charging that Republicans were seeking to “politicize 9/11″?

Well, let’s see if we hear the same high-minded denunciation now that Hillary Clinton is using images of 9/11 in a political ad. It’s not likely — the only people, it seems, who are forbidden from using 9/11 images are those who do so to remind us that we’re actually in a war against Islamofascist terrorists who want to kill us.

It’s only fitting that a man who pled guilty to stealing and destroying classified documents is now advising the Clinton campaign.

Sandy Berger, who stole highly classified terrorism documents from the National Archives, destroyed them and lied to investigators, is now an adviser to presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. Berger, who was fired from John Kerry’s presidential campaign when the scandal broke in 2004, has assumed a similar role in Clinton’s campaign, even though his security clearance has been suspended until September 2008.

I have heard that criminals tend to migrate toward their own. This is obviously the Clintons’ way of paying him back for covering up evidence of Clinton’s negligence in responding to terrorists.

I’m not even shocked by their brazeness anymore.

This is priceless.

RIYADH, 4 October 2007 — Saudi Arabia’s Human Rights Commission (HRC) will urge its counterparts in the European Union to ask their governments not to link terrorism to Islam and also to issue regulations to protect Muslims from prejudice and discrimination because of their faith.

When you finish laughing at the notion that Saudi Arabia has a “human rights commission”, remember this is a country that beats and imprisons people for merely speaking of Christianity…

A Saudi court has sentenced a high school chemistry teacher to more than three years in prison and 750 lashes for talking to his pupils about his views on a number of current topics, such as Christianity, Judaism and the causes of terrorism.

In Qassim province, north of Riyadh, the prosecution department pressed blasphemy charges against Muhammad al-Harbi, labeling the teacher an “apostate,” after his students and fellow teachers filed legal complaints against him. The judge in the case, `Abdullah Dakhil, reportedly accused the teacher of “trying to sow doubt in a student’s creed.” On Saturday, a court in Bukairia banned him from teaching and sentenced him to 40 months in prison and public flogging of 750 lashes.

…or worshipping Jesus Christ…

But in the country where Islam began, Saudis have no tolerance for other religions or even other forms of Islam. And they’re markedly increasing their persecution of Christians.

It’s being called the worst crackdown on Christian believers in Saudi Arabia , in a decade. Over the past three months, close to 100 Christians—all of them guest workers in Saudi Arabia —have been arrested by Saudi religious police. The guest workers’ crime? Worshipping Jesus Christ.

In April, 40 Pakistani Christians were arrested at an underground church outside of Riyadh . In May, as many as 7 Christians from East Africa were arrested at a private worship service. And just last week, 46 more Christians —all natives of India —were rounded up and thrown in prison. Some received severe beatings.

Yeah, muslim discrimination is the problem.

UPDATE:
Bryan reminds us that the country complaining of discrimination against muslims has highway signs like this:

No word yet on whether Democrats in Congress, with their newfound “pro-military” stance, will issue a resolution condemning the actions of these protestors their base.

“We are so shocked and horrified that the Marines have come to Berkeley to prey on our children,” said Zanne Joi, a Code Pink member.

Last week, the Code Pink group protested by defacing the recruiting center and calling the recruiters liars.

Keep protesting the very men and women that protect you, liberals, and someday you may learn the hard way that burkas don’t come in pink.

It could be a full time job just to sort through all the dirty money that runs through a Clinton campaign.

And that which we know is probably just the tip of the iceberg.

Michael Medved has a good article about what the Founders intended for this country and how it’s been clouded by the politically-correct, “multicultural” crowd.

Like so many other commonly held convictions about the role of faith in the nation’s founding this politically correct contention isn’t just confused and unfocused; it is, rather, appallingly, demonstrably and inarguably wrong.

Read the whole thing.

It’s that time again. Nominations are now open for the 2007 Weblog Awards. If you like this blog, please consider posting a nomination (and later voting should it make the finals).

Here are a couple of categories that might be relevant:

Best Conservative Blog
Best Individual Blogger
Best of the Top 1751 - 2500 Blogs

Here is the info needed to nominate:

TexasRainmaker
http://www.texasrainmaker.com
http://feeds.feedburner.com/TexasRainmaker

I don’t expect to win, but what the hell…