Democrat candidates won’t commit to a surrender date certain

posted at 9:40 am on September 27, 2007 by Bryan

The netroots ain’t gonna like this:

The three leading Democratic presidential candidates refused to promise that they would withdraw all American troops from Iraq by the end of their first term, saying in a televised debate here that they could not predict the future challenges in Iraq.

But the candidates displayed deep divisions on a number of issues on Wednesday night, including how to deal with Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear program. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York drew sharp criticism from some of her rivals for taking a more aggressive stance than they have toward confronting Iran. Clinton alone suggested that she supported a recent airstrike by Israel against Syria because of intelligence reports indicating that Syria might have been acquiring materials for a nuclear facility from North Korea.

I didn’t watch the debate. I’m debated out. But if that’s what Clinton said, good. If her rivals didn’t agree, bad for them. Israel has the right to defend itself from the Axis of Evil 2.0.

As I said, I didn’t catch the debate. But Rep. Tom Tancredo did, and live-blogged it for the Rocky Mountain News. Seriously.

Which is cool.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Our troops won’t need an order to withdraw under Hitlery. They’ll defect. My nephew is in the USAF, and says if she gets in, morale will go down the drain. Re-enlistments will also plummet. They despise her and her husband.

roninacreage on September 27, 2007 at 9:48 AM

LOL, this could cause Cindy Sheehan to run for Ms. President.

BobK on September 27, 2007 at 9:49 AM

That title reeks of poor grammar:

Democrat candidates won’t commit to a surrender date certain

MadisonConservative on September 27, 2007 at 9:49 AM

Our troops won’t need an order to withdraw under Hitlery

Is that really necessary? I hate when the left compares Bush to Hitler and don’t think the right should do it either.

Complete7 on September 27, 2007 at 9:51 AM

MadisonConservative on September 27, 2007 at 9:49 AM

You’re banned!!!

Bryan on September 27, 2007 at 9:54 AM

Bryan on September 27, 2007 at 9:54 AM

Ha Ha! MC – see surrender date certain as a title:

Democrat candidates won’t commit to a “Surrender Date Certain”

RushBaby on September 27, 2007 at 9:56 AM

Something changed in her campaign in the last two weeks or so. Can’t tell if it is snootiness or bluff but she is really putting on the aires that the election is over. -envoys to Iran as President-elect, ‘you can’t corner me’ attitude last Sunday on all the morning shows. She believes she will inherit the war and trying to figure out how to get the most political advantage out of it.

Be worried people, be very worried.

Limerick on September 27, 2007 at 9:59 AM

Our troops won’t need an order to withdraw under Hitlery. They’ll defect. My nephew is in the USAF, and says if she gets in, morale will go down the drain. Re-enlistments will also plummet. They despise her and her husband.

roninacreage on September 27, 2007 at 9:48 AM

If that should ever happen (I pray every day that it won’t), the MSM will just spin it as “The troops are tired of fighting in such a useless war, and now they feel like Americans are supporting them in their decision to not reinlist” — or some such garbage.

lan astaslem on September 27, 2007 at 10:08 AM

I’m actually starting to feel a little heartened that the leading Dems are acting more like grownups about the War. They realize if they get elected it’s not as simple as just pulling everyone out like the idiot nutroots want them to do.

If it’s not a sign that they are becoming more responsible, it may (even better) be a sign that they realize things are starting to turn around over there and that they want to be riding the wave of success rather than fighting against it.

Dudley Smith on September 27, 2007 at 10:09 AM

Limerick on September 27, 2007 at 9:59 AM

The media has already crowned her. As they see it, she’s already president; the election is just a formality.

Vic on September 27, 2007 at 10:09 AM

roninacreage on September 27, 2007 at 9:48 AM

I saw that when I was in the Navy back in the 90′s. The military was extremely demoralized under the Clinton regime. I see no reason to believe that Clinton Regime II will be any different.

Vic on September 27, 2007 at 10:12 AM

Well if it’s true that Hillary is being briefed by the Bush Administration on Mid-East foreing policy, she probably knows things some of the other candidates don’t.

I thnks she knows what’s what, and what needs to be done concerning Iraq…and heck, no one knows what we’re going to do about Iran. As much as I don’t like Hillary, she’s probably playing both sides of the fence concerning Iraq…the usual “we need to pull out” stuff, while she would probably run the war very “Bush-like” if *shudder* elected.

