Why I would vote for Hillary Clinton

I'm a republican, a real one, not a McCain, Bush, Cheney, et al neo-con republican. I'm conservative. I would vote for Hillary Clinton over John McCain, and after this recent comment, I'd vote for Hillary Clinton over many other candidates too.
Read.
I firmly believe that the willingness of our leadership to back Israel is one of the most important topics we need to discern before an election. God said he would bless those who bless Israel, and curse those who curse Israel. This is the kind of backbone I want in a leader. Obama is a pansifist (hat tip to Miss O'hara for that word) of the highest degree, and far to weak and ideological to be the President during this stressful time. We are being held hostage at the pumps by middle-Eastern countries with questionable ties to terrorism. We have to know where we draw the line, how far OPEC can push us. I think Sen. Clinton knows that line, after reading that she will NUKE Iran if they attack Israel. Bravo, Mrs. Clinton. We disagree on many things, but you won me over on what matters most.

Candidates and Israel

I have a piece on B. Hussein Obama and his anti-Israel stances (in light of recent news, perhaps I should also mention his anti-American stances?) that I have been neglecting to post for quite some time. It will come soon. Hold your horses. But I have a recently read a very interesting quote from a top Clinton aide on Clinton (had tip to seemingly liberal blogger AmericanGoy who was quite upset with this announcement.)
Here is Ms. Lewis' quote:

"The role of the president of the United States is to support the decisions that
are made by the people of Israel. It is not up to us to pick and choose from
among the political parties."

This was said in retort to an Obama representative firing off several incredibly defensive jabs about Obama's "enemies" accusing him of anti-Semitism. All baseless, of course, since his Pastor only believes that Israel is guilty of state-sponsored terrorism against...well, terrorists (read Palestinians). So obviously we should all trust Obama's unquestionable loyalty to Israel.

And apparently the libs are in an uproar over this statement. Why? Of course Israel has the right to defend itself. And we, as a nation that values liberty and freedom, should not only respect that, but encourage it, when it defends itself against the evils of muslim fanatical rule. Even McCain's rep didn't express such strong words. He did, however, say that he promised to never "push Israel," which I assume to mean that McCain would not coerce Israel into giving up land, or into an unfair "peace" arrangement, etc. Which makes me more comfortable than his past rhetoric on Israel's need to back off some of their positions.

B Hussein Obama, on the other hand, has said he will meet with President Ahmadinejad of Iran, and possibly with leaders of other militant Islamic terrorists groups and discuss peace. This tells us a whole heap about his alleged support of Israel. If the enemy of my enemy is my friend, then surely the friend of Israel's enemies, is also an enemy of Israel.

Our choice between Obama and Clinton will be over long before the November elections, and I'm not certain that there exists a discernible difference (at least judging from public statements) between Clinton and McCain on the topic of Israel. However, I cannot encourage anyone who loves and supports Israel enough...flee from B. Hussein Obama. He will be an enemy of God's chosen people...and that certainly makes him an enemy of Christianity (if his pastor shouting G**D*** America from the pulpit wasn't enough to convince us of that).

The Candidates and Israel: John McCain

For me, one of the most important issues in voting for people to run our country is their stance on Israel. This is one of the reasons Ron Paul was such an attractive candidate for me. While his policy was technically non-interventionist, I think that would actually help Israel. Our "Peace" efforts have largely crippled and hindered the nation, in my opinion. If Iran shoots missiles at them, they should be able to respond to what any sane person would call an "Act of War." But we've restrained them several times now, in just such instances.

However, I'm not righting this about my opinions. I'm writing this to inform you, my loyal readers (all 2 of you!) about the candidates opinions. I'll start with McCain.

"I’m proudly pro-Israel, and my positions have been consistent and clear. Israel, as one of America’s closest allies and the only democracy in a
dangerous neighborhood, deserves our support and assistance. That’s why I view
with such alarm the victory of Hamas and the Iranian president’s vile comments
about wiping Israel off the map." -- John McCain 1

John McCain has been turning up his pro-Israel rhetoric lately, mostly in an effort to bridge gaps with the evangelical base of the Republican Party. Christians LOVE Israel. Typically, the most devout Christians are republican. And most of us hate John McCain. Well, hate is a bad word. We are Christians after all. We love him, hate his politics. How about that?

So what's the real story with McCain? I have the feeling that he is more FOR blowing up Iran and hunting down every last muslim extremist in the world than he is FOR Israel... but hey, that's close enough right? Not so fast. The above quote is the first of many from McCain trying to distance himself from comments made in an interview in 2006. An interview published then, but never commented on until now. When he says that he was quoted out of context. Here's a few snippets:

McCain reportedly added: "I would expect concessions and sacrifices by both
sides."
When Oren asked McCain if that meant a "movement toward the June 4,
1967 armistice lines, with minor modifications," the reporter wrote, "McCain
nodded in the affirmative."
Oren said that McCain stated clearly that Israel's policy should be one of
"defending itself and withdrawing, defending itself and withdrawing."2

The Oren mentioned here is the reporter, defending his journalistic integrity. He even invited McCain to take a polygraph test with him, to see who was lying about the interview...the interview which McCain never questioned until this past weekend. It would seem that McCain expects Israel to concede much of its disputed territories to Palestine, which would include Bethlehem, and much of the surrounding area of Jerusalem. This is the Palestine that is run by Hamas...the terrorist organization. To be fair to McCain, he says that talks can't happen until Palestine shows they are committed to non-violence. In a related statement, McCain also was overheard booking a ski vacation in hell.

For those of you who don't "get" sarcasm, I'm saying that Palestine will never renounce violence. Oh, they may say they will...but the Quran says that it's okay to lie in situations like this, to infidels, in order to position yourself to destroy them later. (I'm paraphrasing here.) Hamas' sole raison d'etre is the destruction of Israel, and the death of every Jew in the world. And they're not too fond of Christians either. It reminds of the scripture, "Beware when everyone says, 'Peace! Peace!'"

So, is McCain FOR Israel? My answer is, "Meh." He'll do. He's better than Obama. He's about equal with Hillary, whose stances I'll be detailing in another blog. He does seem to value Israel as an ally. And I doubt he'd stand for much Israel bashing. But he's not the staunch supporter that Paul or Huckabee would've been. He's very comfortable with negotiating (or forcing Israel to negotiate) with the Palestinians, and having Israel fork over their God-given land to terrorists.