Has Hillary gone NUTS over Iran?

[Muddy Waters Guitar]

Arrgh. I was starting to warm up to Hillary again, after years of frustration and alienation especially with her warmongering on Iraq, the flag-burning amendment and other assorted blunders. It seemed as though she had started to recognize the foolishness of many of her recent right-wing stands, which have alienated her base and earned nothing but scorn from conservatives.

But then, Hillary shows once again why she's so infuriated what should be the core of her own supporters-- she's become more hawkish on Iran than even most Republicans!

http://tinyurl.com/fk8a5

Hillary's stands on Iraq and Syria over the past few years have been rage-inducing enough for those of us who've labored for years to elect a Progressive. She was burning her bridges with us. But now, HRC has not only burned her bridges-- she's actively tossing hand grenades right at the rank-and-file of the Democratic Party! :grr: A war with Iran would be beyond disastrous for us, yet now, HRC is actually going in and saying that Bush is being "too nice" and diplomatic with the Iranians, that we should just let the bombs fly and the burning of Tehran begin. Bush is already moving headling into war, and if Hillary is setting the tone for the Dems in the Senate, it'll become all but inevitable. I can't take this anymore!

Hillary, please, whomever you're getting political advice from-- fire them now! Frankly, it's too late for that-- she's already got too much invested in these pro-war stands. :banghead:

I really do prefer someone like a Clark, a Feingold, a Warner, a Boxer or a Schweitzer for 2008. Warner or Clark in particular would be formidable, with enough loyalty to progressive ideals as to now sell out the Progressives like this.

I'm just curious though-- what are New York Democrats doing about 2006? Are people starting to support Jonathan Tasini there in the primaries? Is he on track to get the endorsement from the Working Families Party? Should we be supporting him? My tolerance has hit the breaking point here.

[MrBenchley]

1. No...but Tasini and his supporters

seem to be quite a few fries short in their happy meals....

[katinmn]

7. Please share an example of why you think they are insane.

[MrBenchley]

8. No, I won't....

I'll just point out what a pantload this story is, and leave it at that.

By the way, speaking of DINOs, Tasini is already saying he's going to march off in a childish huff when he loses the Democratic party and join some dingdong third party.

[Tom Rinaldo]

16. Just for you information

The Working Families Party in New York State is not just "some dingdong third party". Hillary Clinton is fighting Jonathan Tasini to run on their line also in November. The Democratic Party and the Working Families Party cross endorse frequently, and on occasion at a relatively local level, the Democratic Party in New York State will run a person who is primarily identified as a Working Families Party member as their candidate also. The Working Families Party has a lot of Union support, and the Citizen Action organization inside New York is also deeply involved with it. New York State has a long tradition of third parties that the Democrats and Republicans court so that the major party candidates have two or more lines to run on.

John Lindsey once became New York City's Mayor running as the Liberal Party candidate. Republicans have been toying with running a Conservative Party leader as their own candidate for Governor in New York State this year. Currently the New York Working Families Party is larger than the Liberal Party in New York. You can bet your bottom dollar that Senator Clinton will never be caught dead or alive calling it a "dingdong third party". She wants their slot to run on in November at least as much as Tasini does.

[MrBenchley]

22. BFD--they're tag-along nobodies

"Currently the New York Working Families Party is larger than the Liberal Party in New York."
Again, BFD...the Liberal party (which wasn't particularly Liberal in recent elections) has been defunct for years.

"Hillary Clinton is fighting Jonathan Tasini to run on their line also in November."
Be sure and prove that. I'll wait right here, giggling.

[Tom Rinaldo]

25. Don't read a bigger drama into that than was intended

She wants their endorsement. She doesn't "need" it, but she wants it. The "fight" part is that Clinton is doing what she can to make sure that Tasini doesn't get it. There is nothing odd about any of this. Any incumbent Democrat running in New York would do exactly the same.

And there still are people in my district who are registered Liberals. I know because I help our local Democratic Party cary petitions to get candidates officially onto the ballot and I get the Registration lists. The Liberal Party is a spent force, true. They no longer have a designated line on the ballot. My point was that the Working Families Party is now the preferred second line for Democrats to run on inside New York. They are larger than the Greens and more open to cooperation with Democrats.

[MrBenchley]

26. You were the one claiming she was "fighting"

But I guess that means "paying no attention".....

"Clinton is doing what she can to make sure that Tasini doesn't get it."
Again,. feel free to prove that...but I'd bet that's as much horseshit as "Hillary's fight" was.

"They are larger than the Greens"
BFD--who doesn't know by now that the Greens are a piece of shit that function mainly as a GOP dirty trick?

[Tom Rinaldo]

28. It's OK you can win this argument if you think we're having one.

One way or another, I will be voting for a Democrat for Senator from New York in November, and if I vote in a Primary, it will of course be the Democratic Primary. So unless you think it is wrong for a person to hold a preference for who one supports in a Democratic primary, I don't think there is any reason for us to go at each other.

