Hillary Clinton can kiss my progressive ass. Last week, as you're no doubt aware, the progressive "Take Back America" conference was getting plenty of blogospheric buzz—while generating something less in the way of actual rhetorical thunder. David Corn wrote about a certain word having gone missing from the foreign policy discussion:
Former (and current?) presidential aspirant John Edwards addressed a crowd of hundreds at lunch. He talked earnestly (as he does) about the need to help all those sons and daughters of mill workers (and other hardworking Americans) who didn't get the breaks he received as a son of a mill worker. And when it came to foreign policy, he passionately discussed promoting moral values and development abroad. He denigrated a foreign policy that delivers the rhetoric of freedom and not the reality of economic progress and true liberty. Is a six-year-old girl in Sudan really free, he asked, if she goes to bed each day hungry? But throughout his 25-minute-long speech, Edwards did not make a single reference to Iraq. How, you might ask, can anyone speechify about US foreign policy without mentioning Iraq? Well, it's not too difficult. When Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean spoke to the group in the morning, he too said not a word about the war in Iraq.
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton not only didn't say anything at the conference about Iraq (which didn't prevent Ariana Huffington from excoriating her for having earlier declined to discuss an exit strategy, claiming "discomfort" with the topic)—she didn't say anything at the conference, period. Hillary was a no-show, preferring to spend her time bagging herself a million in pre-campaign cash at a Hollywood fundraiser.
Corn writes that the leadership's "don't mention the war" stance is symptomatic of a troubling disconnect between them and the troops: Read on...
