Hillary Clinton: ” I knew Benazir Bhutto for 12 years”.

Please, enough with the victimhood Hillary. The only foreign policy experience she can tout was watching her husband present one third of the Nobel Peace Prize to Yasser Arafat, instead of serving him with a standing indictment for the murder of two American ambassadors at the hands of Black September.

Is America’s memory that short?

How does Carl do it….one day he is under a Palm tree, the next he’s in a snowdrift?
If I was in his shoes, I would have had quadruple pnemonia 10 times over!
Nate Adams in Tampa

The presidential candidate that we elect has to be up to the challenge of serious foriegn affairs issues. The situation in Pakistan, thoughI trust this is not the case, has the potential to spark an ever widening conflict. Remember that it was just such an assasination that sparked WWI. Two smaller countries, Austria and Hungary drew the whole world into war via a complex system of treaties and the assaination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austrian throne. Suddenly choosing a candidate based on our own petty likes and dislikes seem a whole lot less important doesn’t it?

Carl, I agree the crisis is damaging to Huckabee (because of his flippant remarks on foreign policy)and helps Joh Mcain. However McCains opposition to the bush tax cuts and support of amnesty for illegals are going to hurt him. Mitt Romney may not have foreign policy experience but neither did Bush, Clinton or Regan they relied on experts at the state deparment for sage advice and then acted on that advice to determine the best policy. Sometimes it worked out and sometimes it didn’t. I saw a piece on Hannity an Colmes last night where Mitt got to explain this (Alan did try to bait him into saying it was Bush’s fault but Mitt didn’t bite). Mitt Romney is a proven leader with corporate, Olympic and Governership experience. He will know who to turn to for advice and information. No president can claim to be an expert on every aspect of the Job that is why they have a cabinet. The main characteristic we need in a president is the ability to make correct decisions based on information available. Mitt Romeny has demonstrated this over and over again. As a conservative republican of course we want like minded individuals who share our values, lower taxes, pro-life, border control and support war on terror.

By the way good blog ….this is much more relevant than the hunting blog.

Yes, John McCain has tons of experience in this area. He also has plenty of experience flipping off the base of the party(amnesty bill for instance).

You, of course, neglected to mention Thompson’s well thought out, intellignent response to the Bhutto tragedy. Typical Fox.

Which is it? Republicans are better at security than Democrats, or vice versa? The end line in your story says Republicans are better than Republicans. Cannot mean that?????

This is the time for Joe Biden to shine. He’s got the “foreign policy” credentials and if thats not enough he’s always got one of his long-winded speeches that he can bore our adversaries to death.

“republicans are seen as more serious about security than republicans”…WHAT?
Do read this stuff, or do you just vomit up out of your subconsciousness? Please get it right.

Huck is not ready for prime time. He can’t even decide whether to run an ad that personally attacks his opponent or not.

Apologizing for an assassination would start a war if he were actually president.

Huck peter principled himself beyond where he should be, which is back in Arkansas robbing the widow of her mite so that he can drive a bigger Mercedes.

I have submitted several comments…none inappropriate…none have appeared. They have been unfavorable to Chris Wallace and Mitt Romney, none have appeared. I am wondering what it takes. Also, Mitt Romney has campaign ads all over the FOX web sites…does that influence the special treatment he has been receiving from FOX?

“And yes polls still suggest that republicans are seen as more serious about security than republicans”

That doesn’t make any sense. Do you mean that “Democrats are seen as more serious about security than Republicans”?

Otherwise, I don’t understand what you are trying to say!