Hillary Clinton faces anti-war critics

[Robbien]

WASHINGTON -- A liberal crowd both booed and cheered Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton Tuesday after she encouraged Democrats to have a "difficult conversation" about their position on the Iraq war in order to win over middle-of-the-road voters.

Clinton's attempt to strike a moderate stance on the divisive issue of the war contrasted sharply with the angry words of another potential presidential contender, Sen. John Kerry, the party's 2004 standard-bearer, who called the war "immoral" and a "quagmire."

At a speech before a liberal gathering dubbed "Take Back America," the New York senator took grief from those in the audience critical of her vote for the Iraq war and her opposition to an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops.

"I do not think it is a smart strategy, either, for the president to continue with his open-ended commitment, which I think does not put enough pressure on the new Iraqi government," said Clinton, before turning to the anti-war liberals' core beef with her. "Nor do I think it is smart strategy to set a date certain. I do not agree that that is in the best interests," said Clinton, prompting loud booing from some at the gathering.

Clinton has been seen as the early favorite among potential Democratic candidates for president in 2008, but she is increasingly at odds with anti-war liberals over her past vote and current position on Iraq.

http://www.pantagraph.com/articles/2006/06/13/news/doc448eda0a63004033955859.txt

[Master Mahon]

1. Her war stance is Vietnam redux all over again! n/t

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

4. Entirely correct.

I remember the congressional spinelessness during the Vietnam War and it sure helped nothing and no one.

Hillary is blowing it on this one. Big time.

[saigon68]

37. Fight the Rich not their Wars

[ixion]

2. Running Hilary in 08 is a huge mistake, IMO

it's just begging for a defeat.

[howmad1]

29. Hey, gotta continue the losing streak.

If the dems are lucky, they'll make it a solid 12 years of losses. What a record. :sarcasm:

[closeupready]

3. I will not vote for pro-war Hillary.

eom

[BigDDem]

34. Nader in '08!!!!

Fifth times the charm!!!!

[Breeze54]

5. I already posted this at 1 PM

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2676208

Not that it matters! :)

[noonwitch]

6. I would be thrilled to vote for Hillary

The die-hard anti-war candidates are going to be trashed as wimpy hippies by the opposition. The swing voters that a dem needs to win are not going to vote for anyone they think is "wimpy".

I really don't think that any of the dems who voted to give Bush power to deal with Iraq would have voted that way had they not been given false intelligence from a believable source (Powell). Nor would they have voted that way if they knew we'd still be there fighting 3 years later.

So, vote for some anti war candidate who has no chance in hell of winning, like Kucinich or Kerry. When we get 4 more years of souless republicanism, don't be blaming Hillary.

Of course I realize that Hillary can't beat some candidates, like Rudy or McCain, but she can beat those who are nationally unknown, like Allen or Pence. I highly doubt the GOP is going to nominate either Rudy or McCain. The religious fanatics are not going to allow Rudy to top the ballot, and all of the conservatives hate McCain, even though he's probably far more conservative than W.

If Hillary picked Clark as a running mate, she could win. If Clark got the nomination and picked Hillary as a running mate, he probably could win, too. I voted for Clark in the Michigan caucus in 2004-I thought he was a better choice than Kerry.

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. I didn't believe the government's lies about Iraq.

Why did they?

Am I really so much smarter than our elected representatives?

If so, why would I vote for them?

[saigon68]

13. The opposition isn't joining up to kill Islamics or their children

They are out to trash Gay men and women. That is their plan to win

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

16. Anti-war is a must.

Because anybody who still supports the war will vote Republican.

[Robbien]

17. Same old song, vote for a rotten candidate because they are "electable"

A DLC "moderate" candidate cannot get even elected for dog catcher these days.

Your theory is that a non-moderate will be viewed as a wimp so is unelectable. My theory is that a moderate is viewed as Bush-lite where voters do not see the difference between the two parties, so a moderate is unelectable.

If we are both right, at least I will be voting for an unelectable who has the same views and principles I have and not be voting for and unelectable someone who is helping destroy other nations.

