Related Information to Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton - Page 4

Clinton Confident in Her 2008 Prospects

NEW YORK (AP) -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton expressed confidence Sunday in her presidential prospects and said she awaits a spirited contest for the 2008 Democratic nomination.

"I'm looking forward to it. It'll be a great contest with a lot of talented people and I'm very confident. I'm in, I'm in it to win and that's what I intend to do," she said after her first public appearance since announcing her candidacy Saturday.
Ref. https://www.breitbart.com/news/2007/01/21/D8MPTRPO1.html

Clinton Hillary

She really had better win or she is going to have some serious future political issues. The company that I work for is based out of New York, so I come in contact with many people from that state. From what I am hearing, if she does not succeed, a lot of New Yorkers are not going to look too favorably towards her next senatorial election. All those speeches about just wanting to represent and work for the people of New York in her last senatorial election sound like they might come back to haunt.

Hillary Clinton History & Civil Business Politics

It was never about New York, it was always about a future presidential race, and now it's here. This woman has had high ambitions for a long time (and her husband never lost his after leaving the White House). My fear is that she will win the Democractic nomination at all - I'm hoping that the DNC people will nominate another worthy candidate instead, but we shall see.

She awaits a "spirited contest"? It's going to get down and dirty, in my opinion. These people are ruthless.

Page 4 Clinton Hillary

Dirty is probably a gross understatement! This is the earliest that candidates have announced plans for a presidential run and we already have had a light jab thrown out from guess who... Clinton campaign pollster has already proclaimed the efforts of Edwards and Obama as "stalled or falling".

I can only imagine that Obama's well received leap into the democratic presidential nomination race really upset Clinton and her crew. Obama definitely got the applause that Hillary was looking for from her announcement. Honestly, I think she wanted to wait to make the announcement and let those who decided earlier to beat each other up for a while. However, Obama got a spark that began to look like lightning in a bottle and it scared her to announce early. She probably remembers a particular governor from Arkansas that nobody knew about initially until the media took a shine to him.

Hey, it isn't only her pollster that is stirring the pot. Her chief strategist fired out a memo to the press following her announcement that took a shot at Obama (no experience - unlike hers), Gore and Kerry (being more polarizing than Hillary herself) and Edwards (a lifetime presidential campaigner in Iowa - to explain her low numbers there). Miss anyone? Nope...think he got them all!

https://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/na...023,print.story

Think this is going to get dirty? It is going to be absolutely filthy! I actually think it will be amazing if anyone of these people can survive the nomination process without being filled full of holes for their next competition to exploit.

Makes for good reading and viewing! The best part is with everyone announcing so early, there will be lots of attacks before the nomination. Let he/she with the best speech, camera friendliness and fewest ghost win!

Edited: Vincenzo on 24th Jan, 2007 - 4:21am

Clinton Hillary

Well it's great to see I'm not the only one who despises Hillary. I got kicked off another forum for making very graphic details of what I'd do to her given half the chance.

Rather off topic, but... Apparently Hillarly has time to be big-brother, cause some lawyers threatened to shutdown the forum if they didn't kick me off. I was surprised at first they didn't just bully me directly, but then I remembered all my info was fake, down to the isp address hahah! That'll learn'em...

I really don't see what's so different about the politicians though. When someone asked me honestly what I think of Hillary vs Osama, I showed them a picture of Freddy vs Jason. No matter who wins, we lose.

Message Edited... Persephone: Please keep your messages free from extra characters while using good grammar. You will notice most Posts here are written without the use of excessive smilies, slang, dialect(s) or Teeny Bopper scribbles. Please use the Offtopic Tags so that the Thread maintains the same subject matter and does not develop into another Topic.

Hillary Clinton

Well, it looks like the Democrats are starting to acknowledge that they wont pull out all the troops in Iraq should they take the presidency. Funny how its gone from all the them back to now about 60% of them back... However, I have to give her credit. She pretty well sums up what I see as the current situation.

