Besides that fact the her agenda for "common good" makes my head want to explode as I explained in a previous post back in October as well as giving my reasons why, we also have Hillary's own scandal ridden past, some having to do with her husband and some not. We also have Hillary's own voting record which seems to change as the polls do.
NOW, we have her spewing forth her rhetoric about Iraq, via NYT:
“I’m really passionate about getting the administration’s attention because they hold most of the cards,” Mrs. Clinton said during an interview in her Senate office here. “And I don’t want to keep losing these young men and women.”
Her new political offensive on Iraq came one day after Senator Barack Obama of Illinois announced that he had formed an exploratory committee for a presidential bid and three days after another likely rival, former Senator John Edwards, took an indirect swipe at Mrs. Clinton and other members of Congress for not doing more to oppose the war in Iraq.
Lets take a look at her "plan" for success in Iraq, compliments of Debbie over at Right Truth:
Hillary Clinton has finally presented her plan for the war on terror. After her trip to Iraq, complete with presidential-looking photo op with Iraqi leaders, she has decided (1) Afghanistan needs more troops; (2) Iraq needs less (or no) troops; (3) our troops need to be financed; (4) financing to the Iraqis needs to be cut off. Funny, I didn't hear one word from her about winning the war, or about victory, or the consequences of pulling troops out of Iraq. This just proves my belief that politicians should not be in charge of wars.
Back to the NYT article, what stand exactly does Hillary take?
Mrs. Clinton offered sharp criticism of the administration while also staking out two positions that might alienate antiwar Democrats: She said that she would oppose cutting off any funds for American troops and that she would not rush to set a deadline for withdrawal from Iraq.
Debbies right, no word so far on "winning" or "victory" or "success".
The senator described her philosophy about military power as one rooted in pragmatism. Regardless of the pressure from some liberals and antiwar Democrats, Mrs. Clinton said she was skeptical about embracing hard timetables and cutting off financing in Iraq, for instance, because they were not practically feasible.
“I am not for imposing a date — certain withdrawal date,” she said. “But don’t be mistaken, I am for ending this war as soon as possible.”
Now, let me be clear here. I am against a timeline for reasons previously stated and I am against defunding our troops....but this isn't about MY stand, that has been made clear from day one writing this blog. I believe we need to be successful...period.
This is about Hillary's stand and her desire to say the politically correct, stick with what is popular philosophy.
Sooooooo, she wants the war ended as soon as possible....don't we all? But she will not take a decisive "stand" on how to accomplish this and be successful.
On Iraq, she has never repudiated her vote in 2002 authorizing military action. But last month she said that she “certainly wouldn’t have voted” to go to war if she had the same information in 2002 that she does now.
Hillary also will not repudiate her vote in 2002, but she would have said no, with the knowledge she has now....isn't THAT repudiating her vote without having to do it officially...can you say "playing both sides?"
At different points in that speech, Mrs. Clinton made the cases both for and against the war resolution, saying it had “appeal to some” but was also “fraught with danger.”
Again, no stand here, and making it clear she stands on ....thats right....BOTH SIDES.
Mrs. Clinton was sharply critical of Iraq’s prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, saying she believed he had given her “lip service” during a meeting on Saturday about his government’s commitment to cooperating with the American mission there.
NEWSFLASH Hillary.... be happy he didn't kick you the hell out of his country. He owes YOU nothing, YOU have done nothing to help his safety NOR his confidence in this long hard battle he has been in... who cares if he gives YOU lipservice? Guess what, you ARE NOT the President and you have insulted the man publicly on numerous occasions. You are lucky he even agreed to speak to you.
In fact, as the NYT states, one of Hillary's bright ideas is to propose cutting funding for HIS security.
She announced that she would support the bipartisan resolution introduced Wednesday opposing Mr. Bush’s plan to send more troops to Baghdad. And, taking aim at uncooperative Iraqi leaders, she said her forthcoming legislation would cut off funds for their bodyguards and security services unless they did more to support American troops in Iraq.
Good for al-Maliki!!!!!!!!!
Then we have her show of silence on the Ellison controversy in which Goode took a stand, although I do not agree in full with his stand, and her silence about Keith Ellison's CAIR, Nation of Islam and the Flying Imam connections, yet her "camp" wants to raise the Muslim card on Obama for her political gambit in 2008?
This is the question Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s camp is asking about Sen. Barack Obama.
An investigation of Mr. Obama by political opponents within the Democratic Party has discovered that Mr. Obama was raised as a Muslim by his stepfather in Indonesia. Sources close to the background check, which has not yet been released, said Mr. Obama, 45, spent at least four years in a so-called Madrassa, or Muslim seminary, in Indonesia.
"He was a Muslim, but he concealed it," the source said. "His opponents within the Democrats hope this will become a major issue in the campaign."
The woman cannot MAKE a stand and stick to it because she is too busy looking to see what the polls tell her to do....the ONLY person that flip flops more than Hillary Clinton is John Kerry.....HEYYYYYYY, thats the ticket for 2008, Hillary/Kerry the party of flip flop!!!!!
For the record, I am not a big fan of Barack Obama either, but Hillary's games are as transparent as glass and she should be called on it.
Take a stand Hillary and stick to it.... you might want to lookup a little word called "principles", they would come in handy this next two years.
Via Amy Proctor we also should not forget that Hillary and Hubby was FOR Liberating Iraq before she was against it.
Bottom Line Up Front: The war in Iraq is not “Bush’s war”, it is America’s war and it has been since the early 1990’s. In 1998, then President Bill Clinton on the eve of presidential impeachment hearings signed into law The Iraq Liberation Act which committed U.S. money to supporting the overthrow of a dangerous Saddam Hussein and laid out U.S. policy as supporting a free Iraq.
For all my previous posts involving Hillary Clinton, click here, they are all on one page.