[5thGenDemocrat]

24. I'm anti-war and liberal and a veteran, thank you very much

I'd be proud to cast a vote for Wesley Clark, though I suspect he has too much honor to serve beside a power-grabbing POS like Hillary.
I know, way down in my DNA and my DD-214, that a man of true genius and true decency, one who graduated first in his class at West Point (1966 -- a legendary class and the one which suffered the highest battlefield casualties of any at the USMA) would be the last person to drag us into an illegal and senseless war.
That's the difference between a person of duty and honor like General Clark and a neo-con chickenhawk like Hillary. To him, war is abhorrent. To her, it's just swollen pectoral muscles.
John
It is now three days, 15 hours and 28 minutes to FUNDAY.

[arewenotdemo]

32. nicely stated

[noonwitch]

39. If you think Hillary is a neocon, you are deluded

I am impressed with your military record and all that goes with it.

I didn't believe the Bush administration about Iraq, either, but I am not a member of the US Congress, I didn't see the classified info they were shown, so I'm not going to overly judge her for her vote.
Kerry voted the same way, as did both my democratic senators-they still have my votes.

I thought that invading Iraq was wrong, but now that we are there, I don't think we can just cut and run. I also support the soldiers who are there, even if I don't like their commander in chief or the reason they are there. They are still our people and still serving their country.

Obviously, a lot of americans are now questioning the wisdom of this conflict, but I don't see them joining the peace rallies en masse.

But as for Hillary being a neocon-when the neocons themselves call someone a socialist, I highly doubt that she is a neocon. She's just more conservative than you are. So am I, but I'm still a liberal by most people's definition. To imply that she has no honor is really low. And I see any reason to call her a "power grabbing POS".

[5thGenDemocrat]

40. A neo-con is just an ex-liberal who's developed a taste for blood

So long as it's someone else's. That working definition flies for me -- whether it's Hillary Clinton or Paul Wolfowitz.
I never said Hillary had no honor. I said that Wesley Clark did. Honor, to me, would be acting like the intelligent, compassionate liberal that Clinton sold herself to the voters of New York as. But I'll ask you to tell me where the Senator, regarding the Iraq War, has done anything but tote water for the Fourth Reich.
Now, "power grabbing POS" is only my opinion. That I won't vote for her is a fact. There will be a Democratic primary here in Michigan and my vote can cancel your vote. You line up with your candidate, I'll line up with damned near anyone else and we'll see who gets to hold the saucy end of the stick.
I would suspect I'm actually far more conservative than Hillary -- but that doesn't make me a war-lover and it doesn't make me a neo-con in donkey clothing. I'm liberal enough to believe in feeding the hungry, clothing the naked and sheltering the homeless. I don't believe in war except in self-defense. And I'm liberal enough to vote Socialist Worker if that's what it takes to show the gutless Democrats that they can stop licking Bush's jackboots any time (hey, maybe once he gets under ten percent approval, the invertebrates will develop a spine -- however rudimentary).
Bring the troops home now. Iraq will have their Civil War (I personally think they're having it now) whether we stay another six months, another year, another decade -- whatever you and Hillary decide is necessary to preclude any perception of cutting and running. The Shiites hate the Sunnis, the Sunnis hate the Shiites, the Kurds hate both of them and, really, I couldn't possibly care less. It isn't our job to save the world, nor to make it safe for some putative democracy, nor to hammer our belief systems onto some country that will never understand them, didn't ask for them and doesn't want them.
John
And, finally, I'd double-check Levin and Stabenow's votes on the Iraq War Resolution -- I'm pretty sure both voted "no."
It is now two days, eight hours and 12 minutes to FUNDAY.

[dionysus]

36. fuck the imaginary "swing voter"

we lose elections because we turn off our base by pandering to republicans.

[otohara]

7. Booooooo

I concur with the anti-war liberals

[bklyncowgirl]

8. Hillary's Sistah Souljah moment?

Walking into the lion's den and facing down the anti-war left.

Sounds like a way for her to distance herself from--well--people like me. Whether it's a smart strategy or not remains to be seen.

It is classic Clinton.