Rather off topic, but... Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton foresees a "remaining military as well as political mission" in Iraq, and says that if elected president, she would keep a reduced military force there to fight Al Qaeda, deter Iranian aggression, protect the Kurds and possibly support the Iraqi military. In a half-hour interview on Tuesday in her Senate office, Mrs. Clinton said the scaled-down American military force that she would maintain would stay off the streets in Baghdad and would no longer try to protect Iraqis from sectarian violence - even if it descended into ethnic cleansing. In outlining how she would handle Iraq as commander in chief, Mrs. Clinton articulated a more nuanced position than the one she has provided at her campaign events, where she has backed the goal of "bringing the troops home." She said in the interview that there were "remaining vital national security interests in Iraq" that would require a continuing deployment of American troops. The United States" security would be undermined if parts of Iraq turned into a failed state 'that serves as a petri dish for insurgents and Al Qaeda," she said. "It is right in the heart of the oil region," she said. "It is directly in opposition to our interests, to the interests of regimes, to Israel's interests." "So it will be up to me to try to figure out how to protect those national security interests and continue to take our troops out of this urban warfare, which I think is a loser," Mrs. Clinton added. She declined to estimate the number of American troops she would keep in Iraq, saying she would draw on the advice of military officers. Mrs. Clinton's plans carry some political risk. Although she has been extremely critical of the Bush administration's handling of the war, some liberal Democrats are deeply suspicious of her intentions on Iraq, given that she voted in 2002 to authorize the use of force there and, unlike some of her rivals for the Democratic nomination, has not apologized for having done so. Senator Clinton's proposal is also likely to stir up debate among military specialists. Some counterinsurgency experts say the plan is unrealistic because Iraqis are unlikely to provide useful tips about Al Qaeda if American troops end their efforts to protect Iraqi neighborhoods. But a former Pentagon official argued that such an approach would minimize American casualties and thus make it easier politically to sustain a long-term military presence that might prevent the fighting from spreading throughout the region. Mrs. Clinton has said she would vote for a proposed Democratic resolution on Iraq now being debated on the floor of the Senate, which sets a goal of withdrawing combat forces by March 31, 2008. Asked if her plan was consistent with the resolution, Mrs. Clinton and her advisers said it was, noting that the resolution also called for "a limited number" of troops to stay in Iraq to protect the American Embassy and other personnel, train and equip Iraqi forces, and conduct 'targeted counterterrorism operations." (Senator Barack Obama, a rival of Mrs. Clinton, has said that if elected president, he might keep a small number of troops in Iraq.) With many Democratic primary voters favoring a total withdrawal, Senator Clinton appears to be trying to balance her political interests with the need to retain some flexibility. Like other Democratic candidates, she has called for engaging Iran and Syria in talks and called on President Bush to reverse his troop buildup. But while Mrs. Clinton has criticized Mr. Bush's troop reinforcements as an escalation of war, she said in the interview, "We"re doing it, and it's unlikely we can stop it." "I"m going to root for it if it has any chance of success," she said of Mr. Bush's plan, "but I think it's more likely that the anti-American violence and sectarian violence just moves from place to place to place, like the old Whac a Mole. Clear some neighborhoods in Baghdad, then face Ramadi. Clear Ramadi, then maybe it's back in Falluja." Mrs. Clinton made it clear that she believed the next president is likely to face an Iraq that is still plagued by sectarian fighting and occupied by a sizable number of American troops. The likely problems, she said, include continued political disagreements in Baghdad, die-hard Sunni insurgents, Al Qaeda operatives, Turkish anxiety over the Kurds and the effort to "prevent Iran from crossing the border and having too much influence inside of Iraq." "The choices that one would face are neither good nor unlimited," she said. "And from the vantage point of where I sit now, I can tell you, in the absence of a very vigorous diplomatic effort on the political front and on the regional and international front, I think it is unlikely there will be a stable situation that will be inherited." On the campaign trail, Mrs. Clinton has repeatedly vowed to bring the war to a close if the fighting were still going on when she took office as president. "If we in Congress don't end this war before January 2009, as president, I will," she has said. In the interview, she suggested that it was likely that the fighting among the Iraqis would continue for some time. In broad terms, her strategy is to abandon the American military effort to stop the sectarian violence and to focus instead on trying to prevent the strife from spreading throughout the region by shrinking and rearranging American troop deployments within Iraq. The idea of repositioning American forces to minimize American casualties, discourage Iranian, Syrian and Turkish intervention, and forestall the Kurds" declaring independence is not a new one. It has been advocated by Dov S. Zakheim, who served as the Pentagon's comptroller under former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. Mr. Zakheim has estimated that no more than 75,000 troops would be required, compared to the approximately 160,000 troops the United States will have in Iraq when the additional brigades in Mr. Bush's plan are deployed. While Mrs. Clinton declined to estimate the size of a residual American troop presence, she indicated that troops might be based north of Baghdad and in western Anbar Province. "It would be far fewer troops," she said. "But what we can do is to almost take a line sort of north of - between Baghdad and Kirkuk, and basically put our troops into that region, the ones that are going to remain for our antiterrorism mission, for our northern support mission, for our ability to respond to the Iranians, and to continue to provide support, if called for, for the Iraqis." Mrs. Clinton described a mission with serious constraints. "We would not be doing patrols," she added. "We would not be kicking in doors. We would not be trying to insert ourselves in the middle between the various Shiite and Sunni factions. I do not think that's a smart or achievable mission for American forces." One question raised by counterinsurgency experts is whether the more limited military mission Mrs. Clinton is advocating would lead to a further escalation in the sectarian fighting, because it would shift the entire burden for protecting civilians to the nascent Iraqi Security Forces. A National Intelligence Estimate issued in January said those forces would be hard-pressed to take on significantly increased responsibilities in the next 12 to 18 months. "Coalition capabilities, including force levels, resources and operations, remain an essential stabilizing element in Iraq," the estimate noted, referring to the American-led forces. Mrs. Clinton said the intelligence estimate was based on a "faulty premise" because it did not take into account the sort of "phased redeployment" plan she was advocating. But she acknowledged that under her strategy American troops would remain virtual bystanders if Shiites and Sunnis killed each other in sectarian attacks. "That may be inevitable," she said. "And it certainly may be the only way to concentrate the attention of the parties." Asked if Americans would endure having troops in Iraq who do nothing to stop sectarian attacks there, she replied: "Look, I think the American people are done with Iraq. I think they are at a point where, whether they thought it was a good idea or not, they have seen misjudgment and blunder after blunder, and their attitude is, What is this getting us? What is this doing for us?" "No one wants to sit by and see mass killing," she added. "It's going on every day! Thousands of people are dying every month in Iraq. Our presence there is not stopping it. And there is no potential opportunity I can imagine where it could. This is an Iraqi problem; we cannot save the Iraqis from themselves. If we had a different attitude going in there, if we had stopped the looting immediately, if we had asserted our authority - you can go down the lines, if, if, if - "

