Clinton 'Misspoke' About '96 Bosnia Trip

I think we need a funny caption contest. Here, I'll start:

"And then LIGHTNING struck me, right here on this finger! My hair's looked like this ever since."

"Oh my, that was a sour Starburst, wasn't it?"

The girl explains to her friend

These clowns are weird, aren't they? Put the ping pong balls in there and pull this lever...

Yea just like Hillary misspoke on having been named after Sir Edmund Hillary.

This is one thing that she has absorbed from Bill, lying without any remorse. He is just much better at it than she is.

You know, I was wondering about these horrid pictures of Senator Clinton. I was thinking that editors were deliberately trying to make her look bad. As I look back however, I am beginning to wonder if she doesn't just look like that most of the time......

"This is something that the Obama campaign wants to push cause they have nothing positive to say about their candidate," Wolfson said Monday in the conference call.

And yet another idiotic spin attempt. Wow.

Lol, how about a caption for the second photo?

Never.. Tacos.. Before.. Stump..

When her lips move, she lies, and the picture is inflammatory?

The AP has a talent of only getting pictures of Clinton that make her look goofy or stupid, and a couple of weeks ago they printed Obama in the Malcolm X pointing pose. Believe it or not, how you make someone appear has a huge impact on people's impressions of them.

An obvious hit piece. The tipoff is the picture. I don't bother reading after that.

This is the dem nominee. She will not go quietly into the night. She will gut the party before this is over.

This is the dem nominee. She will not go quietly into the night. She will gut the party before this is over.

Well duh. Heard today that part of that strategy would be to wound the dem party so badly that Obama would not have a chance at winning and she could cake walk into 2012.

they pick picts to fit the story most of the time.. even bush gets to look good when the piece calls for it. IF bush just won a legal ruling or if hilary just won something they arent going to show them mad.
DO you not see the story?< first one is her tellign her tail.. with t he flag behind her looking all presidencial.
the second is her facing her accusers.. angry
the last is her giving her excuse. "oops I misspoke"

While they do look biased.. they really do just try to tell a story that's why they show photos of bush with washignton behind him when talking about iraq.. etc
as for obama, you just cant take a bad picture of the man.. he's one of those people.. it can annoy the crap out of photographers.. but you cant take a bad photo of obama.

really look google newsvine and differnt people.. when the news is good they look good when it is bad they look bad.. right/left/lib/ind/woman/man/black/white doesn't matter.

Joules, it's interesting to me that you mentioned a third picture. The first one is new. Hmm.

ahh didn't know the first one is new.. but really 90% of the time they try to retell the story in the photos and it is most noticeable when it is negative.

Hilary is very expressive, it is easy to capture her in transition and make her look bad.. I can see a few photographers having slight bias and turning in their worst set. But really most of these guys couldn't give a crap about politics, they just want to get that "shot".

I put no blame on the photographers. They're doing what they get paid to do. It's the AP using pretty shoddy pictures constantly that is the problem. And if they do get paid more for "that 'shot'" then that's beef I have with the AP. (As if I already didn't have enough. I could open my own butcher shop.)

C'mon, She friiggn' misspoke big time, newspeak for, She lied out her ass! I saw her speech when she told the lie, and I saw the clip of her getting off the plane in Bosnia.... they where handing her flowers as she casually strolled along shaking hands amd smiling that fake bu@!$%#e smile of hers for christ sake. If she were made of wood her nose would be long enough to pole-vault with. Get over the AP already and do some research, they played both her speech telling the lie, and the clip of her getting off the plane on CNN and MSNBC. SHE LIED!

The only thing that ran when she got off the plane were her pantyhose!

Here's the video of her running for her life doing a "duck and cover, zig-zag" maneuver...Had Obama been caught in a lie of this magnitude, his campaign might well be over. Is she using that little girl as a living shield?

This is the dem nominee. She will not go quietly into the night. She will gut the party before this is over.

Well duh. Heard today that part of that strategy would be to wound the dem party so badly that Obama would not have a chance at winning and she could cake walk into 2012.

Don't you mean the Clinton Party?

misspoke = lied

misspoke = lied like a dog

Is it a lie if she believes it herself? What does one call it when one lies and doesn't even know one is lying? It is something else, entirely.

Mistake and delusion are both more accurate than "lie". For the single incident, "mistake" is appropriate. If you see a larger pattern of breaking from reality, the latter may be more appropriate.

On a side note: was her lip quivering and her finger wagging when she said it? or does she have a style different than her husband?