[mhr]

10. I Will Not Vote For Any Democratic War Mongers Including -

Hillary!

[BigDDem]

35. Nader! Nader! Nader!

[closeupready]

11. Hillary is so shamelessly pandering on this issue,

that it seems as though if she will triangulate even when talking about war, what will she not triangulate away? She triangulates on everything - abortion rights, church/state issues. :eyes:

All the right needs to know (if she wins) is stake out an even more outrageously extreme position, and she will move a little bit more to the right, telling her base, "hey, we have to work hard to keep the center."

I'm really getting to the point where I just see her less and less as a leader, and more of a follower. That's not what I want in a president.

[Pastiche423]

12. Why would anyone from the left vote for Clinton?

If you would, please list reasons.

[VegasWolf]

18. Shrugging, because she has a (D) after her name?

[Pastiche423]

26. lol

Since no one else offered a reason, I guess that's it.

[xchrom]

14. hillary ''lbj'' clinton

it's not just her stance on iraq -- but nafta and other issues.

i hated her speech re: abortion.

altogether -- i don't want to see another clinton in the white house -- the whole bush, clinton, clinton, bush, bush dynasties are just too much for me.

[5thGenDemocrat]

19. I'm in 100 percent agreement with you, xchrom

My avatar notwithstanding -- LBJ dragged us into Vietnam, for sure. But he also pushed through Medicare, Medicaid, Aid to the Cities, Head Start, Clean Air, Clean Water, the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act -- and what all else? Hillary, AFAIC, has done less for the country than she's done for the Clinton dynasty. If the people of the good state of New York want her as a Senator, they're welcome to have her. I think she's an okay Senator -- just don't ask this Michiganian to vote for her for President.
We rag on GWB because he's the driving force behind this war, while his skanky, drunken, ho-bag daughters are safe under a basketball team somewhere. They'll never have to bleed for his grandeur unlike, potentially, my nephew -- currently serving in the USAF and unlike my brother or myself or my aunt (sarge43 here at DU) did during LBJ's war. Senator Clinton is worse than a chickenhawk -- not only because she is an enabler but because she never, as a spoiled little 1960s Goldwater girl from the suburbs of Chicago, even had to face the possibility of being drafted. Now, she wants to be more macho (and WAY more hypocritical) than thou.
Meanwhile, just like the Skank Twins, precious, perfect little Chelsea hasn't strapped on an M-16, either. I didn't mind Bill being a draft-dodger because he wasn't looking to get American or Iraqi kids killed. Hillary not only supported this war at the beginning, she likes it now a bit too much for my taste -- just so long as Little Precious Curlytop doesn't have to fight in it.
She'll never get my vote. That isn't an idle threat to the Democrats -- it's a promise. If they don't like it, don't nominate that woman.
John
US Army (SigC), 1974-76. And I was a soldier -- not a gladiator.
It is now three days, 17 hours and 19 minutes to FUNDAY. Still not too late to ask for directions.

[xchrom]

21. i don't think we're alone, 5thgen.

[5thGenDemocrat]

22. Yeah, and seeing as how I live in Saginaw, Michigan...

Don't get me started on NAFTA, either. It's done more to kill industry in this town than anything else I can think of. Thanks heaps, Bill. Hope the big, fat check from your corporate masters cleared A-OK, because our unemployments checks did.
John
No more Clintons. No more Bushes, neither.
It is now three days, 15 hours and 42 minutes to FUNDAY. I'm buying the beer to wash the tears away.

[wordpix2]

30. I agree, I think we need Gore in the WH next time if he'll run. Gore-Fein

gold

[jahyarain]

15. Hillary can't win. period.

placating the middle right will not win her any votes. she seems to have forgotten SHE'S HILLARY CLINTON! much like i would vote for my dog's left nut before ANY repuke, the moderate right would vote for Ralph Nader before voting for ANYONE with the last name Clinton. and because of her pandering to them, Liberals, like myself, will never vote for her. i used to have a lot of respect for her. and would have voted for her six years ago, but her attempted appeasement of what i consider all things evil makes her a liability to the democratic party. but i'm not a dem so what do i know. dems NEED to concentrate more on independents. even rover knows that.

edited because i'm illiterate

[IndianaGreen]

20. Hurrah for Kerry, Boooh for Hillary!

Add to this Hillary's recent move to the right on abortion rights, posted on another LBN thread, and you will see for yourself how a very talented and smart politician can be capable of self-destruction.

