Posted by Glenn Thrush of Newsday
The mad scientists in the basement lab of the Clinton campaign have created a brand new, anti-Bush (anti-Obama? Anti-Edwards?) Iraq position for the senator to tout, lest she be accused of being too pro-war, too anti-war, too critical, too supportive or too anything else.
On first blush, Clinton’s Iraq make-over seems to raise as many questions as it answers. Here’s a rundown:
1. Create a troop "cap." A cap on the number of U.S. soldiers in Iraq as of Jan. 2, 2007. (Question: What happens if the Pentagon doesn’t go along — will Clinton agree to cut off funding? On National Public Radio this morning she said she doesn’t support Ted Kennedy’s plan to block money for the surge deployment.) Not clear if she plans to even introduce legislation on this.
2. Don’t cut off money for the Bush troop surge — but block funding for the Iraqis if they don’t try to quell the insurgency, stop sectarian violence and institute political reform. (What if they really, really try and really, really fail? Do we just ‘copter away, leaving the well-intentioned Iraqis like we did to the well-intentioned Vietnamese who cooperated with us?)
3. Wants to start pulling U.S. forces out of Baghdad now, 180 degrees from Bush’s plan to put most of the 21,500 "new" troops into the capital. (What if the United States takes greater casualties because it doesn’t have sufficient forces to hold areas?)
Clinton’s core positions apparently remain the same: She’s still opposed to any end-date for U.S. involvement and believes the commander-in-chief — not Congress — should have the final word on war matters.
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Did mad scientists also help the president with his numerous plans that have cost so many American and Iraqi lives?
Posted by: Paul | January 17, 2007 2:24 PM
Hillary needs a make-over on what she wears more than her flip-flopping on Iraq.
Those pant suits she wears are terrible!Even if she has big ankles try to dress more like a lady.
Evertime you see her,she's dressed up like a man,except for a scarf to hide her wrinkly neck.
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | January 17, 2007 2:35 PM
Check out this article, re.. one of our 'moderate' supporters in Iraq.
Looks like no ones plans will have time to work out one way or the other. Events are outrunning everyone.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6270957.stm
PS: Further irony.
Anyone notice that in Iraq the Sunni's are the radicals, but in Saudi the Sunni's are the moderates?
Posted by: C.Morris | January 17, 2007 2:48 PM
Thanks for your support Pauldo,us Dems couldn't win elections without your help.
Posted by: John E. | January 17, 2007 2:53 PM
Events will make most of these posers, dem or repub look pretty stupid, and sooner than later, I suppose.
Here is a brief excerpt from a NYT article, (today)
"RIYADH, Saudi Arabia, Jan. 16 — American and NATO military commanders in Afghanistan are worried about the resurgent Taliban insurgency and have asked for additional troops, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said today, adding that he was “sympathetic” to the request."
We are going to have a hard time 'surging' in Iraq, now Afg. also?
Bush made the same stupid mistake as Adolph. (I'm not saying he is Adolph, so calm yourself) But he has needlessly opened up a two front war.
Bad Bush!, bad bad bad!!
(To the sound of smacking rolled up newspaper.)
Posted by: C.Morris | January 17, 2007 2:59 PM
I bet Paulo is more into the Barbara Bush look. She looks hot with those bulging eyeballs.
Posted by: drew | January 17, 2007 3:03 PM
Too bad she can't give her voting record a makeover.
Posted by: Jeff | January 17, 2007 3:09 PM
CMo....Saw the link...unbelievable...Just for the far right that would never click on the link,
it's about Iraq condemning the US attack on the Iranian liaison office. Money well spent huh?
Posted by: bill r. | January 17, 2007 3:20 PM
Paulo....Since you want to sink lower and attack looks....Do you prefer the Hastert look?
wink wink nudge nudge!
Posted by: bill r. | January 17, 2007 3:51 PM
drew,I'm not into the Barbara Bush,Nancy Pelosi look either.
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | January 17, 2007 4:30 PM
Republican robot Paula has just alienated every single woman voter away from his beloved Republican Party with his comments about Hillary's looks.
Well done Einstein!
Us Dems love you bud.....
Posted by: John E. | January 17, 2007 4:54 PM
A plan from the left comes forth and the right does a fashion critique. Precious.
Posted by: Kenny Bunkport | January 17, 2007 5:34 PM
Has anyone else noticed Paulo's obvious macho rhetoric coupled with his dislike of women?
I think the term is on the "down low".
Posted by: Bubba | January 17, 2007 5:52 PM
Hey Bub!
Wife flew over the Cascades today in a twin prop, on the way to Seattle.
Said Rainier was un-freaking- real!!!! Hood, too. (Macho Mtn. just killed three guys) (Forget Paulo)
Posted by: C.Morris | January 17, 2007 6:06 PM
Looks like TeamBush want to stop going around the FISC court;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6272869.stm
Couldn't have anything to do with losing congress, could it?
Posted by: C.Morris | January 17, 2007 8:27 PM
Kenny Bunkport.....A PLAN???
She voted to go to war and is now trying to squirm out of it because Barack H Obama is closing in on her lead and she's trying to get the lefty base back.
B.J. wrote that 3 step plan for her (after a poll was done) while she was out shopping for pant suits and a new scarf.
And Kenny,how about the last line in step #3 She believes the commander-in chief,not--Congress--should have the final word on war matters.
What a revelation!Congress can declare and the President can wage war,B.J. must of read her The Constitution.
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | January 17, 2007 11:53 PM
Don't worry, leftoid robots, as soon as Hilary starts running in the 2008 Democrat primaries she'll start pandering to your beliefs.
Posted by: bruce | January 18, 2007 7:55 AM
B.J. wrote that 3 step plan for her (after a poll was done) while she was out shopping for pant suits and a new scarf.
Paulo
Posted by: Paulo | Jan 17, 2007 11:53:02 PM
Hey Paulo - anytime you want to post links to back up your allegations, feel free to do so. Of course, I've challenged you to do so many times in the past, and you never have, so I don't have high hopes that you'll do so this time either.
BTW, the whole Swamp is STILL WAITING for you to tell us YOUR MIDDLE NAME, which was requested over FIVE WEEKS AGO.
Posted by: BC | January 18, 2007 10:09 AM
Yep, some evolution Hillary's been going through.
This is from 2004.
Is it too much to ask professional newsmen to get their facts straight?
BLITZER (8/29/04): When you voted for that resolution, like almost everyone else, you believed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction?
CLINTON: Right, right. Well, indeed I did. And if someone asked me that if we had known then what we know now, there wouldn't have been a vote. You know, no administration would have come to the Congress and asked for a vote that would have authorized any kind of action based on what we now know.
Posted by: Joe | January 18, 2007 12:23 PM