Is it a lie if she believes it herself? What does one call it when one lies and doesn't even know one is lying? It is something else, entirely.

Do you really believe that she thought that her life was in danger, or her daughter's? Have you seen the video of her arrival? Waving, smiling, walking slowly.

The fact is, if she really believed that is what happened, she is delusional and needs immediate and comprehensive psychotherapy.

So either she's lying or she's delusional. Great.

I'm Hillary Flanaygan Clinton and I endorsed this message. Yeah, that's the ticket!

In other news ...

Miss Speak: Snifters in Tulsa?

How do you "accidentally" say a complete lie? And then it's the other guy's fault. Hmmmm....

The photo is terrible though. I agree with SteveHouse on that one.

That's not a very nice thing for them to say about the person they're suggesting would be a decent VP.

Or have they finally given up on that idea now that Obama has stated he's not in the race to be a VP at all?

I just think it's so crazy that she tries to play off her lie as misspeaking. If it's so hard for her to remember details from old trips, she shouldn't recount them in detail. It's just that simple. And sniper fire? Having to run to your car? Did that ever happen?

She's making it seem like she mixed that up with another trip? But did it ever actually happen or is this just plain old exaggeration?

Dem

I think it's crazy, that she still hasn't caught up to Obama and people try to make her seem like she's winning.

Jfrank, I think that's because we describe momentum with respect to what's coming next. Because Pennsylvania is a slam dunk for Clinton, the media is basically post-dating their coverage.

Now, if the press came after her on this like they came after Obama on Wright, then I think we'd be saying goodbye to Sen. Clinton.

However, I don't think that that's because there is any bias against Obama, I just think that because there was such incredible visual on the Wright story that they could play it over and over. Having the competing film of her saying how much danger she was in and then showing how little danger she was in is good, but it's 3 days good, not 2 weeks good.

Ratigan, also the press wants to keep a "horserace" going, because it's easier to cover than, you know, actual investigative reporting, and stuff.

Which is why I was so glad to see Chris Matthews snap on everyone yesterday on MSNBC. They are already increasing in my opinion because they present the facts separately from their opinions. They present both definitely, but not as if they are one and the same. He said how ridiculous it was for the media to be playing this election like a sitcom on television, and he is right.

"I went to 80 countries, you know. I gave contemporaneous accounts, I wrote about a lot of this in my book. You know, I think that, a minor blip, you know, if I said something that, you know, I say a lot of things — millions of words a day — so if I misspoke, that was just a misstatement.

"...I'm Hillary Clinton for President and I'm delusional and I approve this message.

G.I. Hillary - A delusional real Presidential Candidate (but real in her mind) account of what happened during her "Special Opps, C.R.S., Called to Duty by Bill" mission to rescue the people of Bosnia from Sniper fire with her daughter, a comedian and a singer. I wonder if she was playing the COD4 on the XBOX 360 when you conjured up that lie! Oh how I really wish I knew hot to photoshop pictures!

Interesting that they added a third picture and made it first. Must of gotten too much negative feedback.
Funny how yesterday it was all about Obama's pastor and today it's all about Hillary saying she landed under sniper fire. Well Hillary has always been under sniper fire from the right so no wonder she got confused.

She lied.

Well....SHE'S not very smart.

Normally, I'd agree with you -- but Clinton's comment relates specifically to her claims that she has more foreign policy experience, and when a comment (especially one that turns out to have been wrong) relates to policy and experience, I think they deserve to be called to task for it, so long as the "calling to task" is fair and accurate.

on Foreign Policy experience

A year after his "Axis of Evil" speech before the U.S. Congress, President Bush met with three Iraqi Americans, one of whom became postwar Iraq's first representative to the United States. The three described what they thought would be the political situation after the fall of Saddam Hussein. During their conversation with the President, Galbraith claims, it became apparent to them that Bush was unfamiliar with the distinction between Sunnis and Shiites.

Galbraith reports that the three of them spent some time explaining to Bush that there are two different sects in Islam--to which the President allegedly responded, "I thought the Iraqis were Muslims!"

One would hope we could hold the Democratic nominee to a somewhat higher standard, 'broom.

One would hope to hold any nominee to a much higher standard than that exhibited by GWB in the quote from #5.2. That would include John McCain and his Iran/al Qaida/Sunni gaff...er...WarMonger talking point.