JetBoy on September 27, 2007 at 10:13 AM

Limerick on September 27, 2007 at 9:59 AM

It’s a little bit of strategy she learn watching the Palestinians fight Israel. In the media it doesn’t matter how badly you get your a$$ kicked, as long as you are the first and the loudest to declare victory.

doriangrey on September 27, 2007 at 10:13 AM

Limerick on September 27, 2007 at 9:59 AM

Limerick, I agree. I watched a good portion of the debate and it reminded me of a classroom of little boys vying for the teacher’s attention, but they will never get it because the STAR is Hillary. Did you see those buffoons raising their hands like school kids who wanted the teacher to call on them? Disgusting. I think Hillary thinks the show is over and she is probably right.

bloggless on September 27, 2007 at 10:21 AM

USA Today came out with an article saying 19,000 terrorists have been killed in Iraq.

Game over, man. Game over.

You lose Democrats.

Stormy70 on September 27, 2007 at 10:34 AM

Dems have become bottom feeders. They’ll say whatever they think needs to be said to get themselves elected. What surprises me is this momentary flash of truth. It’s quite retro.

My bet is this will be soon reversed.

petefrt on September 27, 2007 at 10:39 AM

But if that’s what Clinton said, good.

GOOD?! She’s a lying sack of crap and all this does is help her fool the idiots at the general election. She may keep the troops in, but the other baggage she brings is gonna be a nightmare for this country. Baggage like super liberal activist justices.

csdeven on September 27, 2007 at 10:40 AM

MadisonConservative on September 27, 2007 at 9:49 AM
You’re banned!!!
Bryan on September 27, 2007 at 9:54 AM

So, you wrote it before your coffee.

Mazztek on September 27, 2007 at 10:42 AM

You’re banned!!!

Bryan on September 27, 2007 at 9:54 AM

OH NOES!!!

/banished to Hell where he is forced to listen to Harry and Nancy explain why they didn’t do things they said they’d do because it’s somehow Bush’s fault

MadisonConservative on September 27, 2007 at 10:45 AM

Best moment of the debate was when that Gravel dude defended his bankruptcy by implying it was OK because he stuck it to the credit card companies. That was truly laughable.

bloggless on September 27, 2007 at 10:46 AM

GOOD?! She’s a lying sack of crap and all this does is help her fool the idiots at the general election. She may keep the troops in, but the other baggage she brings is gonna be a nightmare for this country. Baggage like super liberal activist justices.

csdeven on September 27, 2007 at 10:40 AM

Exactly. Folks, don’t get fooled by her Clintonian smoke and mirrors triangulation.

Brat on September 27, 2007 at 11:04 AM

OH NOES!!!

/banished to Hell where he is forced to listen to Harry and Nancy explain why they didn’t do things they said they’d do because it’s somehow Bush’s fault

MadisonConservative on September 27, 2007 at 10:45 AM

Heh. Love the bad grammar snark “noes”. Bryan’s got a mad-quick trigger before his coffee.

Jaibones on September 27, 2007 at 11:10 AM

PURE GOLD!!!!
BILLY JEFF WEIGHS IN ON THE ‘BETRAY US’ AD AND BY GOLLY, KNOCK ME OVER WITH A STRAW, HE IS MAD

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2007/09/26/sot.bill.clinton.controversy.cnn

Brat on September 27, 2007 at 11:13 AM

Maybe it’s just me, but I thought Russert did a very good job moderating last night. He constantly pressed candidates, and even pushed back at Hillary a few times.

revolutionismyname on September 27, 2007 at 11:18 AM

Dems in ’04 and ’06: Things are difficult and bloody in Iraq. We should withdraw.

It didn’t work too well in ’04 but it got them a majority in Congress in ’06.

They used the difficulty our troops were struggling through and used it to get elected by promising a withdrawal. Now there’s considerable progress in iraq and they can no longer promise a withdrawal. I hope the voters remember this in ’08 and make them pay. They bet against the wrong side, their OWN side IMO and they should pay. They’re a disgrace.

Also, it’s not just the Dems. One of my Senators (Chuck Hagel NE-Republican) was also very outspoken against the Iraq effort and against the recent surge and now he’s not even running for Senate again because he knows the voters of Nebraska would remember and would not forgive him.

Yakko77 on September 27, 2007 at 11:19 AM

Hillary flip-flops, contradicts Bill – & herself – in N.H. debate

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/09/26/2007-09-26_hillary_flipflops_contradicts_bill___her.html

Brat on September 27, 2007 at 11:22 AM

Someone recently published a startling opinion related to the Dems that is vindicated here. The opinion was that basically the nutroots are nuts, no one in either party pays any attention to them, their candidates rarely win anything, and their only value is as a (temporary) fundraising arm for the left.

Temporary because as soon as you do say or do anything rational, you will lose them. Markos is rapidly finding his natural level (sewer), like water; no one but us even knows what the letters DU stand for; and the HuffPo has exceeded even their worst critics’ predictions for absurdity. As some sharp O’Reilly producer has figured out, this mess of fringe freaks is by far the best argument being put forth by the right today; sadly O’Reilly was a flawed messenger for this message.

