23 Comments so far

1. russwollman March 15th, 2007 1:58 pm

   Better to read the last couple of paragraphs in this story first. Then go back and read the rest. Much as I’d like to see a woman running the Exec branch, would I vote for this candidate? Not even if she were the only choice.

   Only a new seed will yield a new crop. Clinton’s roots do not run terribly deep.

2. namvet67 March 15th, 2007 2:02 pm

   Hillary has no plans to derail the military-industrial-media complex from the suicidal track that it is on. At least until her daughter is asked to serve. Bring back the draft and watch how fast we get out of Iraq.
   Hoa Binh

3. kittyladyoregon March 15th, 2007 2:58 pm

   I agree with Russ above. Never would I vote for this person who to me is touched by the same corruption that all corporate candidates are. Her husband is really tight with the Bushes, and I do not trust either Bill or Hillary to have the peoples welfare at heart. They are in it for the money and power. Most everyone I know is sick of this war and sick of the bushclintonbush dynasties.

4. Ron March 15th, 2007 3:27 pm

   If we had gone in with a different attitude? If we had committed this war crime with more troops so that the looting could have been stopped or limited, then it would have been OK? This candidate who will swear to uphold the U.S. Constitution if elected is telling us in advance that that document is a meaningless piece of paper. The occupation is an ongoing war crime, renewed daily, and the best this candidate can offer is a lower profile, perhaps fewer and less intense war crimes?

5. gmkaake March 15th, 2007 3:40 pm

   The continued occupation of Iraq is the BEST Al Queda recruiting device ever invented!

   And what about what the Iraqi people want? The Sunnis and Shiites may not agree on many things, but one thing they do agree on, they want American troops to announce a scheduled withdrawal. So much for democracy in the Middle East.

   And I don’t see any mention of solving perhaps the root issue in the middle east - the Israeli/Palestinian issue.

   Finally, why would we want to continue wasting lives and tax dollars for the sake of American oil interests? Let’s start investing in renewable energy. Hello?

   Sorry, I know I’m speaking to the choir. She has no vision. No real leadership. Very disappointing.

6. jjpeter March 15th, 2007 4:06 pm

   Sorry Hillary, but you’re becoming such a disappointment, just another republican lite.

   Why don’t you do something noble and tell us why we are really in Iraq?

   Oil.

   Terrorism? A side irritant to the real show. She’s been “talked” to, she’s one of them. The 2001 secret energy meeting with cheney set the table for the ongoing horror show we see everyday.

   Read what Antonia Juhasz has to say on the bush/cheney agenda, and how the right has set us upon a path of imperial adventurism that ignores history, gives other cultures the big middle finger, and aligns the worlds industrial powers against one another over the future global war for energy.

   http://www.thebushagenda.net/article.php?id=43

7. gsemsel March 15th, 2007 4:23 pm

   The true colours are showing through. Too bad. Too sad.

8. judi March 15th, 2007 7:02 pm

   Sounds like Hillary is just lining herself with Republican voters as well as Democratic war mongers. She doesn’t have one original or creative idea on how to get our troops out of Iraq. I would like to see a woman President some day, but I don’t think this is the time and Hillary is just warmned over Clinton gruel.

9. orbit7er March 15th, 2007 7:39 pm

   Finally this reveals Hillary for the hypocrite she really is. Wait until my daughter and all her friends who had been leaning to Hillary as a “woman’s candidate” get wind of this. The younger generation is totally opposed to this War because although there is no draft at the moment they know it could be coming to provide the canon fodder for this war for Oil. Hillary has just lost the nomination with this interview and statement.
   All her corporate dollars will not win her younger people’s votes after this.

10. hetzer March 15th, 2007 7:44 pm

    There is scant hope, even when you consider that she is a craven opportunist.

    It is more important to agitate than vote anyway.

    My car signs include: Iran Knows That We Are the Nazis This Time. Tax the Rich-Take Away Their License to Steal. Argue Politics and Religion - It Might Save Your Life.

11. iammyself March 15th, 2007 8:26 pm

    “Mrs. Clinton said the intelligence estimate was based on a “faulty premise” because it did not take into account the sort of “phased redeployment” plan she was advocating. But she acknowledged that under her strategy American troops would remain virtual bystanders if Shiites and Sunnis killed each other in sectarian attacks. “That may be inevitable,” she said. “And it certainly may be the only way to concentrate the attention of the parties.””

    So…she would force American troops to watch as genocide continued? I think the troops would revolt and she would be facing a junta. Hopefully, Hillary sealed her fate with this one.

    This person must NEVER have the reins of power.