Former Senator David Boren (D-OK) likes to talk about his discussion with Bush 41. After the operation in Kuwait, he advocated going in all the way and throwing out Saddam, to which George H. W. replied with basically a prophesy of what happened here. I have no evidence of this, you just have to take my word for it. He brings it up in his political science class at the University of Oklahoma every once in a while.

A few things come to mind. 1: See, we knew it was coming. 2: Maybe George and George should talk more often. 3: Since it seems like any responsible father would call his son before said son causes a million deaths, the story is a little hard to swallow.

Dad and son are competitors. Son wants Dad's approval as well as to show that he's a grown man with big nads...Son not proud that Dad let SH live....Son have thin skin, small bran...son need more ducolax...

you must remember the interview wherein Dubya was asked if he consulted with 41?...his reply was that he consulted with a *higher father/authority*....

Actually, no, I don't remember that. Thanks for the reference though. It fits Dubya's character well enough.

Former Senator David Boren (D-OK) likes to talk about his discussion with Bush 41. After the operation in Kuwait, he advocated going in all the way and throwing out Saddam, to which George H. W. replied with basically a prophesy of what happened here. I have no evidence of this, you just have to take my word for it. He brings it up in his political science class at the University of Oklahoma every once in a while.

While back in the real world, Colin Powell, Stormin Norman, and Bush 41 all said that the only mandate that they had from the U.N. was to kick Saddam out of Kuwait and that to depose him would have caused the Syrian Army to flip to Saddamn's side (how many of you kiddies remember that Syria was on our side then?) and that the Saudi's, nor the Egyptians would participate. Basically things would have deteoriated into chaos. That would have been fun! (not).

I don't see why both can't be true, space guy. (pouts)

um space guy
I guess you missed cheney and bush 41 taqlkign about the quamire that would have resulted in invading iraq. sure syria may have been a consideration.. little ole syria may have/ But you cant erase their words and the fact is, what they said would happen then, is happenign now. when cheney at the start of the war in direct contradiction to his previous words and direct contradiction to what his advisors were saying to him, told us it would be a cake walk and we would be greeted with flowers and choclates.
we have all seen the video
don't make me google it.

Militarily it was a cakewalk. Winning the peace is the hard part, always has been. However, having Saddamn with no impediments to his power (the French and Russians had already been bribed to introduce a U.N. resolution to remove the no fly zones), and in a race to produce nuclear weapons with Iran is an even less desirable solution.

What folks like you fail to understand is that there were no "good" solutions to the Iraq problem. Bush just picked the one that was least bad and with some hope of a possible future.

Do me a favor... Refresh my memory on what exactly the Iraq problem was in the first place? The way I remember it, the story changed again and again. I remember the exact moment I knew that President Bush was without out doubt the most-full-of-@!$%# President that would be in office during my lifetime. That's saying a lot considering how young I am (God-willing I live 5 or 6 more decades at least).

Just a point here, only on Newsvine would a seed about Hillary lying about her trip to Bosnia, end up as a hate fest against GW and his administration.

Gee, think it evidences a bias of the majority of NV posters?

Well since Obama stutters people jump him. When Hillary lies, it's okay? Said Obama was plagiarising, then used Edwards' words.

She's in this campaign for herself and will do anything to win.

She's in this campaign for herself and will do anything to win.

Jfrank, did you ever expect anything different?

I would suspect that Obama is the same, except he is winning right now. We do not know how he would act, and his campaign would act, if he was behind.

@ Dr. Sherman:

You hope Sen Obama will call of "his attack dogs"!

Good God, man...have you been sleeping for the past few months?? The dogs that were loosed belong to Ms. Clinton. And you know dogs...sometimes they just come back to bite you!

Wmolaw, you have a point: the issue is the experience of the candidates in THIS year's race, not Bush's. So, Newbroom, why didn't you follow through by pointing out that McCain, five years later, still either does not know the difference between Shi'a and Sunni or is deliberately lying about them in order to rile up the uninformed? On FOUR SEPARATE OCCASIONS he has said that Iran is training Al Qaeda terrorists to fight in Iraq. That's about as plausible as claiming that the Rev. Ian Paisley arms and trains Catholic IRA terrorists. So, there are two possibilities:

a. McCain still hasn't informed himself of the most basic facts on the ground in Iraq.

b. He knows damn well that Iran is Shi'a and Al Qaeda is Sunni, but he uses the term "Al Qaeda" to describe anyone fighting against us in Iraq because he figures he can still punch some people's 9/11 buttons with the kind of rhetoric that implies that all them ragheads are the same anyway.

