Bollinger's borrowed a page from Bill O'Reilly's Talking Points and the public whipping of Ahmadinejad that followed could be a wakeup call to Iran and their leadership that the civilized world is not swayed by their propaganda. The other benefit is that the noisy left is surprisingly quiet tonite because they are confused, at least for the moment, by today's events. They thoroughly expected Bolliger to provide a warm welcome to Ahmadinejad like this was a visit to Venezuela or maybe North Korea. The left always has a warm spot for those that make the US military break a sweat and to have Bollinger, clearly one of their own, give Ahmadinejad and his lefty supporters in the US something to think about must be most disconcerting.

I think JPincus hit the nail on the head. Let's get Gary Kariya right on it. Leftwinglady is clueless about the historical record so I have taken the liberty of posting the Balfour Agreement (which follows in its entirety) that was accepted by the Arabs in 1922 and originally included all of Jordan:

Foreign Office

November 2nd, 1917

Dear Lord Rothschild,

I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.

"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Yours sincerely,

Arthur James Balfour

Clearly, the notion of a "Jewish state" preceded the Holocaust (although the UK reneged on the agreement in 1939) but it was blessed by both the League of Nations and the UN. It was the will of the world community that a Jewish state be founded in what was then known as Palestine. SO what's the hassle? What right does Iran have to deny the Holocaust and by inference the legitimacy of Israel?

Glenn, only 15-20% of the voting population buys the populist netroots worldview in its entirety but no Dem can win a general election without carrying 80% of the netroot vote. Ask Al Bore what happens when a Dem fails to get the obligatory 80% of the netroot vote.

Your guy, John Edwards, is not going to win the nomination becuse he is running out of money, and that really matters. Maybe you want a repeat of 2000 where the Dems fractured over Al Bore. I would lighten up on the Susan Estrichs of the world who are trying to paint a less "frightful" picture of lefty candidates to a nation that routinely repudiates netroot values.

It's exactly the small minds like yours that needs to stop getting all your news from the likes of Gary Kariya and GG and move up in the world, for example, to TNR or Peter Beinart. There, you will actually see real journalism as it is intended, and not political hacks like GG who is a noise machine for John Edwards. Your silliness about a 70% netroots advantage is about 3-4 times larger than reality because if it were true, Hillary et al. would not be spending another nickel on pleasing the MoveOn.org crowd.

I have been watching Hillary do the fake laugh routine for several years now. I thought it was annoying when she first appeared on Chris Matthews a few years ago and "laughed" her way to a commercial break. I did not share her humorous moment considering the subject was Iraq. Now she resorts to the "laugh" when she is being interviewed as if to say: how dare you ask me that question, you little s---. See if you ever get press-credentialed in my administration. If this sounds so "Nixonian", you are right. Hillary is the second coming of Nixon.

With Hillary now 90% certain of being the nominee and probably heavily favored to win the whole thing, she needs to work on her presidential demeanor and gravitas. In this regard, she is yet to equal Nixon.

Salon postees have concluded that Hillary is a hawk and I would agree with that assessment and that is a good thing. When al-Qaeda shows up after the election to test the wits of the new president, I would rather have Hillary in charge who is not afraid to assert herself (remember she is 0 to bitch in 1.6 seconds) as opposed to Edwards. Edwards would likely call an international conference at the UN that would last years and accomplish nothing. Somewhere along the way, Edwards would learn that the GWOT is more than a "bumper sticker".

This is why Hillary will win because she appeals to both sides of the aisle. As an added bonus, she has the best universal healthcare proposal out there.