Be Wary Of Clinton's War Record

The Nation: Candidate’s Hawkishness, Exaggerated Experience Deserves Greater Scrutiny

(The Nation)  This column was written by Robert Scheer.

---

It should mean a great deal to progressives that in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination Senator Ted Kennedy favors Senator Barack Obama over two other colleagues he has worked with in the Senate. No one in the history of that institution has been a more consistent and effective fighter than Kennedy for an enlightened agenda, be it civil rights and liberty, gender equality, labor and immigrant justice, environmental protection, educational opportunity or opposing military adventures.

Kennedy was a rare sane voice among the Democrats in strongly opposing the Iraq war, and it is no small tribute when he states: "We know the record of Barack Obama. There is the courage he showed when so many others were silent or simply went along. From the beginning, he opposed the war in Iraq. And let no one deny that truth."

But that is precisely the truth that Senator Hillary Clinton has shamelessly sought to obscure. Her supporters have accepted Clinton's refusal to repudiate her vote to authorize the war, an ignominious moment she shares with other Democrats, including presidential candidate John Edwards, who at least has made a point of regretting it. It was a vote that has led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, 3,940 U.S. service members -- five more on Monday -- and a debt in the trillions of dollars that will prevent the funding of needed domestic programs that Clinton claims to support. And it doesn't end with Iraq. Clinton has been equally hawkish toward Iran and, in a Margaret Thatcher-like moment, even attacked Obama for ruling out the use of nuclear weapons against Osama bin Laden.

Clinton's apologists include Gloria Steinem and too many other feminists, who should know better than to betray the women's movement's commitment to peace in favor of simplistic gender politics. It is disturbing, not because they conclude that Clinton is the best candidate, but because they refuse to challenge their candidate to be better. Does it not matter that Clinton's key foreign policy advisers are drawn heavily from the ranks of the neoliberals, who cheered as loudly for President Bush's war as did the neoconservatives? Are they not concerned that Richard Holbrooke, who exploited his experience and access to secret information during the Clinton presidency to back Bush's Iraq invasion, is a likely contender for secretary of state should she win?

Sandy Berger, a key Clinton adviser, played a major role in convincing Kennedy's congressman son, Patrick, to vote for the war authorization against what the younger Kennedy said was the advice of his father and his own better instincts. According to a Knight Ridder report at the time, "Patrick Kennedy said the most persuasive arguments for attacking Iraq came from members of the Clinton White House," including former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who is often described as the foreign policy expert closest to Hillary. Patrick J. Kennedy refuses to be burned twice and now supports Obama.

Yes, if Hillary Clinton is the candidate, she probably will be better than the Republican alternative and, as Ted Kennedy made clear, deserving of our support. But isn't it troubling that she can't hold a candle to Sen. John McCain when it comes to fighting Pentagon waste or pushing for campaign-finance reform to curtail the power of lobbyists? Isn't it disturbing that Senator Clinton has received more money than any other candidate of either party from the big defense contractors, according to a report on the Huffington Post? Why have the war profiteers given her twice the campaign contributions that they sent to McCain, if not for the expectation that she is on their side of the taxpayer rip-off that has seen the military budget rise to an all-time high? It's for the same reason that the bankers, Wall Street traders and other swindlers who produced our economic meltdown fund Clinton.

Hillary Clinton has made "experience" key to her claim to the presidency and tells us she will do the right thing from "day one." The reality is that her extra four years in the US Senate hardly provides better experience than Obama's eight years in the Illinois state Senate battling for progress with the nation's most hard-boiled politicians. And if she lays claim to her husband's presidency, then she must also take responsibility for caving in to big media with the Telecommunications Act, selling out to the banks with the Financial Services Modernization Act, and killing the federal welfare program -- a political gambit that deeply wounded millions of women and children. Her political career began with the Senate and she hit the ground running, but, as her craven support for Bush after 9/11 shows, it was in the wrong direction.

[Razzl]

If McCain becomes the GOP nominee, you can be sure that the final campaign will have to be one of clearly expressing ideas, because there will be no question of attacking character or experience. The Democrat will have to speak clearly and believe in what they say, reassuring the public that they have a vision they can put in play. Does that sound like Hillary? Her playbook is the doctrine named after her hubby Bill called "Clintonism", which is about deliberately obscuring one''s beliefs in order to offend the least voters, which the Clintonites mistakenly believe to be largely conservatives (but opinion polls show they are not, even if they don''t like the "liberal" label).

While Hillary is generally labelled a "centrist", she is actually a crypto-conservative on matters of foreign policy, which means that Democrats in the primaries will be faced with a choice of having a 2-conservative election if she wins Super Tuesday. Will enough Democrats have the clarity to see this? Can they see through the bogus feminism issue to the really critical matter, her militarism? We can only hope...