Of course, come to think of it, there IS a third possibility (and no one ever expects the Spanish Inquisition). That would be, er, "senior moments." McCain is, after all, even older than Ronald Reagan in 1980, and Reagan's mental decline even during his first term was an open secret. But of course the press covered for him, just as it's busy covering for McCain's repeated gaffes, while they play Clinton's exaggeration for all it's worth. It is an exaggeration, by the way, not a complete lie. According to reliable accounts there WAS some sniper fire in areas near the airport, and she was instructed to stay calm and act normal. The part about running with her head down isn't true, but the story is not complete fabrication.

I just want everyone to know Laura Bush landed with the members of the Army's Airborne division, and happened to land next to a suicide bomber as his vest was exploding.. and guess what, SHE LIVED TO TELL ABOUT IT! hahahahaha

Where I come from, stories like this one and Hillary's Bosnia story are nothing more than BULLSH@*

Oh, and get back to focus... we aren't talking about Bush, he is on his way out! We are talking about Hillary who seems to share his lying traits... is that what we want for another 4 years??

I agree with that but she doesn't need to embellish it.

It's not the embellishment that angers me so much that she doesn't seem to want to offer up an other examples showing her "extensive experience with foreign policy". As I've said in another article - flaunting a USO show as foreign policy experience gives the impression that someone like Bruce Willis has more foreign policy experience than she does.

I support that too. In fact, what is more relevant is that it is still important to this date and for current missions:

"The important thing is that she was there. Our soldiers saw she was there and heard her and knew that our country cared about them and what they were doing,"

This support should be applied to Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the many other places around the world where the brave are confronting harsh reality on our behalf. Not only supporting the troops, but their mission. Just as West states. 100%

If she said: I was there, but I don't remember it well, long time ago - that's one thing. If she was confusing it with some other time she was under sniper fire then that's fine too. But this is like you "remembering" 12 years ago that you were James Bond saving western civilization from terrorists... because it made you sound good.

That doesn't let McCain off the hook, though.

Paul-

I would love to cut her some slack, but she wrote the story in a book, touted it as part of her 'experience,' and was given a few opportunities to correct her 'recollection.'

Kinda looks like a duck to me...

And it kinda sounds like a duck to me...

And it kinda walks like a duck to me.

It's a duck.

It's a peacock!

So.. If she... Weighs.... The same... As a duck....

SHE'S A WITCH! BURN HER!
(/Python)

We'll use my biggest scales!
(/Python for real)

It's a fair cop.
(/Python)

It's a duck you can Xerox.

She has been in public eye long enough to know that whatever is said, especially by someone of her "experience", is not just said to the "audience of the moment" or just Americans but in fact to the entire world. She should know that her conversations are broadcast worldwide.

It's probably a trap, so she gets everyone to read about her foreign policy trip.

I wish people would. Then they would see that she was meeting the wives of other world leaders, with Chelsea in for ride often. I don't know when she had the time to garner all this "experience."

From what I can tell, her "experience" is giving speeches supporting this or decrying that. As much as her and Bill love for something to count for them and not for someone else, this just won't work. If she says Obama is nothing but speeches, her foreign experience is nothing but speeches. Either they're both worth something, or they're both worth nothing.

I think if you ask people who really have had to live a tine part of their lives in the type of danger she suggested she was in, they will tell you she made a gross exaggeration, not a slight exaggeration.

There is a big difference between warm welcome and sniper fire while running for your life. I doubt anyone who had indeed gone through such an experience would "misspeak" about it only years later. And seriously, if it was so bad as you're trying to make it sound, why would she bring her daughter with her? How old was Chelsea then? Old enough to dodge possible sniper fire? Please.

Sorry, I'm not buying it. If she got things mixed up, then she would have come out and said something like "Oh, that's right, that was the trip to the Sudan in which we were under sniper fire." She just lied. She's a politician. It happens. Obama has lied as well in this campaign. It just sucks to get busted.

Except she 'got mixed up' about something that never happened.

From an actual participant in the Irish peace keeping talks:

Hillary Clinton had no direct role in bringing peace to Northern Ireland and is a "wee bit silly" for exaggerating the part she played, according to Lord Trimble of Lisnagarvey, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and former First Minister of the province.

"I don't know there was much she did apart from accompanying Bill [Clinton] going around," he said. Her recent statements about being deeply involved were merely "the sort of thing people put in their canvassing leaflets" during elections. "She visited when things were happening, saw what was going on, she can certainly say it was part of her experience. I don't want to rain on the thing for her but being a cheerleader for something is slightly different from being a principal player."

