I Support Hillary's Position on Iran

Like many of you, I am concerned about what I am reading and hearing about the apparent interest in parts of the Bush White House to go to war against Iran. And like you, I believe that we Democrats must do everything we can to prevent Bush and Cheney from sending this country into another preemptive war. (I invite you to visit my website StopIranWar.com)

Fortunately, Hillary Clinton has been on the front lines in opposing any effort by the Bush administration to sidestep the Congress. Eight months ago, she took to the Senate floor to warn the President that he could not attack Iran without specific congressional authorization. She said then, long before other members of Congress stood up, "If the administration believes that any, any use of force against Iran is necessary the President must come to Congress to seek that authority."

Last week, Hillary voted for a non-binding resolution that designates the odious Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization in order to strengthen our diplomatic hand. On Monday, she joined Senator Jim Webb in co-sponsoring a bill that would prohibit the use of funds for military action in Iran without specific authorization by Congress.

I support Hillary in both these votes. She is committed to ending the unilateralism of the Bush-Cheney administration. She is a strong supporter of direct nuclear talks with Iran, because she believes that direct dialogue with our adversaries is a sign of strength and confidence, and a prerequisite to achieving America's goals and objectives.

She has been one of the leaders in the Senate in standing up to the Bush administration's dangerous approach to Iran. And as president she will reject the Bush administration's ideologically blinkered vision of the world that denies America the tools and the flexibility necessary to build and more peaceful and secure world.

Comments

[avergejoe]

GENERAL DONT BETRAY US!

[DANIELLECLARKE]

WES CLARK your a war monger in disguise. I will never ever donate to your site again. Hillary has the largest earmarks for the pentagon.

Your a waste and a loser and a liar and she or you will never get my vote

[TheDonald]

It's not a good thing when our dear Senator from NY is being supported on her votes by surrogates.

[johndordan]

Clark is embarrassing himself. Has he been offered the Veep job?

[Marlyn]

"Has he been offered the Veep job?"

I think that's a YES.

[k1mgy]

Hillary voted for another Bush war, and it took Mike Gravel, live and on stage, to bring it to her attention.

Then, she chuckled in her characteristically disembodied way to a pathetic non-answer.

Yuck, yuck, yuck. Will it be so humorous when the bombs start to fall?

Wesley Clark is, first thing, a military fellow. He has training and appreciation for war. He's against the IRAN war, but only if it's carried out by the current maladministration. It'll be better done by Clinton and Wesley will be there to lead the charge.

To Armageddon.

[bethinCary]

I would like to know why Hils' position is to deter Iran from nuclear weaponry-she voted for nuclear weapons in her cluster bomb vote-and they will in all likely hood be used should Cheney try to illegally invade Iran.

[vippy]

Whatever happens, we need a way to hold the people accountable after the fact. If they would know this they would not jump into such
commitments. After the Iraq War is done we should take inventory and who done what and they would have to answer. That only makes sense. Hillary, who said in February, she will
bring the troops home and in March changed her
mind, no, I won't forget it. Hillary is just
more of the same. She does not have the attributes of a serious, accountable president with leadership capabilities.

[Marlyn]

"After the Iraq War is done" ???

I am wondering if it will ever be done.

[Wooty]

Wes, I love you, but I think you're dead wrong about Hillary. She voted for military action against Iraq back in 2002 because she knew a vote against would make her appear weak on national security in any future presidential bid. If she were to become President, she would constantly be forced to respond militarily to every world crisis just so that she didn't appear weak in front of our enemies--and our allies. We don't need another coward in the White House.

[pretzeldent]

Bull!

[dutchess2]

What a hoot!

After THIS administration's silliness on all fronts, you wouldn't think the right wing nuts had any standards whatsoever.

But just mention that a strong, intelligent woman who has worked all her life for the public good might be president, and all of a sudden they gotem.

As for stopping Bush...why do none ever chastise the sitting republicans in the House and Senate....­they are the true reason nothing gets done. We would be bringing our troops home today if they would vote their constituency's wishes.

Hilary will do fine...

[Lane]

Alright Duchess!!!!!!
It always takes a women to see through the BS and state the straight facts! We would be lucky to have a seasoned pro like Hilary working on our behalf!

[nolalily]

Actually, women, like men, are just as responsible for the problems in the world. This "women" are better leaders is a total myth.

