When it comes to chutzpah and spin, the Clintons are in a league of their own. That’s painfully obvious in this exchange between Tim Russert and Hillary:

MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn to Iraq. You brought it up. President Bush had talked to General Petraeus the other day. General Petraeus is to report back to Congress in March. If General Petraeus says the surge is working, that reconciliation started in a big way yesterday when the Iraqi parliament said that former members of the Saddam government can participate in new government, don’t pull 35,000 troops out now, keep them there for at least the remainder of the year, would you be open to that?

SEN. CLINTON: No, and here’s why, Tim. The surge was certainly explained and rationalized as giving the Iraqi government space and time to make the hard decisions that they needed to make. 2007 was the deadliest year for American troops, and, you know, from my perspective, part of the reason that the Iraqis are doing anything is because they see this election happening and they know they don’t have much time, that the blank check that George Bush gave them is about to be torn up. I have said that as soon as I become president, I will ask the Joint Chiefs, secretary of defense, my security advisers to give me a plan to begin withdrawing our troops within 60 days.

The reason I have to do that is because last spring, I asked for a briefing on what the planning was. Secretary of defense and the Department of Defense basically said “We’re not going to tell you.” And I said, “Well, yes you are.” We had such a briefing. It was classified. I can’t talk about it, but the bottom line is it was cursory. I don’t think that the Bush White House wants there to be much planning. So starting on day one of my presidency, we will begin that planning. We will begin to withdraw our troops within 60 days. I think we can take out one to two brigades a month. At the same time, I will put increasing pressure on the Iraqi government. I will engage in a full diplomatic effort to work with the countries in the region and others who have an interest in the stability of Iraq.

But Tim, I think that the large part of the reason that we’re seeing the Iraqi government do anything is because time is running out. And yes, I believe President Bush will give them the rest of this year no matter what we try to do, and we don’t have the votes to reverse course. But as of January 20, 2009, we will begin to bring our troops out of Iraq. Therefore, I certainly believe it’s in the interests of the Iraqi government and the people of Iraq that a lot of this reconciliation that I’ve been calling for going back four or five years start and actually get implemented now.

It’s time people collectively took Hillary to the woodshed for this rambling pile of BS. hillary just took credit for the hard work that the soldiers did. These are the same soldiers that she voted to cut off funding for. She doesn’t bother talking about the great work they did in Iraq. Instead, Hillary said that the progress in Iraq happened because of what politicians did in Washington. Talk about pathetic.

As pathetic as that tap-dancing was, it quickly gets worse:

MR. RUSSERT: If General Petraeus says, “Senator, in September you called the surge the suspension of belief. It has worked, and you know it’s worked”–let me finish–”you can see on the ground. I’m saying to you, Senator, or president-elect Clinton, don’t destroy Iraq. It’s working, the surge is working. Keep troops there just a few more months to get this reconciliation complete.”

SEN. CLINTON: Tim, I’m going to go back to what the whole point of the surge was, and the testimony that we heard last fall. The point of the surge was to push the Iraqi government to make these tough choices. Now, if we put in 30,000 of our finest young men and women, who are going to go after the bad guys and quell violence in certain parts of Iraq, there’s no doubt that can be done. The partnerships that have been created by the tribal sheiks in Anbar province and elsewhere gave us an extra advantage. But that doesn’t in any way undermine the basic reality. The point of the surge was to quickly move the Iraqi government and Iraqi people. That is only now beginning to happen, and I believe in large measure because the Iraqi government, they watch us, they listen to us. I know very well that they follow everything that I say. And my commitment to begin withdrawing our troops in January of 2009 is a big factor, as it is with Senator Obama, Senator Edwards, those of us on the Democratic side. It is a big factor in pushing the Iraqi government to finally do what they should have been doing all along.

Sen. Clinton is so full of BS, it’s pathetic. Is Hillary now saying that her telling Gen. Petraeus that to believe his testimony required the “willing suspension of disbelief” was all show? Now she’s saying that “if we put in 30,000 of our finest young men and women, who are going to go after the bad guys and quell violence in certain parts of Iraq, there’s no doubt that can be done.” Which is it, Sen. Clinton? Does the surge’s success require the “willing suspension of disbelief” or was there “no doubt that can be done”? Just for clarity sake, here’s what Hillary said to Gen. Petraeus:

“I think that the reports that you provide to us really require the willing suspension of disbelief.”

Was Hillary just playing to the Nutroots when she said this or was she saying what she really believed? For that matter, why should we believe Hillary when she says that there wasn’t any doubt that American troops could achieve their mission? Let’s frame that last question a bit differently:

If there wasn’t any doubt that the soldiers could prevail, why didn’t she criticize Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi for saying that the surge had failed? If there wasn’t any doubt that the soldiers could prevail, why didn’t she vote each time to fund the troops? If there wasn’t any doubt that the soldiers could prevail, why didn’t she join with the only courageous Democrat, Joe Lieberman, in voting for funding each time?

Why shouldn’t we view Hillary as a profile in political cowardice?

A true leader wouldn’t have played the puppet to insane activist groups like MoveOn.org. Joe Lieberman stood up because he was only interested in doing what’s right.

Finally, shouldn’t our next commander-in-chief be able to stare down MoveOn.org?

Technorati: Hillary, Tim Russert, Meet The Press, MoveOn.org, David Petraeus, Joe Lieberman, Profile In Courage, Surge, Election 2008

Cross-posted at California Conservative