Mrs Clinton has made Northern Ireland key to her claims of having extensive foreign policy experience, which helped her defeat Barack Obama in Ohio and Texas on Tuesday after she presented herself as being ready to tackle foreign policy crises at 3am.

"I helped to bring peace to Northern Ireland," she told CNN on Wednesday. But negotiators from the parties that helped broker the Good Friday Agreement in 1998 told The Daily Telegraph that her role was peripheral and that she played no part in the gruelling political talks over the years.

Lord Trimble shared the Nobel Peace Prize with John Hume, leader of the nationalist Social Democratic and Labour Party, in 1998. Conall McDevitt, an SDLP negotiator and aide to Mr Hume during the talks, said: "There would have been no contact with her either in person or on the phone. I was with Hume regularly during calls in the months leading up to the Good Friday Agreement when he was taking calls from the White House and they were invariably coming from the president."
Central to Mrs Clinton's claim of an important Northern Ireland role is a meeting she attended in Belfast in with a group of women from cross-community groups. "I actually went to Northern Ireland more than my husband did," she said in Nashua, New Hampshire on January 6th.

"I remember a meeting that I pulled together in Belfast, in the town hall there, bringing together for the first time Catholics and Protestants from both traditions, having them sitting a room where they had never been before with each other because they don't go to school together, they don't live together and it was only in large measure because I really asked them to come that they were there.

"And I wasn't sure it was going to be very successful and finally a Catholic woman on one side of the table said, 'You know, every time my husband leaves for work in the morning I worry he won't come home at night.

"And then a Protestant woman on the other side said, 'Every time my son tries to go out at night I worry he won't come home again'. And suddenly instead of seeing each other as caricatures and stereotypes they saw each other as human beings and the slow, hard work of peace-making could move forward."

There is no record of a meeting at Belfast City Hall, though Mrs Clinton attended a ceremony there when her husband turned on the Christmas tree lights in November 1995. The former First Lady appears to be referring a 50-minute event the same day, arranged by the US Consulate, the same day at the Lamp Lighter Café on the city's Ormeau Road.

The "Belfast Telegraph" reported the next day that the café meeting was crammed with reporters, cameramen and Secret Service agents. Conversation "seemed a little bit stilted, a little prepared at times" and Mrs Clinton admired a stainless steel tea pot, which was duly given to her, for keeping the brew "so nice and hot". -- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/08/wuspols108.xml

I wish more politicians would use terms like "wee bit silly!" Less seriousness is usually good.

I got a pretty good chuckle out of "wee bit silly" as well.

I'm tooting my own wee horn, but I have done my part to keep the term alive. I also try to work in the occasional "Holy Schnikies!" a la Chris Farley in Tommy Boy and on SNL! Here are my wee contributions thus far:

Regarding Marxist philosophy & terminology:

I'd figure you are playing a bit there, my friend! Cute. Or if you're serious, your being a wee-bit transparent!

Abandoning a point:

Thinking about it now, whatever "point" I was going to make was a wee bit weak, and my memory too vague! Sorry for the distraction.

Admitting imperfection:

Yes, the neocon in me is a wee bit leftist, but I tolerate him. Can't be perfect. ;)

A call to greater scope over issues:

It should be noted, too, that different regions of Iraq vary greatly as to what is plaguing them, and correspondingly, what strategies are likely to succeed. The US approach is, in fact, a wee bit more nuanced than you make it out to be, my friend.

Regarding the Irish born Ms. Power's potential disenfranchisement:

If she dares to mention Saddam in the same sentence as Hitler, then I think she could be a wee bit frustrated at Obama's downplay of Saddam's role in the world, a.k.a. his "foreign policy" stance vis-sa-vi domestic pandering.

Come on folks. Let's keep this term prominent! It's good fun!

Well, sending Sinbad into the killing zone doesn't strike me as such a bad idea...

Sinbad is a very nice person to meet in person. I met him at a rib joint in LA a few years ago.

Me and Sinbad together in a rib joint would be awesome! Laughing and BBQ are two excellent activities, and even better when linked. So long as no one is laughing at the BBQ.

Alright, I retract that snark about Sinbad. Anyone who likes ribs can't be all bad... and especially after reading this funny post by the 'Bad himself, over at TalkingPointsMemo:

Senator Clinton, I admire you. You're a courageous, honorable, sort of weird lady. And today I'm proud to formally announce that I, Sinbad, hereby publicly offer you the opportunity to be my running mate. Let's make history, Senator. Take my hand and join me. Together we will change this nation, together we will - OH GOD, HEAD DOWN, HEAD DOWN, JESUS CHRIST THE SNIPERS ARE EVERYWH----

Thanks agio! Very funny post!!

