Associated Press
01-18-07
Rival Dems take tougher stances on Iraq
By MARGARET TALEV
Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, talks about her recent trip to Iraq during a news
conference Wednesday on Capitol Hill.
WASHINGTON -- Just back from Iraq and facing doubters in her own party, Sen.
Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., on Wednesday opposed President Bush's plan to send
more troops and offered an alternative that stops short of an immediate
withdrawal or cutting funds.
Clinton called for capping U.S. troop deployments in Iraq at Jan. 1 levels,
beginning to move them out of Baghdad soon and eventually redeploying forces
to Afghanistan. She also stressed that Iraq's government must meet benchmarks
for political progress before it gets more U.S. aid.
Despite Clinton's tougher posture on Iraq, the war remains a political burden for
her as she weighs a 2008 run for the presidency. The Democratic Party base is
staunchly anti-war and displeased that she has never rejected her October 2002
vote to authorize the war. Even though she's voicing greater opposition to Bush's
war leadership, she's not as fervently anti-war as some of her rivals for the 2008
Democratic nomination.
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., for one, toughened his position Wednesday. Early in
the day, he said in an interview that he might not submit his own anti-war
legislation if plans from his colleagues sufficed. But as Clinton's afternoon news
conference wound down, Obama's staff issued a news release saying that he
opposes Bush's plan, favors capping the number of troops in Iraq and would
introduce legislation to begin a phased troop withdrawal, perhaps by March.
Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, another Democratic candidate for
2008, has repented his 2002 vote to authorize the war and calls for withdrawing
as many as 50,000 troops immediately.
Clinton's announcement Wednesday didn't immediately appease anti-war
activists.
"She's saying the right things; the question will be, Does she support Congress
using the powers it has to put the measures she's talking about into effect?" said
Tom Mattzie, the Washington director of the liberal group MoveOn.org. "It's not
sufficient to oppose. You've got to work to stop the president. We'll wait and see."
But some independent analysts thought Clinton's centrist stand might appeal to a
broader base of Democrats and independents.
Clinton had to begin taking a position that can get her good ratings in the Iowa
caucuses and New Hampshire, said Steffen Schmidt, a political science
professor at Iowa State University. But Clinton also understands that there are
many military families and Democrats who don't just want to see Iraq abandoned,
Schmidt said.
"I don't know politically if it will work," he said. "The liberal wing wants raw meat.
It may actually be an honest effort by her to say, 'How can we get this wrapped
up?'"
At a packed afternoon news conference, Clinton she said she's not willing to cut
off funding for the troops yet, in part because she thinks there are national
security interests at risk.