At my fantasy dinner party, Dan Henninger makes it to the table. Henninger is not flashy but he's insightful and manages the best editorial page in the country. Henninger points out that the Dems are stuck in 1968--not a very good year. 1968: The Long Goodbye Can America rise above the divisions of the 1960s? Not yet. BY DANIEL HENNINGER Thursday, November 15, 2007 12:01 a.m. EST It's too bad Barack Obama wasn't able to meet Abbie Hoffman. I don't know if Hillary Clinton ever met Hoffman, who died in 1989, but like any young person up and running in America in the late 1960s, she knows him well.

. . . if they define themselves as soft on terror. Democrats and Waterboarding The party will lose the presidential race if it defines itself as soft on terror. BY ALAN DERSHOWITZ Wednesday, November 7, 2007 I recently had occasion to discuss the Bush administration's war on terrorism with one of the highest ranking former officials responsible for planning that war. He asked me what I thought the administration's biggest mistake was. I told him that it was not immediately going bipartisan following the attacks of 9/11. President Roosevelt had invited Republicans to join his cabinet as the U.S. prepared to fight the Germans and the Japanese, and President Lincoln had included political opponents in his efforts to preserve the union. Creating a united political front against an external enemy may blunt the partisan advantage expected from a successful military effort, but it helps to keep the country together at a time when partisan bickering can undercut the effort. The former Bush official agreed, regretting that the war against terrorism had become essentially a Republican project. Now the Democrats appear to be making the same mistake as they move toward what seems to be an inevitable retaking of the White House. Most of the Democratic presidential candidates are seeking partisan advantage from what many Americans see as the Bush failures in the war against terrorism and especially its extension to Iraq and possibly, in the future, to Iran. This pacifistic stance appeals to the left wing of the democratic electorate, which may have some influence on the outcome of democratic primaries, but which is far less likely to determine the outcome of the general election. Most Americans--Democrats, Republicans, independents or undecided--want a president who will be strong, as well as smart, on national security, and who will do everything in his or her lawful power to prevent further acts of terrorism. Hundreds of thousands of Americans may watch Michael Moore's movies or cheer Cindy Sheehan's demonstrations, but tens of millions want the Moores and Sheehans of our nation as far away as possible from influencing national security policy. That is why Rudy Giuliani seems to be doing surprisingly well among many segments of the electorate, ranging from centrist Democrats to Republicans and even some on the religious right.

Click here to vote in the Scariest Democrat Contest. One reason Mrs. Clinton is polling as the scariest Dem so far is becauser her Democrat Party Unity Score Is 95.2%. That's higher than liberal Massachusetts Senators John Kerry (94%) And Ted Kennedy (83%).

Okay, he didn't say exactly that. But he just as well have when he said that if he is elected president, he would immediately pull all troops out of Iraq. What if we're winning? What if al Qaeda is gaining ground and murdering more innocent Iraqis? What if al Qaeda is amassing in Iraq to train, plot, and plan more attacks on the United States? Makes no difference. He'd bring 'em home. Congrats, B. Hussein Obama! That seals up the al Qaeda vote--and your fate as a failed candidate to be the chief protector of the U.S.

Chris Matthews made some stunning comments about the Bush administration last week. The next day he was interviewed by Jon Stewart--no friend of the Bush administration--who proceeded to eviscerate the theme of Matthew's new book, "Life is a Campaign." Matthews doesn't like being the quarry:

(Tom Harkin with two women--neither of whom are Ruth Harkin.) Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Ia) is apparently for more adultery. Longing for a return to the Clinton era, Harkin has suggested that the Military Code of Justice be changed to allow for more philandering among hetero and homosexuals in the military. Harkin asked retiring Gen. Peter Pace about his "hurtful" comment that homosexual activity is morally wrong: Pace's lengthy answer on gays was prodded by Sen. Tom Harkin, who said he found Pace's previous remarks as "very hurtful" and "very demoralizing" to homosexuals serving in the military. In March, the Chicago Tribune reported that Pace said in a wide-ranging interview: "I do ...

National Public Radio would normally love to air a feature story focusing on the anniversary of school desegregation in Little Rock. NPR would normally love to have one of the country's best black journalists conduct such an interview. But NPR passed on the offer--because the interviewee was George W. Bush. (H/T Instapundit.com) NPR Rebuffs White House On Bush Talk Radio Network Wanted To Choose Its Interviewer By Howard Kurtz The White House reached out to National Public Radio over the weekend, offering analyst Juan Williams a presidential interview to mark yesterday's 50th anniversary of school desegregation in Little Rock. But NPR turned down the interview, and Williams's ...

And we thought it was a rhetorical question: since Columbia University is interested in hosting Ahmadinejad, we asked whether they would have invited Hitler during WWII. Turns out, they would. (H/T Drudge) This is why no one, NO ONE, should send their child to Columbia.

In the run-up to the President's speech last week, I was (forgive me) watching Keith Olbermann on MSNBC--which probably doubled his ratings for the evening. It was a spectacle. He could not foment fast enough. It was a rip-roaring, raucous hour of hammering the Leader of the Free World on what he had not yet said about Iraq. Why wait? I was not surprised by anything he said about the President. But I was perplexed when he turned to Gen. David Petraeus and spewed the following: that Admiral William Fallon allegedly said of Gen. Petraeus that he was “an *ss-kissing little chicken-sh*t.” Here's the excerpt from the transcript: OLBERMANN: Despite the rosy picture painted tonight by Mr. Bush, at the Pentagon, there is sharp disagreement about how to proceed from here. Remarkably, the loudest protests coming from the man who is, at least for the moment, General Petraeus‘ superior, Admiral William Fallon. Admiral William Fallon, chief of Central Command, of CENTCOM, having reportedly derided General Petraeus as a sycophant during their first meeting in Baghdad last March. The admiral telling the general, reportedly, again, saying he was a blank-kissing little chicken blank. That comment, Petraeus‘ reward for making remarks Fallon interpreted as Petraeus trying to ingratiate himself with a superior. The admirable apparently hates that. That proved too much. And Hugh Hewitt reports that it is: The lefties at the Daily Kos and Think Progress are both giving a lot of play to the following quote that Admiral William Fallon allegedly (much more on that in a bit) made about his underling David Petraeus during their first meeting in Baghdad last March. The Daily Kos and Think Progress report Fallon called Petraeus “an *ss-kissing little chicken-sh*t.” I know what you’re thinking. For reputable outfits like the Daily Kos and Think Progress to report such an incendiary comment, the remark must be impeccably sourced. Well…

Not unlike their counterparts in Anbar -- and now Baghdad -- the Dems are staggering around the ring. Joe Louis has just hit them square on the chin. They are flat footed, dizzy; their eyes move in and out of focus. As the fog of war clears, the fog of politics emerges, and at precisely the wrong time. And so they squint, trying to see their adversary, searching for some piece of flesh to swing at. A flailing jab. A wild punch into to the air. Everywhere: impotence. Their inside dialog: Breathe. This guy wasn't supposed to be able to do this. Push up your knees. I'm OK. Settle down. I'm the champion, right? I need to sit down.  Put up your hands; protect. ...