  |
 |
| |
|
|
|
 Obama, Clinton and the WarPosted on Jan 29, 2008
It should mean a great deal to progressives that in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination Sen. Ted Kennedy favors Sen. 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 Sen. 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 Sen. 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 U.S. 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. Previous item: Again, a Sudden Shift in the Campaign Winds Next item: Western Civilization: An Idea Whose Time Has Come Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.
Comment Pages:
1
»
By joseph, February 8 at 3:19 pm # Let us not forget that in the Clinton era Iraq was subject to draconian import restrictions of food & medicines. Many Iraqy children suffered & died from from these Clinton / Albright policies. Ms. Albright was quite the feminist as she referred to these horrific results as just unfortunate casualties in a larger war. Do we also forget that Clinton/Albright policies included numerous daily flights over Iraq, for years. Shouldn’t the information gleaned from these flights along with her inside foreign policy knowledge add some clairity in Hillary’s vote? Did she know of the pre-war distortions of Bush/Chenny/Powell?? For some reason the Clinton’s wanted this war. The Clinton’s have caused too much pain in the world. It’s time to turn the page and shed some light on this not so glorious Clinton Presidency. Great article!
By Franz Keifer, February 6 at 6:22 pm # mrtibbs or Mr. Tibbs, Interesting thoughts. I take it you have an anti-Kennedy jones? While watching the president’s State of the Union address I was wondering why Barack was all but sitting on Senator Kennedy’s lap. I would prefer a candidate without those ties but I fear Hillary would have perched gladly on that same knee if she had received the endorsement. Fifty years of scandal and Kennedy continues to be the torch bearer for the Democratic Party? Barack preaches change and this alliance does nothing to convince me he is sincere. Yes, who is John Edwards backing? There’s an endorsement to be vying for. It is a shame that Edwards is out of the race.
By JNagarya, February 5 at 11:56 pm # You’re obviously an ass with about as much “sensitivity” to Kopechne as you accuse Ted Kennedy of hiaving. Now, jerk, show us you EVIDENCE for the string of UNevidenced assumptions/smears you assert in the following: “By M.J. Kopechne, February 5 at 6:58 am # “(Unregistered commenter) “Re: Re: Bill WTF pal “Not fond of the idiom: “If you lie down with dogs, you’ll rise with fleas.” are you Mike Mid-City? Perhaps you’ve never heard it before. Uncle Ted has spent his entire political career trying to prove he was not the self-centered, cowardly bastard that allowed his date to drown. Any other American would have had to do the same from behind bars and I don’t mean on a Hyannis bar stool.” And have less guts than he: We know his name; you haven’t the maturity to give yours. Instead you smear even Kopechne with your vulgarity. All of which wholly negates your liar’s pretense to being moral, as over against Kennedy.
By M. J. Kopechne, February 6 at 1:17 pm # Ms Kopechne showed poor judgment being with a group of married men that night. No single men were present. No wives of the married men were present. Things that make you go hmmmmmm? I’ll say. Was she duped into attending such a soirée? Perhaps. Was she duped into remaining there into the wee hours when all prospective drivers had reached the saturation point of their respective livers? Perhaps. Poor judgment or not, she did not deserve her fate. We on the other hand know a good bit about the cad-like nature of the man. Beyond that, we know that Ted was a “C” student at the Milton Academy and was only admitted to Harvard as a “legacy”. While at Harvard, he was expelled twice for cheating and after a brief military stint in Europe (not Korea, thanks dad!) he was allowed to return. Cheating and being allowed to return to Harvard sounds a bit strange, don’t you think? Cited for reckless driving 4 times while attending law school at the U of Virginia and yet never had his license revoked. There was an infamous incident in 1987 where he was interrupted mid-coitus with a female lobbyist on the floor of a restaurant. The list of trespasses, drunken and sober, is seemingly endless and is mostly ignored on the grounds that this is a member of the “American royal family”. I find Uncle Ted’s quote from the era of the Watergate scandal to be the pièce de résistance of his tumultuous career. Ted said the following from the senate floor: “Do we operate under a system of equal justice under law? Or is there one system for the average citizen and another for the high and mighty?” Wow, that definitely left a mark. Who could argue with his very clear vision of our world? Not I. I pose to all who read this post one question. If you were in Ted’s shoes for any one of his faux pas, would you have been treated in kind? He is a serial abuser of our system and common decency. No amount of good works or liberal legislation takes that away. This is a grown man that insists on being a spoiled child. Knowing this we have presidential candidates sidling up to him for support with the expectations that his endorsement will endear them to the populace. If such nonsense were the premise of a television show I dare say you would change the channel. Yet, Ted goes on. Enjoy the fleas “unregistered commenter JNagarya”. By the way Ted shows no guts simply by our knowing his name, he shows plenty for having the audacity to show himself in public. You, “unregistered commenter JNagarya”, show yourself to be gutless for not calling him on it. My smearing the name “Kopechne” is laughable. If you do just a modicum of research into that incident you will understand why I say that. Nothing did more to smear the name than associating it with Ted Kennedy’s. What is smearing her name compared with what happened to her person? Glug!!! I don’t want politicians to be moral, I want them to be equal under the law. Oh, you wanted my name. Call me “unregistered commenter mrtibbs”.
By M.J. Kopechne, February 4 at 5:16 pm # Glug, glug, glug, girgle, help me Ted,
By Dollar Bill, February 4 at 7:25 am # I have three words for Uncle Ted’s being an effective fighter for “gender equality”, Mary Jo Kopechne.