[Veleria29]

duchess2
I agree with you. The people want the war to end but not bad enough to take away the money to fund the war. The republicans could vote with the democrats to end this war at any time. They refuse to do so and walk in lock-step with Bush because Bush wants this war to continue until his precidency runs out.
Wes Clark is no dummy, and neither is Clinton, she will make a great President. We do not need a president that spouts terrorists plots every day to scare the people into cowtowing down to them. We need someone who understands the Constitution and supports it after taking office. Bush has treated it like a group of words which he did not have to follow and has shut out the Congress in any decision making. Remember he said he was the decider and like any other dictator he has decided this war in Iraq will continue and the republicans are backing him all the way. I just hope the people will remember this when they go to the polls in 2008.

[Marlyn]

"We do not need a president that spouts terrorists plots every day to scare the people." ???

but that is just what Clinton/Clark are doing!
NOW we can't leave Iraq (they say) because of Iran.

No end in sight.

[ConcernedAboutRFuture]

Good One Dutchess!

Why DON'T we whine about the Repukingcans NOT doing anything? All we're doing is crying about the Dems... when in fact, it is the Repuks that keep the senate from progressing in any direction.­.. except the wrong direction.

[Purple Girl]

Oh Gen. Clark you so lost me on that one. the Non-binding was BS. Frankly her splitting hairs on such topics makes me very leary of her. Big supporter of Bill, but doesn't bleed over to her.
Hope your not compromising just to get the VP seat- love ya,voted for you last go around. But will not just because she could be the first woman pres- I'm looking for the best person for the job- one who makes the right call the first time. Not interested in another pres who can't say he/she screwed up and continues on the same destructive course.

[OldKnute]

Dutchess.

I have to totally agree with you.

Every time I listen in on C-Span,,, the House or the Senate, the Republicans are either shouting Kill them over their or they will kill us over here, or why need we investigate crimes against humanity,,, or This is all a Witch hunt,, or watering down bills so that even Democrats wont vote for them.

They dig in the heals,, blame Bill Clinton for everything from 9/11 to the death of Christ,, whine and cry that they didn’t get a chance to read the bills,,, put 9/11 into every speech,,, talk about supporting the troops while not sending one damn bit of armor over to Iraq,,, I mean my gosh,, under their watch our boys were making their own armor plated Humvees out of stuff from the scrap yard,,,, Oh and lets not even mention offering more help fore the wounded coming home!

If I hear one more Republican shout,,,, Mushroom Cloud,,, Or WMD,, We might have another attack,,,, I think I will spit sparkles.

If we have another attack,, the FBI will have dropped the ball, the CIA failed, the Fatherland Security have botched it, Border Patrol messed up, and the MYTH about the need for wiretaps the trillions we have spent to be secure, seen as a LIE TOO.

Oh and now after TRILLIONS have gone into their wars,, we worry about a few single moms being covered with healthcare insurance along with their children?????

Fiscal and spending disciplines?

My Arse!

General Clark!

I love you guy, BUT,,, This Globalization, New World Order thing, is dead in the water. I don’t care if we own all the oil wells in the world. 6,000,000 other people on the planet are not taking too kindly to being turned into SLAVES or seeing the earth destroyed.

Not you Sir,, those other fellows.

Sheeese!

All the best

Knute (Neo-LIB)

[1stsgtbill]

You left out quite a few people it is 7,000,000,000 that is billion not 6,000,000 million. There is 300,000,000 million people just in the U.S. And by the way the Clinton's believe that Global warming is the largest danger to the entire world and have a plan to get us off fossil fuels by the year 2025 which General clark supports. Where are the other candidates plan?

[oldvet]

I have been a very active soldier in Wes Clark’s army since August 2003. His recent actions in favor of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton have forced me to conclude that it is time to resign my commission and look elsewhere in search of Democratic leadership.

My change of heart began on September 15, when I unexpectedly learned that he is supporting Senator Hillary Clinton for President. Then yesterday I was even more dismayed when I read his statement in Huffington Post praising her vote for the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment.

I agree with Senators Biden, Bingaman, Boxer, Brown, Byrd, Cantwell, Dodd, Feingold, Hagel, Harkin, Inouye, Kennedy, Kerry, Klobuchar, Leahy, Lincoln, Lugar, McCaskill, Sanders, Tester, Webb, and Wyden, who voted against the Amendment, in believing that it gives Bush/Cheney the go ahead to attack Iran. They have been joined by respected commentators on most progressive blogs such as the Huffington Post, Daily KOS, Common Dreams and TPM.