If only the RNC had any listeners.

Back on topic, Obama and Edwards are both idiots with no political sense and no talent, but they can apparently count to 100, and have seen the polls that give Hillary most of that 100. They are now falling in line with this first point: the nutroots won’t get you elected to anything.

I just can’t figure out how all this helps get a Republican elected, since GOP hatred defies all logic policy positions.

Jaibones on September 27, 2007 at 11:36 AM

The media has already crowned her. As they see it, she’s already president; the election is just a formality.

Vic on September 27, 2007 at 10:09 AM

Limerick has it right. I commented on this at least twice since Sunday. Coronations and anything regal doesn’t gel with the American public. The tea party wasn’t for naught. It is waaaay premature to dispair.

The Bushes might even support a Clinton run, if another Bush is to follow. The public has had enough. The independents will see to that.

Entelechy on September 27, 2007 at 1:41 PM

Bill Clinton and his phony “outrage” again. When is this lying a-hole going to learn that his “act” is getting tiresome. “I did not have sexual realtions with that woman, Ms. Liewenski (finger shaking)!”

Besides deliberately lying — what’s new about that from this admitted perjurer — about the Cleland ads, which were NOT as he claims, his pathetic attempt at moral equivalency pales because moveon (and George Soros, their patron) want America to LOSE A WAR, while the Republicans where trying to OUST a DEMOCRAT that wanted to politicize the new Department of Homeland Security and make it a featherbedded nest for unions.

Hey Bill, don’t you have an intern to rape today?

georgej on September 27, 2007 at 2:42 PM

I caught some of this debate last night by chance, it got really tireing waiting for the candidate to answer the question, most of them didn’t and had to be asked again at the end of their rant. And the guy to the right of Hillary, Gravel (?) … don’t remember him, some of the stuff he spewed set the audience and his fellow candidates tittering, he was out there, funny stuff.

4shoes on September 27, 2007 at 2:47 PM

The war is going extremely well. You’d never know it from the defeatist surrender talk of the cut and run surrender monkey democrats and their fifth-columnist uber left-wing media allies, but the fact is that the Iraq War has been and is a roaring success by every meaningful standard. I often listen to a radio program to which active-duty service personnel frequently call in, and I can tell you that the optimism, confidence and morale that I hear in their voices truly is sky high.

The only one recurring sour note comes from the realization that if not for the aid and comfort provided to the Al-Qaeda terrorists in Iraq by the America-hating liberals and democrats in this country, our boys job would likely at this point be all but finished, ready to hand things off to the Iraqi army, the Iraqi police and the Iraqi government, and all set to board those ships and planes for their eagerly awaited trip home.

When I think of the needless deaths and suffering our boys have had to endure as a direct result of the machinations of the democrats who want to surrender just as soon as they can, it is very, very difficult for me to contain the intense anger and outrage I feel. In fact, I’m all set to volunteer as an interrogator at Guantanamo – just so long as I’m permitted to take acouple of plane loads of democrats down there with me.

I think we should just trust our wonderful President in absolutely every decision that he makes and we should just support that.

FeralCat on September 27, 2007 at 3:39 PM

I got to hand it to Hillary. She knows how to play the game. Republicans better watch out.

SoulGlo on September 27, 2007 at 5:06 PM

As I predicted long ago, those troops are in Iraq for decades. No president will pull them out, for no better reason than the Saudis won’t allow it. What the Left doesn’t get, with the possible exception of lardass, Moore, is that the House of Saud runs US Middle East policy, regardless of party. Oil talks and everything else is bluster.

This map tells the story of why those troops are never leaving Iraq.

Just remember, 50 years later, the US still had tens of thousands of troops in Germany and Japan.

jihadwatcher on September 27, 2007 at 5:53 PM

I’d rather pull out of the war on poverty and get a tax break…or at least transfer the same tax for my lovely, soon-to-come Hillarycare!

SouthernGent on September 27, 2007 at 6:22 PM

When I think of the needless deaths and suffering our boys have had to endure as a direct result of the machinations of the democrats who want to surrender just as soon as they can, it is very, very difficult for me to contain the intense anger and outrage I feel.

FeralCat on September 27, 2007 at 3:39 PM

Amen to that. The liberal Democrats have been rooting for the enemy ever since the war started, in the hopes of exploiting a U.S. defeat for political advantage. It is and always will be a national disgrace.

ReubenJCogburn on September 27, 2007 at 6:51 PM

Clinton alone suggested that she supported a recent airstrike by Israel against Syria because of intelligence reports indicating that Syria might have been acquiring materials for a nuclear facility from North Korea.

“Clinton Lied, Iranians Died!”

After all, that’s what those scumbags are saying about Bush after he acted on intelligence reports.

BKennedy on September 28, 2007 at 5:05 AM