Top Dems Don't Guarantee Full Iraq Pullout

Leading Candidates Refuse To Promise At Debate They Would Have All Troops Out Of Iraq By 2013

(CBS/AP)  The leading Democratic White House hopefuls conceded Wednesday night they cannot guarantee to pull all U.S. combat troops from Iraq by the end of the next presidential term in 2013.

"I think it's hard to project four years from now," said Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois in the opening moments of a campaign debate in the nation's first primary state.

"It is very difficult to know what we're going to be inheriting," added Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

"I cannot make that commitment," said former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina.

Sensing an opening, Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson provided the assurances the others would not.

"I'll get the job done," said Dodd, while Richardson said he would make sure the troops were home by the end of his first year in office.

“Democratic primary voters may pause when they consider that none of the three top-tier candidates were willing to promise a complete withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of their first term as president,” said CBSNews.com Senior Political Editor Vaughn Ververs.

Foreign policy blended with domestic issues at the debate on a Dartmouth College stage, and several of the contenders endorsed payroll tax increases to assure a stable Social Security system.

Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware and Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, as well as Dodd, Obama and Edwards all said they would apply the tax to income now exempted.

Richardson said he wouldn't and Clinton refused to say. "I'm not putting anything on the proverbial table" unilaterally, she said.

Current law levies a 6.2 percent payroll tax only on an individual's first $97,500 in annual income.

Biden also said he was willing to consider gradually raising the retirement age, which is now 67.

Kucinich said that while he favors taxing additional income, he wants to return the retirement age to 65, where it stood until the law was changed in 1983.

Health care, and the drive for universal coverage, also figured in the debate.

"I intend to be the health care president," said Clinton, adding she can now succeed at an undertaking that defeated her in 1993 when she was first lady.

But Biden said that unnamed special interests were no more willing to work with Clinton now than they were more than a decade ago.

"I'm not suggesting it's Hillary's fault...It's reality," he said, carefully avoiding a personal attack on the Democrat who leads in the polls.

Biden said a "lot of old stuff comes back" from past battles, adding, "when I say old stuff I mean policy. Policy."

Across the stage, Clinton smiled at that.

The moment was not the only one in which attention turned to the former first lady, a campaign front-runner bidding to become the first woman president.

"The headline of this debate… was other candidates now confirm that Hillary Clinton is the frontrunner," said CBS News chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer. "They know it, she knows it and they all acted that way. All the little barbs were directed at her but they were very, very polite."

Asked whether presidential libraries and foundations should disclose their donors, she said she had sponsored legislation requiring it. Asked whether her husband's foundation should voluntary disclose, absent a requirement, she said, "you'll have to ask them."

"I don't think about my private conversations with my husband," she added.

She seemed to suggest differently at another point, after being asked whether she would ever approve torturing a suspected terrorist to prevent the detonation of a nuclear bomb.

She said no, and Russert said former President Clinton, her husband, once suggested it might be appropriate.

"Well, he's not standing here right now," she said, an edge in her voice.

[getloud1]

***** Stop The War & Restore America *****

Why Don''t You Know Ron Paul??????

The corporate media will not give Ron Paul any Exposure. Because, NBC is owned by GE. GE is one of the world''s largest war-makers. They make things that go boom. They make $Billions on war. A Ron Paul administration would be bad for business. CNN is owned by AOL. Majority share holder is Saudi Royal Talal who is also partners with GHWBush in The Carlyle Group. Another major warmaker. And on and on. You get the picture. This is why they are doing a Media Blackout on him.

Because they don''t WANT YOU TO KNOW THE TRUTH!

Who is Ron Paul?
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/about

Join A ReVoLuTiOn Group In Your City:
http://ronpaul.meetup.com/cities/

Ron Paul Has WON 10 Straw-Polls!
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/straw-poll-results/

RESTORE YOU LIBERTY & FREEDOM
SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT RON PAUL 2008!

** Stop Iraq War Immediately
** Eliminate IRS
** Eliminate Federal Reserve
** Eliminate Government Wasteful Spending
** Restore America''s Work Force & Values
** Restore America''s Freedom!

HE HAS RAISED ALMOST 1 MILLION DOLLARS IN 5 DAYS!
Check out www.ronpaul2008.com

GET UP AND GET ACTIVE TODAY!!!
VOTE RON PAUL 2008!

[taotxzen]

Libs were for it, before they were against it, before they were for it.

(apparently the ''Fox Talking Points Machine'' is stuck again)

Next Time you see that, ''Slow Traffic Keep Right'' sign, believe it!

[taotxzen]

Libs were for it, before they were against it, before they were for it.

(apparently the ''Fox Talking Points Machine'' is stuck again)

Next Time you see that, ''Slow Traffic Keep Right'' sign, believe it!

[name_verify]

I keep forgetting.

Libs were for it, before they were against it, before they were for it.

LMAO

[taotxzen]

Only difference - you are still riding it...

