Who do we think we are?

I'm sorry if people feel that we shouldn't meddle in the Iraqi "government", but we need to if we ever want a stable Iraq. The man is anti-sunni, and pro-militia. His military officials are corrupt, and stuck in their ways, and I have yet to speak to an Iraqi citizen of any sect who thinks he is doing a good job.

There are millions of people around the Globe who believe the world is going to – in a Handbasket.
And no matter who the audience is the majority all give credit to the Republican party.

What is this, Rosie and Lizzy all over again?

Hillary says one thing 4 years ago to seem tough and because of the political climate at the time, and others 4 years later are spinning her words like she said something else.

Since I am part of the right wing conpiracy, I will remind all of you nostalgic Clintonistas that every word and DEED she has uttered and done will be used in ads against her.

Looking forward to it.

I have read most of your blogs and tend to agree with most.

Regarding your latest, I disagree with #3.

To stay in Iraq "as long as needed" seems open-ended and infinite. Unforunately we don't have an infinite # of troops. How will we (America) recognize the end game and know when the "war" is over?

You commented:

"Since you say "proof" of her lying, manipulating and pandering is never shown, read below from a speech in December of 2003:"

I appreciate your time in posting Senator Clinton's Speech. I hadn't heard it and didn't have the opportunity to read it previously.

I do see this issue through another window however. And that is, I believe every politician and every citizen would have a very different view of any situation over the course of a four year period. And given the issue at hand is a Very Complex and Controversial War, situational changes take place at a very fast and steady pace. And assessments of the situation change accordingly.

Therefore I really don't believe it is fair to expect that an experienced politician would hold the same view on an issue four years later. In fact, if they did wouldn't we be criticizing that politician's credibility and leadership? And wouldn't we be suggesting that they should be re-evaluating the situation on a day to day basis or at least on a more current level?

You are not justifying or contradicting those words as being my thoughts, as they were wholly hers.

President Bush has a nice simple message: Stay the course. Three words. Easy to remember. All the Republican candidates seem to agree with this position.

There’s a simple version from the anti-war crowd, too: Bring the troops home. Four words. Simple. Several of the more left-leaning Democrats are sticking to this sound bite.

The problem with the first course is that it isn’t working, and the problem with the second is that it won’t work. Honest members of both parties have positions of far more subtlety. Sound bites don’t solve problems, statesmanship does. I will defend Senator Clinton on the charge that her position has been inconsistent. It hasn’t. It’s just too complicated to stuff into a slogan.

Tom of Dedham, Mass (a worthy adversary) criticizes Senator Clinton on four points, and since I agree with her on all of them, I’ll defend them one by one:

1) “She doesn't regret voting to authorize the president to go to war”
Right. She didn’t encourage Bush to go to war. In fact she said it was a bad idea. (Read the speech). She voted to give the President a tool to use against an enemy. That Bush completely misused that tool is not her fault. Bush bungled the war, not Clinton.

2) “she's "delighted" that Saddam Hussein was captured”
As am I. As are all freedom-loving people. But that doesn’t mean it was worth thousands of lives, trillions of dollars and the turmoil in Iraq right now. There were better ways of dealing with Saddam than this madness.

3) “American troops should stay in Iraq for as long as they're needed”
Right. We shouldn’t have gone to war, but we did. It’s (partially) our mess and we need to help clean it up. They’re our troops and we need to support them.

4) “and the postwar fight to secure Iraq is crucial.”
See #3. We shouldn’t be an occupying force, but we can’t just pretend we didn’t invade. If we let Iraq disintegrate into total civil war the world will blame us forever. We need to get out, but we need to take responsibility for our own actions.

It’s easy to shout simple slogans. It’s harder to offer real world solutions. I think Senator Clinton is trying to do the latter. I think Senator Obama is, too. Frankly, at this point I think Senator Biden has the best plan in his concept of soft-partitions in a federated Iraq and I encourage you all to look at his ideas, but you can see how far his subtle complexity has taken him in fund-raising and the polls.
Senator Clinton has enough political skills to know she’d be better off just trashing the Bush administration and calling for total withdrawal. That she hasn’t done so isn’t hypocrisy, it is political courage. She hasn’t flipped positions. She’s refused to reduce a complex issue to a simple sound bite, and sadly she’s paying a price for doing so. Senator Clinton is being subtle for the good of the nation. I hope it doesn’t cost her the Presidency.