[NoodleyAppendage]

23. A Vote for Hillary in 2008 is a Vote for the Repukes to Win.

I will NEVER vote for Hillary, and I suspect many Dems feel the same way. If the Dems want to lose 2008, they will put Hillary up as the Dem Presidential candidate.

J

[americanstranger]

25. BTW, TBA sold out Code Pink today.

According to Susie Madrak at Suburban Guerilla...

Fearing that CODEPINK would openly confront Clinton on her pro-war policy, the organizers of Take Back America entered into negotiations with CODEPINK a few days before the conference. “We had lengthy discussions where they pleaded with us not to protest during her keynote breakfast address,” explained Gael Murphy, one of the cofounders of CODEPINK. “Instead, we were told that we could distribute flyers explaining Hillary’s pro-war position to the crowd inside and outside the hotel, and we would be called on to ask her the first question after the speech. We agreed.”

However, when CODEPINK showed up on Tuesday morning in advance of Clinton’s speech, the security guards refused to allow them to pass out flyers, even outside the hotel. “Take Back America violated the agreement from the moment we arrived,” said Ms. Murphy. “Even though we had a table inside the conference, burly security guards blocked us and informed us that it was a private event, that we were not welcome, and they escorted us out of the building. We telephoned the conference staff who then told us that we couldn’t enter the hotel, couldn’t leaflet the event, the hallways—anywhere. They went back on their word and tried to quash even peaceful, respectful dissent.”

A few CODEPINK women did manage to get inside the breakfast, however, as they were legitimate ticket holders. Once inside, the CODEPINK women soon realized that they had been deceived about the second part of the agreement: They would not be allowed to ask the first question, or any question, because Hillary Clinton would not be fielding questions from the audience. “We were really upset that we had been lied to by Take Back America, and that there would be no space at this ‘progressive conference’ to have a dialogue with Hillary Clinton about the most critical issue of our time—the war in Iraq,” said Katie Heald, DC coordinator for CODEPINK.

http://susiemadrak.com/2006/06/13/16/50/code-pink-punked/

--

Doesn't sound like Mrs. Clinton is too interested in 'facing' certain critics, does it?

- as

[IndianaGreen]

27. Hillary believes in First Amendment Zones, just like Bush does

There isn't a democratic bone in Hillary.

[Robbien]

28. Heck her husband invented the practice

Wouldn't doubt she had some influence in getting the practice started.

[dysfunctional press]

31. FUCK the "middle-of-the-road voters"...

i'm a left liberal who is content to vote with my conscious, and wait for the "middle-of-the-road" voters to come to me. the repuke-lite strategery is just plain immoral.

i will not vote for anyone who supports the war or the dlc center-party line.

when th pendulum comes back our way, i want it to swing FAR to the left, not stop in the middle.

[nealmhughes]

33. Ask the people in the South what they think of Billary:

NAFTA destroyed our textile industry. It made perfect sense for Canada to join and maybe Costa Rica. But Mexico? We knew what was going to happen and it did. Free trade ought to be a reward between countries who are on common ground politically. Hell, even Portugal had to wait forever to get into the EU!
Maybe Hillary will be cutting a ribbon at the new China Motor Corp. (transferred from GM in 2010 lock stock and wingnut from Detroit) grand opening...
What happened to health care, Hill? Remember that? Oh, people said mean things to you about that so you gave up, didn't you?
Been to any good funerals in Arlington lately? It is quite simple to get there, you can actually walk from the Capitol. Jackie Kennedy did in 1963.

[lakeguy]

38. hey, there's how you win an election! throw a little bit to this side

and little bit to the other side and manage to piss everyone off in the process! it's only a "difficult conversation" because she is toeing the line.