[taotxzen]

===I keep forgetting. Libs were for it, before they were against it, before they were for it.===

You can blame the ''Libs'' all day long for being naive enough to believe the manipulated intelligence that they were fed by the Bush Administration.

The only problem is that you also bought the same horse.

[taotxzen]

Is it Democrats that got us into this trillion dollar quagmire in Iraq and took our focus off al Qaeda? And is it Democrats that spawned Rummy%u2019s post war strategy of not enough boots on the ground with not enough equipment? And was it Democrats that gave us Paul Breemer and his wrong at every turn management of post-war Iraq? And obviously it was the Democrats that cooked up Halliburton%u2019s no-bid, Billion dollar contracts. And Democrats gave us Blackwater and Abu Ghraib and its Democrats that are making America the laughing-stock of the entire world.

Am I reading this right?

Bush Inc. cooked the intel to get us into Iraq and bungled the occupation at every turn while lining the pockets of Haliburton (Cheneys other employeer), KBR, Blackwater, etc.. And quess what, the reason they have no plan for withdrawl is because they aren''t planning on leaving.

Bill Clinton said last night, ''Its not as simple as staying or leaving, there are many options in-between."

[socrates392]

Bill Richardson said he''''d get the troops out. He''''s the best candidate.

Posted by coffee_guy1 at 06:19 PM : Sep 27, 2007

Yeah, but did you hear his plan to remove the troops? He said he''d leave all the "light equipment" behind and have them drive out through Turkey and Kuwait . . . Removing the troops is an admiral goal, but I''m not sure he entirely comprehends the logistical difficulty of removing so many troops in so a short a time . . .

[rhs648]

Is it possible that the Democratic candidates are talking to their base in a code. The leading candidates, on the same night, told their base that withdrawal from Iraq is not practical. Will we see a softening of the opposition to the war by many of the posters on this site? If the followers of these candidates understand and accept the code, we may see less criticism of the war on this site. Perhaps we will shift to other issues.

[rhs648]

The Liberals Bail on their Base.......

(CBS/AP) The leading Democratic White House hopefuls conceded Wednesday night they cannot guarantee to pull all U.S. combat troops from Iraq by the end of the next presidential term in 2013.

"I think it''''''''s hard to project four years from now," said Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois in the opening moments of a campaign debate in the nation''''''''s first primary state.

"It is very difficult to know what we''''''''re going to be inheriting," added Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

"I cannot make that commitment," said former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina.

Posted by hillaryin08

This should not be a surprise. The war in Iraq has become a political football. The Democrats got control of Congress with the war in Iraq as the issue. As we get closer to the election, the Democrats realize that they have to do an about face and stop promising to end the war. The Democrats knew a good thing when they saw it. They used the war in Iraq for political advancement.

[name_verify]

I keep forgetting.

Libs were for it, before they were against it, before they were for it.

LMAO

[coffee_guy1]

Bill Richardson said he''d get the troops out. He''s the best candidate.

[bizzzz-2009]

I actually feel better knowing that Hillary, Obama, and Edwards state that they can''t guarantee they''ll pull up stakes in Iraq. They obvious know how dangerous Ahmedinigad and the Iran regime is.
It''s nice to know that they are not crazy enough to compromise the security of the country and the West because a group of people have invested their
time,effort,and money on a tie dye operation in their parents basement.

[coffee_guy1]

Its ok. My nails are long..

[drummer94]

Try a pair of needle-nose pliars. If that don''t work you might have to blast. (just kiddin)

[coffee_guy1]

Geez I gotta big booggger in de corner of my nose and can''t git it.

[slim1h2o]

We need to face up to the fact that the best chance for stability in Iraq is to allow Iraqis to work out their own issues without us in the middle. That won''''t be pretty but it is necessary

Posted by realpatriot1 at 04:57 PM : Sep 27, 2007

I agree; the longer it takes, the worse it will be. For the Iraqis.........

[drummer94]

So, notblue, you saying that loony-toon did have a long-term plan for his debacle in Iraq? Har-har-hardy-har-har! Actually, I think he did. He agreed with the puppetmaster HalliCheney, and his oil buds. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[realpatriot1]

notblue,

There won''t be stability until the parties know that we aren''t staying indefinitely; that''s why we have to withdraw. If we wait for a "good time" to leave it won''t happen.

We need to face up to the fact that the best chance for stability in Iraq is to allow Iraqis to work out their own issues without us in the middle. That won''t be pretty but it is necessary.

The best way to minimize the voilence while that happens is to get Iraqis and other Arabs to invest in the process. If Bush won''t lead a diplomatic effort the next President must.

[notblue]

realpatriot1, I too am for logical withdrawel not surrender! Not lose because it would be politically adventagous, it must be a withdrawel after STABILITY is established. The problem withthe left is they have NO longterm view of the ramifications, in fact most on the left think this whole thing is some government perpetrated conspiracy, that''s how looney some are in this country!