Let The Conversation Begin

This was a great video seen on HotAir TV:


Technorati: Hillary Clinton

I Will End This War

If there was ever any question that Senator Clinton is a cut-and-run Democrat, then here is the proof:

"You have to have 60 votes to cap troops, to limit funding to do anything. If we in Congress don't end this war before January 2009, as president, I will."

There you have it. Mark my word - she will to do anything to just get out of Iraq and appease to groups like Code Pink.

Technorati: Hillary Clinton

Senator Clinton's Shifting Views On Iraq...

...Or the "I was for the war before I was against it" routine.

In the news today:

“This was his decision to go to war with an ill-conceived plan and an incompetently executed strategy,” the Democratic senator from New York said her in [sic] initial presidential campaign swing through Iowa.

"We expect him to extricate our country from this before he leaves office" in January 2009, the former first lady said.

Emphasis mine. I'll pass over the last statement - Mrs. Clinton does not want to have to deal with the war when (as she hopes) she takes office in January 2009. Note that she said that the decision was his to make. She states elsewhere

"'This is not a vote for pre-emptive war.' I said that on the floor of the Senate. I said that we should not go to war unless we have allies... If we knew then what we know now, there never would have been a vote. I never would have voted to give this president that authority."

Note that Senator Clinton said that we should have allies and that she was misled by the information provided by President Bush. As I have posted elsewhere, President Bush inherited his Iraq policy from President Clinton and since we know that Bill and Hillary were "two for the price of one", she most likely knew the same things that her husband did. If nothing else, she believe the same faulty intelligence that President Clinton gave to the American people

But let's take the YouTube Delorean (see video below) back to March 6, 2003 when Senator Clinton meets with a group called Code Pink just after voting to authorize President Bush to go to war with Iraq and just weeks before the Coalition's invasion.

First of all, I love their opening theme song!!! Senator Clinton enters at 1:41 into the video. Note how she wears BLUE to speak to the Code PINK group in 2003... And the spokes-lady talking at 4:00 in has Hillary's name spelled wrong on her shirt (Hilary)!

Now, compare Hillary's comments there regarding her research into the war (8:52-9:20) - stating that she voted as she did "after carefully reviewing the information and intelligence I had available, people whose opinions I trusted" with the current statements. This flies pretty squarely in the face against what the Senator is telling us today - that she was misled by one man and one man alone!

See also the question at 10:14 and 11:06 where Hillary is asked if the US should go in unilaterally. Hillary's answer begins at 11:15. Hillary is strong and doesn't give way to the disagreement by Code Pink. The question is basically "Whose responsibility is it to disarm Saddam?" Senator Clinton said (11:47) that

"I do not believe that, given the attitudes of many people in the world community today, that there would be a willingness to take on very difficult problems were it not for the United States' leadership. And I'm talking specifically about what had to be done in Bosnia and Kosovo where my husband could not get a Security Council resolution to save the Kosovar Albanians from ethnic cleansing. And we did it alone as the United States , and we had to do it alone. It would have been far preferable if the Russians and others had agreed to do it through the United Nations. They would not."

At 14:30ish they started railing on the Senator as she was leaving!! Wow! - it's good to see how Senator Clinton was trying to distance herself from that group - she wouldn't even take one of their pink shirts. I will give her some credit for that!


Technorati: Hillary Clinton, Iraq

The Cheney Family on Hillary Clinton

From a Newsmax story, we have the following quotes:

[VP Dick] Cheney, asked in an interview on CNN whether Clinton would make a good president, replied, "No, I don't."

Why not? "Because she's a Democrat. I don't agree with her philosophically and from a policy standpoint."

I think that's one of my fundamental issues with Senator Clinton. But the Newsmax article also referenced a quote by Liz Cheney, the Vice President's daughter. That story can actually be found at The Union Leader. I like this quote in particular:

Anyone who has watched her remarkable trajectory can have no doubt that she'll do whatever it takes to win the Presidency. I wish she felt the same way about the war.

In fairness, Clinton, with her proposal for arbitrary caps on troop levels and hemming and hawing about her vote for the war resolution, has company on both sides of the aisle. Sen. Joseph Lieberman is the only national Democrat showing any courage on this issue. We Republicans -- with help from senators such as Chuck Hagel -- seem ready to race the Democrats to the bottom.

She then goes on to list some considerations for those who are wanting to cut and run.

This is what we here at Anybody Buy Hillary are about. We have nothing against the Senator personally. We just feel that she does not represent the direction we should take for this country.

Technorati: Hillary Clinton, CNN

Senator Clinton - The History Revisionist

After former President Clinton's tirade on Fox News last week, Senator Clinton has now come out in support of her husband's policies on Al-Qaeda. Specifically, Senator Clinton stated:

"I'm certain that if my husband and his national security team had been shown a classified report entitled 'Bin Laden Determined To Attack Inside the United States' he would have taken it more seriously than history suggests it was taken by our current president and his national security team."

