Activists in the bluest district in the bluest city of probably the bluest state in the nation believe they've earned the right to deliver a blunt message to Hillary Clinton: Senator, we in this liberal enclave see red every time we hear that you are the Democrats' main hope to reclaim the White House in 2008.

Why? We see you as a female equivalent of John Kerry, taking safe, centrist positions in general and, most glaringly, a wimpy stance on the war in Iraq.

Mark Green, who was Kerry's campaign manager in New York City and who supports your national ambitions, found himself on the defensive during a recent appearance in our district. Addressing members of an Upper West Side political club, he chose to speak positively about your presidential prospects at a particularly untimely moment: You had just been quoted in the media as backing the recent invasion of Fallujah on the grounds that it would "bring stability to Iraq."

The uproar over that Fallujah comment - "Panderer!" said one member; "She'll jump on any bandwagon," complained another - had barely subsided when Green arrived. He came to lead an election post-mortem but was asked about a key figure in the party's future: you. What was his rationale for supporting you, given your tepid policy positions?

"She's doing what she has to do to be a credible national candidate," Green said. "When was the last time an Upper West Sider ran for president?"

That's a fair question. But more important to us is when will we have a presidential candidate not shaped in the Al Gore and John Kerry mold? Having seen what happened to those losers, we believe Democrats should recognize that this play-it-safe strategy is a recipe for broad-scale disaffection, if not disaster.

We probably did you a disservice, Senator, by not speaking out long before this. You dismayed us during your first 21 months in office when you were content to remain in the background. We kept silent because your devotion to attracting federal money for local programs and to providing constituent services was worthwhile, if not leaderly.

We lost patience on Oct. 10, 2002, when you voted to give the president war powers. It is painful to remember the gullible words with which you helped set the stage for the Iraq debacle: "I take the president at his word that he will try hard to pass a UN resolution and will seek to avoid war, if at all possible."

You made it impossible for us to respect you after it became clear that, far from "trying hard," President George W. Bush was determined to go to war. We expected you at least to express strong misgivings about the pre-emptive invasion. Instead, you resorted to another flag-waver on March 19, 2003: "The thoughts and prayers of all New Yorkers and Americans," you said, "are with the nearly 225,000 brave men and women who are at this moment putting their own lives in danger to protect the freedoms we all cherish."

We hope it embarrasses you now, given the bloodshed, torture and chaos that has ensued in Iraq.

Polls show a plurality of Americans now consider the war a mistake from the start. Although you enabled that mistake, you have said little about it since early last year. Indeed, of the hundreds of press releases your office has issued in 2004, only one that I've seen - on the need for multilateral assistance in the rebuilding effort - made direct reference to the morass this war has become.

That's not good enough for us in New York City. We demand that both you and Sen. Charles Schumer become more combative on Iraq. Schumer has been as bad as you, but he's not the one being touted as a presidential candidate.

A Democratic club member at the meeting with Green said she found instructive the uncompromising words of a right-wing adversary, the Rev. Patrick Mahoney, director of the Christian Defense Coalition. Mahoney had warned Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist what would happen if he didn't stop moderate Republican Sen. Arlen Specter from becoming chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. "Don't turn to us in four years when you want to run for president," Mahoney said, "and expect our passion and zeal."

No Democratic Party candidate can expect the fervor of the party's progressive base if he or she doesn't acknowledge the evil the Bush administration has done in Iraq. It should have been the moral issue of the 2004 campaign. And whatever happens between now and 2008, Iraq will be central to our response. That means, as of now, we see you as a threat rather than a hope. And, as the bluest of the blue, we'll do what we can to make this message resonate among all Democrats nationwide.

John Richard Starkey is a partner in Perfect Pitch Communications, a polling and media relations firm in Manhattan.

© 2004 Newsday, Inc.