[bwessels]

Sums up our unease with Hillary pretty well. From a progressive''s standpoint, she is troubling. Possibly more "corporate" than a Republican contender, McCain.

[alanrobisch]

While Hillary is generally labelled a "centrist", she is actually a crypto-conservative on matters of foreign policy, which means that Democrats in the primaries will be faced with a choice of having a 2-conservative election if she wins Super Tuesday. Will enough Democrats have the clarity to see this? Can they see through the bogus feminism issue to the really critical matter, her militarism? We can only hope...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by razzl at 03:56 PM : Jan 30, 2008

You mean that someone who doesn''t support cut and run is a militarist and btw what is a militarist?

[p-syrus]

she is actually a crypto-conservative on matters of foreign policy

Posted by alanrobisch2

Absolute nonsense!

Traditional conservative foreign policy combines isolationism with being the strongest military power in the world.

Neo-conservative foreign policy emphasizes the use of that military power to obtain strategic foreign policy objectives.

The Clinton''s have never been advocates of either policy. They have held to the traditional democratic parties defense wing objectives of maintaining a strong military and emphasizing the importance of negotiation & alliance building to attain foreign policy objectives.

This policy was best formulated by republican president Teddy Roosevelt in: "Speak softly but carry a big stick." Ironically, it has never held much sway in the modern republican party.

[cbs_oliver]

Hillary seems to be committed to the use of US military and economic capabilities as weapons to compel people and their governments to do what world elites prefer.

Her approach will not long remain a US imperialist policy aimed at benefiting American citzens.

It must soon become a global elite imperialist policy aimed at benefiting elites around the world - even at the expense of regular Americans.

We see this policy at work already.

I suspect that Hillary will continue it.

[alanrobisch]

The Clinton''''s have never been advocates of either policy. They have held to the traditional democratic parties defense wing objectives of maintaining a strong military and emphasizing the importance of negotiation & alliance building to attain foreign policy objectives.

This policy was best formulated by republican president Teddy Roosevelt in: "Speak softly but carry a big stick." Ironically, it has never held much sway in the modern republican party.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by p-syrus at 05:37 PM : Jan 30, 2008

Fascinating since carter reduced the size of our army after vietnam and reagan enlarged it and then clinton reduced the size of the army. Strong military weird if you ask me. Eisenhower did not take us to war nor did nixon nor did reagan and GWHB did with the agreement of most of the world to evict iraq from Kuwait.

It was on kennedy and Johnson''s watch that the vietnamese war started.It was during Truman''s watch we fought in Korea. FDR WWII woodrow wilson WWI.

Puhleeze don''t make unjustifiable statements. Nixon and GWHB were two of our best presidents as diplomats.

[paris1969]

"betray the women''s movement''s commitment to peace in favor of simplistic gender politics

....... shame on THe Nation for spewing these types of assumptions ... if someone wrote that blacks betray the civil rights movement in favor of simplistic race politics .. the Nation would be aghast! ...

[Harpersage]

You know, I read all this *** about Hillary being this and that and all I can think of is the big money in washington is really worried--that would include "Kennedy" that they just might have to cut back on the easy life and give back to the middle-class for a change. Plus! if she gets the presendency they won''t be able to bully her into doing things their way. Hillary, you go girl, you do have a large following out here and we will strike when it counts!!

[nearl4511]

Funny thing about Superdelegates.

Really robs the party of the ability to throw out the entrenched and connected. Unless of course they also are so tired of the annointed ones that they support change too.

I too am suspicious of Hillary''s corporate and military positions. But mostly, I want to end the succession business for the Bush and Clinton families. Time for some one else PLEASE.

[nearl4511]

Time to give the Party back to hte people.

End Superdelegate system now.

[croft777]

Robert Shceer is probally an Obama supporter or a republican. Theres no proof in any of this. Many people believed it when Bush said that Sadam had weapons of mass destruction. Many agreed to the war in Iraq.This is just Clinton bashing, thats all. Shes a dedicated lady, and she supports the people. Her work since the 1970''s prove this. I read these articles and am amazed that so many people take it seriously, I take it with a grain of salt. It won''t change my mind either way on voting for Hillary. I can read people and I know Obama is a racist, regardless of what people say, there would be know reason for Hillary to play the race game, she would know that it would hurt her in the long run with the African Americans who her and Bill have always supported. Obama on the other hand would gain all the African american votes. He knows what he did. He says one thing, then says people took it out of contest, we know what he meant. When he jabbed Clinton with the Republican bull ***, it was obviously a bash on Bill and his term in ofice. Bill did a great job as a president, and my opinion counts.

