The Nation's current editorial throws down the gauntlet against Democrats who refuse to support the speedy withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. The editors write:
We will not support any candidate for national office who does not make a speedy end to the war in Iraq a major issue of his or her campaign. We urge all voters to join us in adopting this position….But this fight, and our stand, must begin now. In the coming weeks and months The Nation will help identify--and encourage support for--those candidates prepared to bring a speedy end to the war….
Senator Clinton also faces mounting criticism from liberal activists.
Mrs. Clinton will now have to "pay a price for all of this, all these lost lives and wasted money," a spokesman for United for Peace and Justice, William Dobbs, told The New York Sun. UPJ is the largest coalition of antiwar organizations in the country, representing around 1,200 activist groups. "It's always amazing to me that there are people who think Clinton is somehow a liberal," Mr. Dobbs added. "Her position on this war has been horrendous."
Two weeks ago, her New York colleague, Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer, said on the Meet the Press that he didn't regret his vote for the Iraq war resolution (as Kerry has done) because "my vote was seen and I still see it as a need to say we must fight a strong and active war on terror." For now, Sen. Clinton stands with Schumer, who, unlike Kerry, has yet to buckle to the withdrawal crowd on the left.
Next Page