By Dollar Bill, February 4 at 7:02 am # Three words on Uncle Ted’s enlightenment, Mary Jo Kopechne.
By yours truly, February 3 at 5:57 pm # It Isn’t Who We Put In The White House “What then?” “It’s whether or not our next president ends the Iraq war plus turning things around here at home.” “And why is this so?” “Either we end the Iraq war or it’ll be the end of us.”
By Don Fahrney, February 1 at 11:51 pm # You got it all wrong. Why isn’t he a white man with a black father. Hey, we always know who our mother is but no proof who the father is, but that begs the question. Obama is a white man with a black father, how can it be any different.
By Don Fahrney, February 1 at 11:51 pm # You got it all wrong. Why isn’t he a white man with a black father. Hey, we always know who our mother is but no proof who the father is, but that begs the question. Obama is a white man with a black father, how can it be any different.
By thebeerdoctor, February 1 at 10:45 am # Re: They change only their faces and flags...!“And the killers still run the country, and they count their money with their blood stained hands, Note to truthdig: Although I am a registered member, your log in would not allow me in. Is this because I am using the Opera browser? Please make note.
By Sodium, February 1 at 5:09 am # Since the Declaration of Independence,US has been I am a white American citizen,but I love to see the Executive Branch being made as follows: President:A Muslim American. This way,we may overcome the power of the Military
By Honolulu Mike, February 1 at 3:36 am # DOES ANYONE REMEMBER MAX CLELAND?As NY’s newly elected junior senator what would the chances of Hillary Clinton’s reelection have been had she voted against the authorization for use of force in Iraq? And why was it up to her to lead the charge against the authorization? Why doesn’t anyone ask McCain if he would vote for the authorization knowing what we know now. In the upcoming election when it is likely the Dem. nominee will be facing super-hawk McCain, it is very true that a female candidate (or a black former hippie candidate for that matter) cannot look weak on defense & national security issues—especially if the dirty bomb scenario plays out right before the election next Nov. I’m back to my original thinking that a Clinton / Obama ticket is the way to go this year. Barak will be in early 50s 8 years from now, and should be able to help the Dems. hold the White House for another 8 years. For an interesting view from a Civil Rights organization about Obama’s credentials and credibiltiy on racial justice issues, visit the http://www.fair.org website and download the podcast of this week’s program. I’m losing patinece with lefties and the Clinton bashers who deliberately forget the fact that the Republicans gave Clinton’s admin. hell from day one because they felt he had no right to deprive GB I of his God given right to a second term. From the “don’t ask don’t tell” trap, to the oppostion to Clinton’s cabinet appointments (remember Lani Guinear?)to the humiliating way they shot down the Clinton healthcare reform effort the punishment was merciless, and few Dems. rushted to the Clinton’s defense. After the Repub. take over of control of Congress 2 years into Clinton’s term it was all downhill. They and did everything possible to deny Clinton a second 4 years. When he was victorious, becoming the first Dem. president to win a second term since FDR, the the VRRC began looking frantically for a way to block him from achieving anything of major importance in his second term, and of course the Lewinsky “bimbo-gate” impeachment coup fit the bill perfectly. Hillary will have no reelection obsession, I predict, having already made history by becoming the first female President. She will feel compelled to make few of the Faustian compromises Bill Clinton was forced into; and with a supportive Barak Obama as her VP, I think we could be looking at one of the greatest presidental administrations in generations.
By jerry reyes, January 31 at 4:03 pm # Obama as Illinois State SenatorAs an Illinois State Senator, it’s been reported that Obama pushed the wrong button on at least 6 different occasions when voting for some important bills. He acknowowledged the mistake, apologised on the floor of the Senate that his intent was to vote the other way. Now tell me , can I trust this guy to push the right button in case of a nuclear emergency?
By cyrena, January 31 at 6:21 pm # Re: Douglas Chalmers is a complete idiot!Tony, I keep trying to tell you this. (about him being a dunce). I don’t know why you persecute yourself by even looking at anything he posts, or trying to respond logically. The thing about Obama being a Muslim has been around for over a year. I started getting it via the standard right-wing trash machine, cheap propaganda e-mail, at least that long ago, and from people that I knew. (they didn’t know any better, and that’s how that stuff starts to circulate). It was so ridiculous, claiming that he was only recently converted to Christianity, (I wouldn’t care whether he was or not) and that he had attended a madressa in Indonesia, (pre-school maybe?) and that he was gonna convert the U.S. to Islam. Right, a black kid born to a white mother in Hawaii, raised in Kansas, (of all places) who began the guts of his career as a civil rights lawyer doing grass roots work in the black communities of the southside of Chicago. PUHLEESE…. Now, like I mentioned, this has been floating around the Internet, (the Muslim story) for a long time. If Chalmers is only just getting around to it, it just proves how desperate he is. (not that we hadn’t already figured that out). Still Tony, I’m glad you were able to get it from him directly, and make your own deductions…the dunce corner. I don’t think it’s gonna make any difference on his end, but it’s always good to keep him exposed for the dunce that he is. (kindly word – dunce- and far more ‘diplomatic’ than I) Actually, I’ve even gone beyond the ‘complete idiot’ indication, but I’ve been trying to clean up my act. Besides, at this point, who could have missed it? Add Your Comment |
|
McCain’s Shocking Discovery
Email
Print
Share
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Ma.gnolia
Newsvine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Yahoo
Jump to Comments
COMMENT TOOLS:
Hide comments
Show comments
Comment on this article