[sophielhu]

It must soon become a global elite imperialist policy aimed at benefiting elites around the world - even at the expense of regular Americans.
-----------------------------------------------
Internet is a good place to share information and meet friends. I recently found
a nice web site called pubspa.com where you can meet friends who have same interest in beauty care, massage, wellness and spa treatment. You can also share blog, video, game, photos, etc with people from all over the world. Unlike other online dating sites where you have to pay membership fee, this site is totally free. I already made several interesting friends there.

[user168-2009]

Who else can flock with LIAR BILL except but LIAR HILLARY? The pair''s motto: if truth does not fit into my agenda, reinvent truth.

[feelfree1]

"CBS_Oliver" and "veteran71" nail it.

[truthspeake2]

OBAMA 2008...

[truthspeake2]

OBAMA 2008...

[rowdytexan2]

Hillary has said over and over she would bring our troops home, just like every other democratic candidate.

What do you want her to do, have it tatooed on her forehead!!!!!????

This is bull *****!

[destardi]

This article is a bunch of BS.

1)Obama''s record is IDENTICAL to Hillary''s...he voted for Patriot Act. ANYone who tells me he would suddenly veer from that identical voting record out of the blue if he could have voted against the Iraq Resolution is a joker.

2)Obama is a senator in the biggest Democrat stronghold in the Midwest...he has the convenience of not being able to vote on the IR, he wasn''t as visible as Hillary, so of COURSE he could speak out against the IR in Democrat Chicago...DUH

3)His "record"? Whatever....

His "record" is RACE BAITING:
The media distorts Clintons'' comments
http://mediamatters.org/items/200801130004

Obama creates a 4 point memo which is "leaked" based on the media''s out of context statements:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12/obama-camps-memo-on-clin_n_81205.html


Anything to win votes huh Obama-Rove?

[destardi]

USER168...shutup...seriously.

Liar? People like YOU make up lies about the clinton''s:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200801130004

And spread it like manure!!

[destardi]

The headline should just read "BE WARY OF THE CLINTON''''S". The last month has proven that the Clinton''''s will stoop as low as they possibly can to get Bill back in the whitehouse. Send the "Arkansas trash" back to Arkansas!



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by roadking041 at 02:16 AM : Jan 31, 2008
+ report abuse


Wait a minute...So you''re saying that an average American guy who worked his way to the PRESIDENCY all on his own merit through intelligence and political curiosity is "trash" yet a privileged silver-spooned frat boy coke head who f*cked up the country is not, just because he keeps his misdeeds well hidden?

WHAT.EVER.

What do you people have against the American dream? Bill Clinton achieved more than any of you haters could do with 2 lifetimes.

[destardi]

llary is bought and paid for. She would continue with a seamless extension ALL of Bushco''''s War Agenda, Permanent US Bases in Iraq, Attacking Iran, Support of Israel over American Interests, etc..
She has NEVER said she regretted her vote FOR the Iraq War, and avoids the question like the plague.
Don''''t trust Hillary. She''''s a Liar.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by veteran71 at 10:37 PM : Jan 30, 2008
+ report abuse

Yes, because you should ALWAYS believe everything the media tells you:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200801130004

[andor3]

It is good the Iraq situation is entering the campaign (finally). It is good this article and others are challenging the candidates to defend their positions and go on record as to how they would address the Iraq disaster and the attacks on the Constitution (and have them own up to any part they played in it).

Kennedy`s endorsement means a lot. Hillary losing a key liberal endorsement means a lot too. We need a bona fide liberal to bring back America and American values, and Americans are looking to the democrats to provide that in this election.

[rowdytexan2]

Posted by veteran71 at 10:37 PM : Jan 30, 2008

You evidently didn''t read Hillary Clinton''s message when she made those votes! Read up! She doesn''t need to apologize!

Obama hasn''t a clue!!! And I still am wondering when in the hell he voted against the WAR?

[godseyesore-2009]

They''re both smart as a sunday switch, and I generally like them. But, I will not vote for Hillary due to the war stance she took, and continues to hold. Nothwithstanding any comments now to the contrary, her voting record stands. That leaves just Obama, so I hope he wins nomination.

[andor3]

"[regarding pro-Iraq authorization vote] She does not need to apologize!"

It was a mistake. It needs to be acknowledged, explained and an apology given to the people she represented and those she is campaigning to lead.

I would listen to her apology and re-consider her as a candidate if she did that.

Right now Obama seems to have mindshare and momentum and packaged with his enthusiasm, chemistry and youth appeal, he is going to be hard to catch.

[destardi]

Posted by veteran71 at 10:37 PM : Jan 30, 2008

You evidently didn''''t read Hillary Clinton''''s message when she made those votes! Read up! She doesn''''t need to apologize!

Obama hasn''''t a clue!!! And I still am wondering when in the hell he voted against the WAR?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by RowdyTexan2 at 11:03 AM : Jan 31, 2008
+ report abuse

Right on man...he has the convenience of not being on official record...but living in the biggest Democrat stronghold in the midwest..of COURSE he''s going to say he''s against it.