Since you say "proof" of her lying, manipulating and pandering is never shown, read below from a speech in December of 2003:

After the capture of Saddam Hussein, the senator from New York laid out her own views on Iraq, in speeches and in interviews. She articulated sharp criticisms of the Bush administration while staking out an unapologetically hawkish position on Iraq.

"I was thrilled that Saddam Hussein had finally been captured," she said in a Monday speech to the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. "Like many of you, I was glued to the television and the radio as I went about my daily business. We owe a great debt of gratitude to our troops, to the president, to our intelligence services, to all who had a hand in apprehending Saddam. Now he will be brought to justice, and we hope that the prospects for peace and stability in Iraq will improve." Clinton made four key points: She doesn't regret voting to authorize the president to go to war; she's "delighted" that Saddam Hussein was captured; American troops should stay in Iraq for as long as they're needed, and at higher levels than present, if necessary; and the postwar fight to secure Iraq is crucial.

Why is CNN posting political stmts from non-American Muslim Preachers supporting Hillary from the UN while not posting historical facts about her so called "experience" sent in from American voters?

Who needs more proof of CNN’s bias reporting techniques..??

C'mon Senator, a candidate for the president of the United States shouldn't always say what they're thinking,(to coin a phrase), isn't that right?

A non-functional government that cannot produce a political settlement, is Senator Clinton commenting on foreign or domestic policy?

Isn't she echoing Carl Levin? A day late and a dollar short again!

She says "Progress will only come from political reconciliation and compromise from the Iraqis themselves," she said in the statement. "Given that reality, the President’s escalation strategy is not succeeding."

I agree with the first part of that statement, you can't force change where the other party is definitely not willing.
But, perhaps the "escalation strategy" is a prerequisite to setting the environment to accomplish the first part. She said it was working, but now it isn't?

Have a good day, vote your conscience,

Chip

Is she saying that the Maliki government can not maintain the same objectivity/lack of bias that she maintains despite all her campaign contributions from lobbyists?

A more unifying figure? Look at the candidates we are having? Are there any candidates that we consider a unifying figure? I personally like to see Obama as president, but then for other people, he is not qualified to be President.

There will be conflict no matter what. A unifying figure – dream on. Even Jesus Christ has a difficult time unifying people.

If each of us shows some restraint in doing and saying mean things to other people, then maybe it will become a better world – but it requires work from each of us. No one leader is going to solve the problem for us. However, they can inspire us – and that's what I see in Obama.

I just saw the CNN reporter on Anderson Cooper's show talking about Hillary's speech at the VFW summit and he referred to Obama and Edwards as "her challengers". Doesn't a challenger go against a winner/champion?
...CNN has already declared Hillary the winner.

Why don't you all read what Sen. Carl Levin had to say after returning from Iraq:

WASHINGTON (CNN) — The chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee is calling for a new government in Iraq, saying his trip there last week convinced him that Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki is too sectarian and cannot create a stable Iraq.

.....Levin visited Iraq with the ranking Republican on the committee, Sen. John Warner, R-Virginia. The two men issued a more nuanced joint statement together, saying that current Iraqi leaders may be facing their “last chance” and that if they fail the government and people need to judge “what actions should be taken…to form a true unity government.”

Remember that Hillary is also in the Armed Services Committee and Sens. Levin and Warner probably briefed her on their findings.

Hillary says that there is a "certain responsiblity in how you relate issues related to terrorism." Is it responsible for her to be calling for the ouster of Iraq's elected (more-or-less) leader at a time like this?

The situation in Iraq is probably beyond our control at this point anyway, so for Hillary to pretend that we just need to put another leader in place to solve all the problems is just as delusional as Bush and McCain - who she is sounding more and more like every day.

GO HILLARY!!!

Shawn from Atlanta, at the time of my posting this there were 28 responses here and 20 of them were against Hillary.

Sorry, it's not just 2 or 3 "guys" or only Republicans, it's "guys" and "girls" from both parties.

I know, it's part of the right-wing conspiracy.

And for the record David, Salinas, Ca, Hillary is wrong here big time, let them sort it out, we need them to make their own government legit or all of this will be for nothing.