Shameless

“We don’t want to send a signal to insurgents, to the terrorists, that we are going to be out of here at some, you know, date certain."

--Junior Senator from NY and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton on "Meet the Press" in 2005, a mere two years ago.

If you haven't done so yet, read today's NY Times' "Hillary’s War" by Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr. It is a long article but well worth the time. It presents a chronology of Hillary's cynical, self-serving and calculating positions and votes on the Iraq War.

But wait, there's more ...

We Are All in It Together, Clinton Says

Tuesday May 29, 4:41 pm ET

By Holly Ramer, Associated Press Writer

Clinton: Shared Prosperity Should Replace 'On Your Own' Society

MANCHESTER, N.H. (AP) -- Presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton outlined a broad economic vision Tuesday, saying it's time to replace an "on your own" society with one based on shared responsibility and prosperity.

The Democratic senator said what the Bush administration touts as an ownership society really is an "on your own" society that has widened the gap between rich and poor. "I prefer a 'we're all in it together' society," she said. "I believe our government can once again work for all Americans. It can promote the great American tradition of opportunity for all and special privileges for none."

That means pairing growth with fairness, she said, to ensure that the middle-class succeeds in the global economy, not just corporate CEOs. "There is no greater force for economic growth than free markets. But markets work best with rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed," she said. "Fairness doesn't just happen. It requires the right government policies."

By "shared responsibility," Hillary means "collectivism." It has been tried. It has failed. Miserably and repeatedly.

In her desperate attempts to out-Obama Obama, Hillary is veering ever so drastically to the left.

The promise of America is opportunity not a determined outcome. There are no guarantees in a free market. That's why they are "free." The moment government intervenes with the "right" policies, as Hillary suggests, free markets go out the window.

Government policies to "ensure" fairness become arbitrary the moment they are enacted. The liberal version of fairness is nothing but an environment where mediocrity is the norm and the lowest common denominator is the true rule.