12. PJD March 15th, 2007 9:10 pm

    jjpeter wrote:

    “Why don’t you do something noble and tell us why we are really in Iraq?

    Oil.”

    Read again - at the bottom pf paragraph 5, she is quoted: “It is right in the heart of the oil region”…“It is directly in opposition to our interests, to the interests of regimes, to Israel’s interests.”

    So, there you have it. They are rigging this thing up to be utterly phony mockery of an election.

13. ezeflyer March 15th, 2007 9:11 pm

    This is another of endless examples of corporate conservative Democrat’s rubber stamping of BushCo and the Republican agenda. Fool me once… how about about every time? Do we keep voting for Dems and praying for the best when they won’t represent us? Or are we finally so sick and tired of being taken for granted that we will tell them to go jump in a lake?

    We can change things by switching to the Green Party, the largest, fastest growing and international third party that includes ALL our progressive values.

14. Peacenik March 15th, 2007 10:37 pm

    I gave up on Hillary some months ago when she made a comment about not rushing to get out of Iraq.

    I think it’s high time America nationalized its oil. From what I understand we’re the third highest exporting oil company in the world. Further, I’ve heard, America and Great Britain are the only two countries in the world who have privatized oil. Everyone else, it seems, considers oil as a national commodity, and the profits are used to help everyone, not just those at the very highest levels of power.

    I like the idea of returning college education to pre-Reagan standards. I like the idea of taking care of the homeless, the mentally ill, and all those war vets who have and who have yet to come home.

    We could have universal health care. We could take care of our environment.

    And for anyone who argues that nationalizing the oil companies would mean loss of expertise, I suggest with the billions of dollars of revenue private oil companies made we could afford to pay decent honest working people to take care of refineries, etc.

    We could afford to take back our ports now being “protected” by Dubai.

    It’s time to take care of our children. Since Americans don’t seem to want to practice birth control, we need money to make sure these children grow up strong and intelligence, so that they can make their lives better. We should all be working to make our lives better, not just monetarily richer.

15. susanparker March 15th, 2007 10:42 pm

    I’m delighted Clinton spoke out so boldly and frankly — nothing she said surprised me, nor do I agree with her or her plan — but the country needs to move beyond simple flag waving and “wanting” to bring the troops home. We have to talk about the 130,000 independent contractors and the unfullfilled “reconstruction” contracts. We have to talk about those bases and that embassy.

    As someone on another board noted regarding Clinton’s statement … she never mentions whether the Iraqis have any say in any of this.

    Her description of an occupying force that stays safely behind the scenes is chillingly neocolonial in ambition and our failure to secure virtually ANY foothold in Iraq — desperate and destitute as they are — in 3 years of occupation does not bode well for some future Clintonian occupation.

    There is going to be a lot of effort to somehow “salvage” something from this effort, sweetheart deals, reconstruction contracts, those bases. I think it’s rather doubtful the Iraqis are much interested, however, they deserve and need to know about the imperial ambitions of the people who would be president. They need and want to know about those bases, that promised reconstruction, oh, and about our intentions with regard to Iran.

    Americans don’t care … just like most never understood the immorality of Vietnam, just that our personnel were dying in a war we were losing and the the draft loomed over their children’s future.

    I keep thinking about Chernus’s piece last week regarding the post-vietnam backlash. Since Vietnam we have not had to create a peace … America is in for an education.

16. BogusStory March 16th, 2007 1:37 am

    If you’ve followed the news carefully, you might notice that Hillary’s plan for Iraq is exactly Bush’s “stay the course” from a few months ago.

    The fact that Bush now wants to increase troops is the only new idea being proposed. Hillary’s plan is basically no on the troop increase and instead to initiate a troop decrease (which could be 1 guy coming home).

17. Karol Klein March 16th, 2007 6:06 am

    Another dog of war has spoken,give Chelsey a rifle and send HER over there, not a chance.

18. noun March 16th, 2007 10:15 am

    I have heard lots of folks take issue with Hillary for several things lately, most of whom have been those in rather transparent Republican dress and party motive. The comments here seem to be of the exact same ilk.

    Like it or not we have a problem in Iraq that needs a solution. The cause of the problem is clearly a series of strategic errors by the Bush Bunch that has left us and the Iraqi’s with a problem of imported terrorists that are hell bent on the task of killing us. Our task is to kill them before they can kill us.

    Just what do you find wrong with the plan she has offered?

    Our presence there is not of her doing, even though she did add her signature to a document that provided the authority to use force, IF NECESSARY, also based on the provisions that certain stated claimed FACTS were indeed facts.