[MrBenchley]

29. We're sure not having much of one from your end.....

"One way or another, I will be voting for a Democrat for Senator from New York in November"
Too bad Tasini doesn't say the same.

[Tom Rinaldo]

10. I disagree

I live in NY and I am supporting Tasini for a primary run against Hillary Clinton. I haven't had time to read the article in the OP yet so I will withhold specific comment on it other than to say that from what I know to date I have not been pleased with the position my Senator has taken regarding Iran.

I've met Jonathan Tasini on several occasions. He is a bright, serious, and thoughtful person who has made a life time commitment to a broad range of progressive causes. Tasini started the National Writers Union and was President of it for some time (that Union later merged with the UAW), you should read some of his writings some time. Tasini is far from being a self promoting light weight, and he is NOT just a one issue candidate. I have no trouble supporting Tasini while he is running as a Democrat in a primary against another Democrat. I find myself more often agreeing with him on important issues, including issues specific to New York State, than I do with Senator Clinton. Assuming Clinton emerges with the Democratic nomination to defend her seat, then I will support Hillary Clinton in the General Election regardless of what decision Jonathan Tasini may then make in that regard.

[MrBenchley]

15. He's a dingdong who's already pouting about quitting the party

when he loses...

[Tom Rinaldo]

17. Here is Tasini's blog on Kos

Folks can decide for themselves whether or not he is a "dingdong". Tasiini's entries tend to be issues focused, with very little if any discussion of his campaign for Senate. They include his thoughts on Immigration, "Free Trade", the Israel/Palestein question, Welfare Reform etc:

http://tasini.dailykos.com/

[MrBenchley]

20. Hot-cha-cha....

And that's why he's already talking about bolting the party....

[IndianaGreen]

2. Hillary, Biden, and Liberman are on the same neolib/neocon page again

I expect Hillary to support the nuking of Iran.

[Warpy]

5. She's desperate to prove a woman is tough on defense

even when it's the wrong issue at the wrong time using exactly the wrong tactics. However, she's a conservative, so expect nothing but more of the same on this and other issues.

Anybody who supports her is fooling themselves.

[hiley]

9. yep!

expect the same from her too.

[acmavm]

3. There's nothing she won't do, no level she won't sink to, if she thinks it

will get her the nomination in 2008.

[wtmusic]

4. In Hillary's defense

her statement is in warning Iran about invading Iraq--not about invading Iran. The rest is pulled out of the hat of the post author.

That's as far as my defense of HRC goes.

[Speck Tater]

6. She is "politician" to the core.

Instead of having any real values of her own she bends in whatever direction she thinks will get her votes. This is clearly a ploy to counter the "Dems are soft on defense" meme. It's going to bite her in the ass.

[Donna Zen]

12. Whose ass is on the line?

I think it is ours.

As a previous poster pointed out, Hillary and her team have obviously decided that to counter the soft-on-defense Dem meme with the additional component of being a woman, they have decided to out-hawk the hawks. Unfortunately, the '12 election starts the day after 08 in the modern WHouse which means more of the same.

What is odd about this perception is that by standing up for her beliefs, Boxer comes off as the stronger of the two women.

Now there are hawkish Dems. in the party who will find this talk very welcome. I'm just not one of them, and while I don't control much, I do control my vote.

[BigYawn]

34. Hillary had the best "teacher"....Billy Jefferson Clinton.

So why would anyone think she won't follow in his footsteps?
BJC signed off on NAFTA, Welfare reform, Corporate subsidies,
etc etc, besides sending cruise missles to Bahgdad.

[leveymg]

11. Hil is a captive of a small, BIG MONEY faction of her constituents: AIPAC

Having accepted so much of their money to date, they would try to destroy her if she didn't do their Bomb Iran dance now.

It's that simple.

http://www.counterpunch.org/frank01032006.html
As the top Democratic recipient of pro-Israel funds for the 2006 election cycle thus far, pocketing over $58,000 as of October 31 last year, Senator Clinton now has Iran in her cross-hairs.

During a Hanukkah dinner speech delivered on December 11, hosted by Yeshiva University, Clinton prattled, "I held a series of meetings with Israeli officials , including the prime minister and the foreign minister and the head of the to discuss such challenges we confront. In each of these meetings, we talked at length about the dire threat posed by the potential of a nuclear-armed Iran, not only to Israel, but also to Europe and Russia. Just this week, the new president of Iran made further outrageous comments that attacked Israel's right to exist that are simply beyond the pale of international discourse and acceptability. During my meeting with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, I was reminded vividly of the threats that Israel faces every hour of every day ... It became even more clear how important it is for the United States to stand with Israel ..."