This is not hard political logic; the man wrote his memoirs at age 33...how politically ambitious is that?

Obama is a politician all the way, only not as good as Hillary or Bill.

[rowdytexan2]

Posted by andor3 at 01:29 PM : Jan 31, 2008

OK, sir, then you go out and get an apology from every congressman and representative that also voted for it.

This reasoning makes no sense!!!

Obama hasn''t a freaking clue how to run this country! And you want to have another George W. Bush in the White House that has not clue how to move legislation??? Does voting over 130 times ''present'' to avoid taking a stand on an issue constitute solving a problem???

[rowdytexan2]

Obama wasn''t even in the freaking Senate when they voted on the Iraq war, and he was ABSENT when they voted to delcare Iran forces as terrorists!!!!

And yet now as the Iraq war is a disaster HE CLAIMS he spoke out against it!!!! Doesn''t that tell you something?

[tibu987]

No fan of the Kennedys, but I, like them, do not want four more years of the Clinton twins.

Washington needs new, young, idealistic, not yet corrupted leaders. The same-o, same-o of the current, old crop of pols, shows us how inept they are. We need a change and McCain and the Clintons do not represent change.

And, how does being the First Lady for 8 years extrapolate into all the experience Hillary would like us to believe. She did not sit in on any national or international meetings. Being a shyster lawyer and a Senator for a brief time time do not experience make.
And, no tears are allowed in the oval office.
And, how many foreign governments will feel comfortable dealing with a woman president?
That many women will vote for Hillary simply because she is a woman is frightening and not all are blondes and l^sb^ans. How simple minded.
Sheeeeesh! Gimme a break.

[heartlight3]

Rowdy Texan- Obama did not vote against the war as he was a State Senator at the time, but he definitely spoke out against it in a speech on October 26, 2002. You can read it here:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama''s_Iraq_Speech

[denn034]

Stories like this can only help Obama.

[truedemocrat]

Read below this ambitious jr Senator didn;t get elected to any office until 1996. Ha So after tweleve years of political experience we should elect him Prsident. Are you out of your mind? Secondly Those who balme HRC for the war vote must remember that the Bush Administration claimed there were wmd held by Iraq. In fact Saddam wnated us to beleive that he ehld WMD to keep the Iranians from attacking him. What if he did have WMD''S HRC vote would look like the right thing to do. Given the facts that we had it was the righ thing to do. Bush lied to us but how were we to know. Obama didn''t know. If they had weapons that no vote for war vote would have been a huge mistake. So Americans now should elect him president becasue he was lucky. The next time he votes yes or no to force we (America) might not be so lucky.


Obama married Michelle Robinson, a fellow Harvard Law School graduate whom he had met in Chicago, on Oct. 18, 1992. The Obamas have two daughters, Malia, born in 1999, and Natasha, known as Sasha, born in 2001. Four years after they married, Obama won a seat in the Illinois state legislature, sponsoring legislation on the death penalty and racial profiling. (Photo: Family Photo)

[pcbirdsall]

I spoke out against the Iraq invasion, also, but nobody listened to me because, just like Obama, I wasn''t in the Senate at the time and my opinion didn''t matter. Hindsight is 20/20 and we all know now that it was a mistake to invade Iraq. It''s easy to criticize others when you have no idea what it''s like to be in their position. If you think it was an easy decision, then you run for public office and get yourself elected to the Senate and see how you vote on such issues.

[hbevis]

HOW ABOUT THIS.....

BE WARY OF "THE" CLINTON''S. PERIOD

OBAMA MAY NOT BE EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT. BUT AT LEAST HE DOES NOT BRING AN EX-PRESIDENT ALONG WITH HIM.

[Netterz]

The last 20+ years our nation has all but been destroyed under 2 families...The Bush''s and the Clintons. We CAN NOT do even another 4 yrs. Because she was married to Bill and is a woman, one with a big mouth, promises plans that no president in the next 20 years can accomplish. Every one LOVES to Bash Bush, for doing what everyone wanted, was to start the extraction of revenge for 9/11. BUT, he did not single handedly start a war. Everyone had the SAME info given to them. MANY law makers from BOTH parties agreed it was the right thing to do. isnt like Bush had one person single handing him fake reports, that he passed out as proof. I think deep down, every one agreed that Saddam had to go, and he was the first of many other radical leaders. Was supposed to be an example of how powerful we are, and that all countries will abide by our beleifs and way of life, or...we will kill your leader and give you Americanize you to our way of life. We need to stop sticking our nose in where it doesnt belong, and start taking care of our problems here at home.

[hbevis]

I WOULD LIKE TO SAY, AMEN, TO WHAT "OLDTHOUGHT" SAID.