But, it sure didn't take long for the vast right-wing conspiracy to call her out on that. For we can quickly find the following document signed by President Clinton in 1998: "The Intelligence Community has strong indications that Bin Laden intends to conduct or sponsor attacks inside the United States."

I guess that's just another one of those surprises that Senator Clinton has been hit with by her husband. It's really sad. America, do you want a President like Senator Clinton who is in such denial that she would try to rewrite history in this manner to save the legacy of her name? I hope to hear that she retracts her statement after it's been brought to light that her husband not only saw an intelligence document but signed it - he was well aware of Bin Laden's aspirations with 2 years to go in his final term. And there would still be the USS Cole attack. This is pure political posturing. With less than 2 months to go until the mid-term elections, the Democrats are really trying to show that they "tried" to do something about terrrorism. The DNC knows that they need to appear as war hawks or they will lose again. If they want to win, I don't think they need to focus on their incompetence at handling the "law & order" problem that they perceived terrorism and Bin Laden as being before 9/11.

Further, I still think the best way to defeat Senator Clinton in 2008 is to defeat her in 2006! How is her campaign going in New York? Anyone wish to comment on that? I haven't heard much about it.

Technorati: Hillary Clinton, Fox News

Senator Clinton...so exactly what DO you propose?

The Washington Post carried this story on Saturday.

Senator Clinton was in Kentucky at a Democratic fundraiser trying to help the Democrats reverse the Republican control of the state. Her usual talking points included President Bush "ignoring an ailing health care system" and giving tax cuts to the wealthy. Tired talking points, but Democrat standards nonetheless. By the way, Senator Clinton will revive healthcare as one of her major platform issues in 2008. You watch and see.

But neither of those issues are up for consideration here. During her speech criticizing President Bush on the war in Iraq she stated:

"The time has come for the administration to stop serving up platitudes and present a plan for finishing this war with success and honor. I reject a rigid timetable that the terrorists can exploit, and I reject an open timetable that has no ending attached to it."

"Instead, I think we need a plan for winning and concluding this war, and the president can begin by taking responsibilities for the false assurances, faulty evidence and mismanagement of this war."

Ok, this is nothing we've heard before right? Or is it? Look at the second sentence...closely. Exactly what DO you propose Senator Clinton. Either you have a rigid timetable for leaving Iraq or you have a more open timetable that is dependent on the conditions in Iraq. Or did you forget your comments from November where you stated that we needed to wait on the results of the December 15 elections in Iraq?

Exactly, where is your plan Senator Clinton? You voted to approve the actions in Iraq based on the same intelligence that the President had been looking at. And before you start criticizing the intelligence, remember that HINDSIGHT is the only vision that is truly 20/20. Lastly, on the issue of mismanagement, um...shouldn't your criticism be aimed at the Generals actually waging the war? I mean, they're the ones on the ground actually managing the war. Ohhh...but accusing them of mismanaging the war would mean you don't support the troops. Can't have that, now, can we?

Blaming Bush for your own vote to go to war is FAR easier than taking responsibility isn't it?

Senator Clinton agrees with President Bush... or does she?

This story from the AP is interesting:

RYE BROOK, N.Y. - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said Monday that an immediate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq would be "a big mistake."

Say what? I thought Senator Clinton disagreed with the Bush Administration on the whole Iraq war.

Well, she does:

"It will matter to us if Iraq totally collapses into civil war, if it becomes a failed state the way Afghanistan was, where terrorists are free to basically set up camp and launch attacks against us," she said.

Or does she?

At the same time, Clinton said the Bush administration's pledge to stay in Iraq "until the job is done" amounts to giving the Iraqis "an open-ended invitation not to take care of themselves."

Now wait a minute, I'm confused. Which is it? Is Senator Clinton FOR our actions in Iraq or AGAINST our actions thus wanting the US to pull out. Wait a minute, the end of the article....what's that?

Clinton, who is running for re-election to the Senate and is seen as a likely presidential candidate in 2008, suggested that the United States wait for Iraq's Dec. 15 elections for an indication about how soon the Iraqis can take over.

"Until they vote for a government, I don't know that we will have adequate information about how prepared they are," she said.

Ohhhhh, now I get it. Senator Clinton is pulling plays from her husband's playbook. She's not quite sure which position to take until she sees which way the wind is blowing. So watch the news. Depending on the results of the Iraqi election in December, and depending on how the press reacts to that AND DEPENDING on how Senator Clinton can use if for her eventual Presidential bid, we should eventually know where she stands....maybe.