Clinton: I Won't Fund Iraq War Without Withdrawal

Source: CNN

Clinton: I won't fund Iraq war without withdrawal

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton said Sunday she won't vote for any more money to support the four-year-old war in Iraq without a plan to start bringing U.S. troops home. Presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Clinton greets people before speaking in Washington on September 17.

"I've reached the conclusion that the best way to support our troops is begin bringing them home," the New York senator and former first lady told CNN's "Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer."

"I don't believe we should continue to vote for funding that has an open-ended commitment, that has no pressure on the Iraqi government to make the tough political decisions they have to make, or which really gives any urgency to the Bush administration's diplomatic efforts."

Clinton's declaration comes as the Senate debates the Defense Department's 2008 spending authorization bill. It follows her vote against a $120 billion war-spending bill in May, when Congress dropped a call for the withdrawal of American combat troops by March 2008 after President Bush vetoed a bill containing that provision. "The president has no intention of changing his policy in Iraq," she said. "He's now talking about leaving it to his successor."

Read more: http://www.cnn.com:80/2007/POLITICS/09/23/clinton.iraq/index.html

Ignored the conclusions of the grassroots and the Democratic underground (the ones who proved themselves right over and over and over and over again) for the past five years.

Stranger things have happened.

I wasn't just referring to this website.

It bothers me that some people seem to engage in a monolithic group think.

I said the grassroots AND the Democratic underground (SMALL 'U').

Lots of different people, of varying opinions, who made their voices heard in lots of different ways. Who didn't engage in groupthink, but in INTELLIGENT ANALYSIS and MORAL OUTCRY and were ignored, marginalized and held in contempt.

It has nothing to do with 'groupthink.'

I have watched it happen over the past five years.

If you want to defend Hillary Clinton, then defend Hillary Clinton.

absolutely

Disclaimer: I don't support ANYONE. YET.

I do not remember Barak Obama saying anything like "No withdrawal, no funding." If he has, good; I simply don't remember it, but I am getting old.

I'd love to vote for a woman for president. I'd love to see a democratic president voted in.

But I fear a Hillary presidency would be a disaster because she has neither the gift of eloquence nor inspiration.
Every time she speaks I'm reminded of a 10th grade social studies teacher who no longer cares.

N/T

grade student who didn't pay attention in class.

personally, I find she yells way to much. And many people confuse that with being determined and forceful.

She looks a lot ms. cravaple from the simpsons.

eom

withdrew all U.S. troops from Iraq, solved the housing crisis, reduced the cost of gas, ensured there was no American living in poverty and that everyone had health care......folks on DU would still be critizing her.

Sometimes I think some of the folks on DU want to blame her if it's raining when they leave the house, or if their care breaks down.

I will not criticize her.

But, I'll join you in your vow.

but at this point, I'm sticking with Dennis. :-)

voted to grant a criminally misguided president the power to invade a sovereign nation, voted for a grossly unconstitutional "anti-terrorism act", and was generally chameleon like, adapting her policies to the audience she is currently appearing before, folks on DU would still be supporting her. Go figure.

she's going to get hell for saying no but if she said she'd vote yes---i don;t even want to think about that.

more funding?

Clinton appears to be the first major fiqure in Congress to have gotton the message (although Edwards has been on this message for a while).

Clinton is beginning to impress with her good ear for the correct direction and how to get there.

Too bad he is unelectable, it would be nice to have someone that could make good decisions from the beginning in the white house. But I guess its only hundreds of thousands of human lives that we have lost and endless money, no big deal. Go President Clinton. :sarcasm:

just was not given the body that folks want to elect (it has long been known that the fat and the short earn a small fraction of the tall and thin with the same credentials).

Hillary Clinton is beginning to surprise me a bit as I thought she would go more center right - the DLC idea - rather than follow her left roots of the 70's 80's and early 90's (when she was the only voice pushing Bill toward single payer - a problem we in the insurance industry fixed by getting Bill to reject single payer in a speech during the 92 campaign).

It is nice to see she hasn't changed (albeit that DK is closer to my position - but Clinton is not that far away :-) ).

If Dennis does not have the electable body then Hillary does not have the electable credibility.....

What exactly do the people want?

Hillary cannot win the general election so voting for her is a waste of time (PERIOD).

Dennis could win the general but not unless our own vote for him in the Primary and to be frank he is the only candidate that is running for President who has gotten it right on all the issues the first time....

Woooooooo, good one!
Thanks for the laugh!!!

..that she sings whatever tune she thinks the listener wants to hear. Or at least the listener with the most disposable cash at that particular time.

I just trust her less and less.

6mos ago. Saying it and making it happen is 2 different things. Is she willing to withhold the funding because Bush will not compromise...he doesn't need to. He has too many democratic supporters in the senate. Not spineless, or afraid...they support Bush's plans on everything from FISA, Amnesty for all FISA lawbreakers, funding without a timeline, surge...all of it. The republicans have a higher approval rating for Dems in the Senate and House than Democrats do. Read Glen Greenwald's post over at salon.com on Diane Fienstein's husband making a fortune off the war. And her being lame and lying to her constituents pretending to be liberal-Ha!
Is Clinton willing to put her money where her mouth is because her one vote on some ready to be filibustered amendment won't amount to anything. But it only takes 40 votes to halt the funding, or support Reid and pressure him to not let a funding bill come up for a vote. She could get a timeline if she is willing to withhold the funding. All dems in the house and senate need to stop listening to the beltway advisors who say most Americans are against withholding the funding...that is not true, They were also wrong about move on's ad, Petraeus' PR campaign, and everything else. Hell, they cost dems elections for years. Stop listening to the Beltway genius, they are just about power and money. Listen to the American public. Maybe Clinton is finally getting a clue and listening to the overwhelming majority of voters who want our soldiers out of harm's way and to stop throwing away millions/wk to the war profiteers. About time she said enough is enough.

obama said he will not fund the war anymore last week in front of clinton and it gets no press but 7 days later clinton says it and it's like god said it, wtf




This illusion that you get more presidential experience from the Senate is sheer nonsense. How many Senators have become President of America? Does Laura Bush have the experience to be President? Sitting in the front seat beside the driver for 8 years will never make you an experienced driver.

John Edwards spent six years in the Senate and had only 1 sponsored bill passed. Hillary has 2 insignificant bills passed in all her 9 years, while Obama has had 2 bills with his name passed in just over 2 years. And very important legislation he co-sponsored with Republican colleagues.
GovTrack describes Hillary’s sponsorship as “VERY POOR” and Obama’s as “AVERAGE”

In the State legislature he also passed significant healthcare, ethics reform, crime and poverty bills. Take a look at Senator Obama's bills in the State legislature:

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/07/29/us/politics/20070730_OBAMA_GRAPHIC.html

Compare that with Hillary's record on her website. Even her ads make no reference to any tangible accomplishments of hers. Hiding behind Bill Clinton will not make her an experienced candidate. Only fools are deceived by her campaign's marketing skills.

would fund only a plan to stabilize the Iraq government as we begin a controlled withdrawal of U.S. forces.

The House should be the key since We the People have a chance to replace them every two years.