[IChing]

13. I don't know if she has or not

I will await her comment the second time she is at a Fox News Party
to see what she has to say about this or better yet maybe I'll ask
Rubert Murdock what he thinks she ought to say about this.

[pola]

14. CALL ALL DEM'S. IN D.C. AND VOICE OUTRAGE

TELL THEM HILARY IS NUTS, OUT OF TOUCH WITH HER PARTY, AND IF WE BOMB IRAN
NO TELLING WHAT THEY WILL UNLEASH ON US !! THE TIME TO STOP HER IS NOW !!
I'M SO AFRAID FOR MY COUNTRY !
WE ARE IN GRAVE DANGER, AND SHE IS REALLY CRAZY TO DO THIS.

[AtomicKitten]

18. I'd worry more about what Junior says about Iran than Hillary.

She's merely hedging her bets with her testosterone-laced bad ass talk.

[paulk]

19. this is right wing agitprop

Joshua Frank?

why does DU allow this right wing waterboy to be posted here?

[AtomicKitten]

21. are you new here?

It suits a purpose and furthers an agenda. :)

[paulk]

23. yeah, I know...

there's a reason a useful idiot is useful

but it gets so old

who shall we bash on DU today?


:argh:

[AtomicKitten]

24. $10 on it being a Democrat

[OKNancy]

27. The author of this article hates Democrats

He has never written a positive thing about any Democrat. Anyone taking him seriously, look up your favorite Dem and see what hatchet job he has done on them.
:puke:

[Muddy Waters Guitar]

39. I don't take Joshua Franks seriously

but, that whole thing about stopped clocks and twice a day...

Franks himself I find annoying, but it's HRC's war stands that have broken the camel's back here, and on Iran she's very hawkish, which is a recipe for disaster. * is already pushing heavily for this, and if our most prominent Democrats are even more hawkish on this issue, then war with Iran may well be inevitable-- a fiasco for us in the world. Here's another, better link (i.e., not Joshua Franks) on this very topic:

http://robertdreyfuss.com/blog/2006/01/hillary_outflanks_won_iranon_t.html

[leesa]

30. War's good fer bidness...she's a corporate whore, what do you expect?

[wisteria]

31. John Kerry has it over of all them.He will have my vote if he runs! n/t

[The Magistrate]

32. More Blather From Joshua Franks, Sir

It is truely amazing how this wretch, in addition to all his other serious flaws as a commentator, seeks to direct the energies of the anti-war movement against Democrats rather than the Republicans. It is quite clear his purpose has nothing to do with ending the war in Iraq in any practical way: his sole interest is to use it a pretext to shout up his real intention of fracturing the left and damaging the Democratic Party. The last thing on earth this reptile actually wants to see is serious action to shorten the war. That would force him onto other pretexts in his wrecker's campaugn.

[linazelle]

33. Oh gee. Another HHT.

Hillary hate thread. :eyes:

[Muddy Waters Guitar]

38. Actually, it's a HNSMW thread

A hate needless, stupid, murderous wars thread. I really don't give one whit about all the horse race crap that gets played up prior to the elections-- the fact of the matter is, when we actually elect someone in 2008, that choice has real-world consequences and even life-and-death consequences. That choice has to be made for pretty sober reasons. With Hillary already on record as a big Iraq War supporter and now trumpeting for a conflict with Iran, we're seeing a very, uh, consequential stand-- in all the wrong ways. As I've said elsewhere, these aren't leftists and Molotov-cocktail throwing anarchists among the Dems who are angry at Hillary-- it's the rank and file who in general are infuriated about her war stands.

I was even starting to warm up to her because I thought she was finally gaining a sense of balance and good sense on Iraq, but her stances on Iran immediately dispelled those beliefs. No war on Iran unless they engage in patently and openly aggressive behavior, period (and I don't mean any evidence-less finger-pointing at a scapegoat in response to e.g. a terrorist attack), and no support for any Dem who is calling for it. This goes far beyond partisan politics here-- this is life and death, spilling of blood on a massive scale, the very precarious state of our endangered nation here. The stakes are too high to succumb to any shade of political expediency on an issue like this.

[union_maid]

35. Not seeing much there

I'm not a huge Hillary fan, at least in terms of the presidential nomination, but I'm just not seeing much of substance in that. It's just a screed, very light on actual full citations. Doesn't mean much.

[Muddy Waters Guitar]

37. HRC's Iran war stands reported elsewhere

That site was obviously polemical but her hawkishness on Iran is becoming well-known and reported in quite a few outlets and more centrist-type blogs. See here e.g. (with links): http://robertdreyfuss.com/blog/2006/01/hillary_outflanks_won_iranon_t.html

[sandnsea]

36. Joshua Frank?? roflmao

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

You're basing an opinion on the gibberish of Joshua Frank???


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Maybe you don't know that there isn't a single Democrat he hasn't bashed, including Dennis Kucinich.