    Read the language of the legislation and try to understand what the word “Whereas” means.

    The area does contain a number of people who have been attracted to it, some of them invited, others who have seized an opportunity to victimize the locals into providing cover for their intended assassination of our people. People who have been sent there by the present government, and who continue to be prime targets for the terrorist’s purpose.

    She rightfully points out that had we provided a reasonable level of civilian protection when we entered their nation, many of those terrorists would have not now be there and be able to pick us as their targets.

    Yes, the war was a mistake and the manner in which is was conducted was also a series of mistakes that has nurtured a number of home grown terrorists in Iraq.

    She offers a few reasonable ideas about what we can do about it.

    All you offer is ridicule! Do you all use the same “Golden Microphone”too?

19. skysage March 16th, 2007 1:39 pm

    Can’t believe this woman.
    She is beginning to sound like John McCain who changes his position every time the political wind blows in a different direction. I simply do not trust her. She was a real hawk for the war and has never apologized for making a stupid blunder voting for it. Thousands of us were already aware of Bush’s deceiption about the war. How did Hillary not know this. No way will I vote for this woman. She is truly not a democratic candidate. Give me someone with conviction all the way and sustained integrity and who is not afraid to stick her neck out for a true democracy.

20. Commonreader March 16th, 2007 2:54 pm

    Remember you saw in a NYT story in March 2007, both Cllinton AND Obama say some troops must stay in Iraq.

    Neither of these will get my vote.

    Now can we please start seeing in the NYT the thoughts of other announced or new candidates or some third party voices?

21. Mr. Tuttle March 17th, 2007 11:37 am

    Neo-con lite. She and Obama are both members of the war party. They are puppets of the corporate powers. They have both sold their souls. How else can you explain their inability to state clearly that homosexual life stlye is not immoral? They are puppets. They will not help the common man and women citizens in this country. They will not repeal the effects of the Patriot Act I & II and the military commisions act that took away habeaus corpus. I woulod love to hear from anyone that believes that they will and have proof of it.

    Republicans are the problem.
    Democrats are not the solution.
    It’s time to form a new government of the people by the people.

    One last thing we need to repeal the act that has allowed the corporations to be treated as “a person” under the law. This is what has taken our country and our rights away from us.

22. SFisher March 19th, 2007 5:56 pm

    After her husbands disastrous presidency, I am convinced that Hillary Clinton is just plain dumb, or else blinded by her ambition. Probably both. Next, she’ll make Condoleeza Rice her running mate.

    If Bill Clinton had resigned when he should have and given Al Gore two years as President, Gore would have been a shoo-in in 2000, and the mess we have on our hands now could have been largely avoided.

    Now, with the Wilson/Plame expose, the growing revelation of the illegalities of the war in Iraq, Hillary has the temerity to say she will perpetuate it?! Why not? Was her husband complicit in the case? Indirectly, was she?

    Recently, Hillary trivialized the war in Iraq, at great expense to the integrity of our troops, saying, in regards to her adulterous husband, that she has “stayed the course”. Ha ha. This, Hillary, is insipid. Have we forgotten Vince Foster, or WHITEWATER, her shredding of documents, and, with her feet to the coals, she could not “recall” anything? When Reagan couldn’t recall, he had a legitimate excuse — Alzheimers. What’s Hillary’s?

    And let’s remember, it was Hillary who encouraged her husband, then president, to bomb the daylights out of Kosovo, granting Halliburton a fat, no-bid contract there. And Bill Clinton’s involvement in Iraq? Has anyone wondered why he now follows Daddy Bush like an old hound dog?

    In 1999, President Bill Clinton committed one of the greatest crimes against humanity of our time when he refused to lift the sanctions he had imposed on Iraq. The UN, France, Germany, and other countries presented Mr. Clinton with a detailed report submitted by UNICEF which concluded that 500,000 infants and children under the age of five years old had died of malnutrition and starvation because of the economic embargoes and sanctions imposed by President Clinton. Still, he would not yield. Mrs. Clinton, you have no business considering yourself presidential material. Your husband, who exploited his position as president, his trust as a husband, and his respect as a father, was not a man to “stay the course” with. His exploitation of a woman not much older than his own daughter borders on his being a pedophile.

    We need a President who makes the best interest of America and her people his (or her) priority. We need someone with a clean track record who sees peace more profitable than war.

    The Clintons have disgraced America long enough.

23. ezeflyer March 20th, 2007 12:42 pm

    If “It’s the economy stupid”, Clinton’s was the polar opposite of BushCo’s. Whatever else he did or failed to do, we should at least give him credit for that.

Join the discussion:

You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)