I seriously doubt that looting was a root cause here and we pretty much asserted our authority. The country is screwed up and we did it for them. I also would love to see a copy of her proposal for phased redeployment that was rejected. However, I think she summed up the unsavory situation pretty well. But anyone that things all the boys are coming home with a vote Democratic, this just isn't going to be the case.

Hillary Clinton - Page 4

Another Pro-Abortion Group Endorses Hillary Clinton for President

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Another pro-abortion group has endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton's bid to become the Democratic nominee for president. The endorsement from the NOW political action committee comes on the heels of an endorsement from Emily's List, the largest political group in the nation. Noting that the House of Representatives has the first woman speaker, NOW chairman Kim Gandy told LifeNews.com in a statement that this is the right time for the first female president. In endorsing the New York senator, Gandy said Clinton "has a long history of support for women's empowerment, and her public record is a testimony to her leadership on issues important to women in the U.S. and around the globe." She said Clinton has worked hard "to advance the civil and human rights of women and girls." Gandy said the NOW membership would "conduct voter registration drives, make phone calls and go door to door to encourage women to vote" for the pro-abortion former First Lady. However, Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser says Clinton's pro-abortion views don't represent women. "Everyone is talking about the possibility of having a Madame President in 2008, but few are asking how well she would represent the majority of American women," Dannenfelser said recently. "Though her campaign is capitalizing on her status as the only woman candidate, Clinton's extreme position in abortion puts her out-of-step with the majority of American women," she explained. "These same women, whom many claim will carry Hillary to victory in 2008, actually support commonsense measures like parental involvement before minors can have abortions and a ban on partial-birth abortions," Dannenfelser added.
Ref. https://www.lifenews.com/nat3006.html

Hillary Clinton Politics Business Civil & History - Page 4

Despite the general sentiment here, Hillary seems to be drumming up a lot of support from those who want to see the Clinton era brought back: