HILLARY WILL BE READY ON DAY ONE

We watched the first thirty minutes of Obama's stint on Meet The Press, then switched over to ABC to see Hillary's "town hall" meeting on This Week With George Stephanopoulos.

Obama was weak, we agreed. He seemed short on energy, and his remarks about his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, were so obviously tired and defensive. A generally lackluster performance.

Hillary, while not at the top of her form, was still presidential, leader-ly, and fluid in her speech. She didn't have to think, she just pulled the information out of the file cabinets of her mind. That's the most amazing, impressive thing about Hillary -- her complete mastery of every nuance of every issue. It boggles the mind.

A plus -- the first mention I've heard on broadcast TV that Hillary has the backing of 35 flag officers. She worked that in nicely, along with some recognizable names such as former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Hugh Shelton.

George has to bring in the unfavorables. Her honesty is an issue. Hillary responds convincingly.

You know, I was one of those bright girls growing up, that the Tweetys of the world like to dismiss as so unlikable. I had the genius IQ, got the scholarships to college, always made the top grades. I was a popular leader at school, but I was concurrently known as somewhat of a tomboy sports nut and bohemian intellectual, which made me "interesting." And I had lots of friends who were boys, who didn't seem the slightest bit intimidated by a smart girl -- not even my debate team pals, who were all learning nerds and completely accepting of me as the lone girl in the circle. I never really felt the gender bias except from my parents' generation, from teachers and counselors, and after school, from business recruiters and employers.

When I moved to Arkansas as a young bride, Bill Clinton was running for governor for the second time. All our friends in our new hometown were Republicans who were eager to clue us in on the despised Clintons. What The Sage and I gained, though, was a terrific admiration for and excitement about them as a new political promise -- a pragmatic, intellectually engaged, connected-to-the-people, solutions-oriented couple who were completely committed to improving and defending the nation. And I was particularly admiring of Hillary, who had made some of the same choices I had (marriage, motherhood, subliminating one's own career goals somewhat to those of the husband) yet somehow found the energy and commitment to devote herself to public service at the same time. I could only shake my head in admiration and respect for her. And even today, as one of the "smart girls" so denigrated for the amusement of the MSM, I am in awe of her ability to process and store so much information. A few years younger than Hillary, I nonetheless have problems these days with remembering the birthdays of my relatives.

And now that she actually has received her well-earned position at center stage, she continues, day after day and week after week (as she did this morning), to demonstrate a detailed knowledge of every issue the next POTUS may face and the fact that she's reflected on all of them and reached imminently reasonable and thoughtful judgments. She truly IS ready to take on the job on Day One.

TWO GENERATIONS IN IRAQ?

On This Week just now, Newt Gingrich compared the U.S. military involvement in Iraq to that in South Korea. He stated that our work in South Korea, starting with the Korean War, was a two-generation effort as that nation evolved from a dictatorship to a prosperous democracy, and that Iraq was an even more serious and difficult situation. His argument was reminiscent of those right-wingers I often hear talking about how many years after WWII our military spent completing the pacification of Europe and Japan.

Spare me. The equations are specious. The American military after both the Korean War and WWII ended were not, by definition, engaging in armed warfare as they are in Iraq. Nor is there in Iraq, as there was in WWII, a clear enemy that can surrender, ending the conflict, or as in the case of the Korean conflict, agree to a cessation of hostilities, so the U.S. troops can be transitioned to simply a peacekeeping presence in the region.

The bogus "when [Iraqis, South Koreans, Italians, etc.] stand up, we will stand down" strategy has no logical application in Iraq. Iraqis are Sunni, Shiite, Al Qaeda, loyal to this and that sectarian leader. At present there is no recognized Iraqi identity and no central government with any significant power to enforce its will. And there is little prospect that either will emerge in the foreseeable future. The more likely scenario, if you accept the position of the chickenhawks and the 101st fighting keyboarders, is two generations of American men and women fighting and dying in a futile effort to "crush" the insurgents/terrorists in Iraq while creating exponentially more of them throughout the region and the world.