Senator Clinton as ever continues to triangulate and vote according to the advice of her chief strategist, pro-Iraq war pollster Mark Penn, attempting to please everyone, including Bush and the Republicans, who oppose a timetable for our redeployment out of Iraq.

I continue to seek audacious Democratic leadership, people who act on their convictions and adhere to the motto of the Infantry School, “Follow Me”. Regrettably, I have not found it in the calculating Senator Clinton, nor the timid, fearful Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

[alijean]

Go Al Gore

[StephenJK]

Al Gore isn't running for POTUS. He's stated NUMEROUS times he has no interest in running for office. I bet a large part of his reasoning has to do with two things: A.) his current work addressing Climate Change B.) Washington Politics makes his stomach turn. I for one hope he continues his more important work; steward of the planet. Saddling up in the POTUS office would inevitably bog him down and take away from his abilities to focus on influencing world leaders on the issue of Climate Change.

[oldvet]

AMEN!

[KenoshaMarge]

I respect and admire General Clark enormously. His support for HRC makes me feel just a teensy bit happier about voting for her should she get the nomination. And I will vote for ANY Democrat against any Republican and I will not sulk and vote 3rd party when it is of primary importance that a Democrat be in the White House when the next picks for the Supreme Court are made. Which will most likely be during the next presidents term. If two elderly justices can hold on for another year.

[StephenJK]

AMEN!!!! The upcoming SCOTUS picks are of ENORMOUS importance. I will support whoever comes out of the primaries standing.

[naschkatze]

What are you going to do if Clinton is the nominee and somewhere down the campaign line in order to get the Republican votes she mistakenly thinks are going to cross over to her, she comes out and says that she will have no litmus test for Roe v. Wade?

[oldvet]

Of course.

[massimo1]

I respect the General, but supporting Hillary is a big mistake. Given who Hillary really is and how she will not be good enough for the country.

[Lane]

and "you" know who Hilary really is????
We can't go anywhere but UP from the present administration. ANYONE would be an improvement!

[nolalily]

Or we could move laterally which is what would happen if Clinton is elected.

[Jonni Rae]

So therefore, Hilary is better than nothing.

[getoffmedz]

If there is to be yet another Clinton ticket, the only thing good about it will be you, sir. Or should I say, Mr. Vice President?

[SensibleAmerican]

Probably Secretary of Defense and well earned Sir! I am sure that you will have a lot of detractors criticizing you for your support of Hillary. It is the usual Nader-herd, exclusively misinformed whose mind was made up on Hillary quite a while ago!

But you ARE right General. Hillary Clinton has been the only member on the Armed Service Committee that has questioned this administration on a precise Iraq withdrawal plan. She has been raising questions on their "Iran intent" since Spring this year! She was the one who proposed a "carrot and stick" policy to which she did not even get a reply from the DoD!

Ofcourse and on this and similar issue, you know much better than all of us put together! I am sure you have solid reasons to support Hillary's policies and candidacy ... all "Sensible Americans" are with you :-))

[Maxiesid]

You know, you people keep parroting the line.."it'­s the usual Nader-herd, exclusively misinformed" baloney like it has any basis in fact whatsoever. In the meantime you totally ignore Hillary's voting record, as if somehow it doesn't really mean anything. Hillary has voted with and for this criminal administration's policys' more often than not, then she insists that even if she was wrong she would do it again. Don't we as a nation deserve someone better than a rubberstamp GOP supporter for a change? And if you are a 'sensible American' then I guess our country is truly lost. Anyone with any common sense whatsoever is not buying into all this spin about the candidates and is looking at their past records to determine what kind of candidate they really are. Here is a link to Hillary's voting record (even though I am positive you dont REALLY want to be bothered looking at anything that contains real facts about your chosen candidate)­.. it has her voting history on one page (makes it easier for those of you who seem to have a problem keeping track) http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=55463

[davidly]

You've been championing a 'with us or against' us kind of line for so long that I'd have to come to the conclusion that your mind was made up quite a while ago about Sen. Clinton as well.

Whether one is part of the 'Nader-herd' or the 'Barrack Hussein-herd' or the 'Edwards-herd' or the 'Hillary-herd', I don't think it does anyone's current candidate of choice any good to color these issues so black and white.

[Marlyn]

"She was the one who proposed a "carrot and stick" policy."

NOT GOOD! That is just another way of saying that Iran is like an ass.