Yep. A decent few of us saw it coming when Obama didn't take Ohio and Texas, too.

wow... the McCain campaign must love all of this discussion focused on the Clinton and Obama campaigns.

McCain is not immune, his time is coming. But I think while the near term fight is fiercest between Hillary and Obama each of them are relishing the struggles of the other far more than McCain is for the moment.

McCain doesn't need to insert himself and he probably loves that he doesn't need to waste money attacking, but has some concerns about losing the limelight.

McCain doesn't need to insert himself and he probably loves that he doesn't need to waste money attacking, but has some concerns about losing the limelight.

Yeah, this is a double-edged sword for McCain. On the one hand, he loses the spotlight, on the other hand, when/if he opens his mouth, he risks saying the word "gook" (for example) and taking the spotlight away from the fighting between Democrats as they compete for the nomination.

I'm convinced that McCain is only doing well in polls because he hasn't really had to open his mouth, lately. If he were forced to campaign on his views of the war (after his trip to the middle-east) and how successful it is, I wonder if he'd still have the strong showing he's basking in currently.

People keep citing polls, and I don't see the short-term value, during a heated primary.

At least Obama is consistently anti-American

Sigh... And again, just because you don't agree with a country's policies doesn't make you anti-that country.

Sir:

Actually, she has done this before. Like when she said she loved to bird hunt and she was familiar with the "rifle" used to hunt birds. Or something to that effect. All it did was show her total lack of familiarity with it, and her stunning ignorance.

Better to say, "I am not familiar with hunting," than to try to lie.

But, hey, she learned at the feet of the master, or the other way around.

I guess it's been long enough since Dick shot his friend in the face that politicians are allowed to hunt again?

This was before the Cheney incident.

I saw him at a speech the other day, and he made a joke about that incident which was really funny. Something along the lines of "you can always tell your true friends, they will go hunting with you."

Very self deprecating.

just because you don't agree with a country's policies doesn't make you anti-that country

Quite true.

I do look forward to Obama visiting Iraq to meet personally (face to face) with the men and women who's sacrifice he has proposed to squander. He can have a nice photo op at this traveling museum. He can shake the hand of a young Iraqi child that may end up facing AQI and insurgent torture and death:

The province is mixed between Sunnis and Shiias, a microcosm of what Iraq was before sectarian bloodletting largely partitioned many parts of the country along religious lines. Diyala's residents refer to it as "a little Iraq" — which makes fueling sectarian violence there an easier task.

"I think that is why Al Qaeda wants that province so very much, because it is 'a little Iraq,"' Hertling said. "It gives them access to Baghdad and it also ... is considered their caliphate capital."

Both Sunni insurgents and Shiite militia death squads regularly torture their captives before killing them -- often with power drills. Most of the hundreds of bodies that have turned up in Baghdad and other parts of Iraq have had signs of torture.

....The captives told U.S. soldiers they had been convicted to death by an insurgent court and had the choice of either beheading or a fatal gunshot.
....the discovery of more torture sites may occur.
....American commanders are the first to say they are a long way from declaring victory.

Obama and Clinton can address these common misconceptions, and confront the gentleman quoted in this article to let him know we'll be pulling out ASAP regarless of consequence:

The commonplace assumption that Al Qaeda will not work with Saddam's Baathist elements because the first are religious and the latter are purely secular is simply not true. Thus the marriage of convenience between these two groups is to obtain information from victims and kill a common enemy -- America -- and any perceived local supporters.
....
Over the past 12 years, I have observed many good days and numerous setbacks in Iraq, yet I have never lost hope in a positive outcome for the future of my country. We are witnessing the last phase and the end of terrorism in Iraq on a large scale.

Ms. Power had a variety of opinions and conclusions, but always showed great depth of understanding in these things. There are indeed complexities, down-sides to all approaches, that must be faced head on such as her details of a mass evacuation of Iraq following withdrawal. Indeed inaction and action both have profoundly mixed consequences. Her understanding of Saddam's place in history was well founded and stated. It is telling that Obama had to chuck her when she couldn't find a way to toe the campaign line, but instead acknowledged the complexity of the war-on-terror and of appropriate policy vs. campaign devices. He simply proved her point about "campaign" issues and politics as usual.