General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJust a little history lesson for the "Clintons are War Mongers" crowd.
Bill Clinton had a framework for peace in the Korean Penninsula in October, 2000 before Bush/Cheney scrapped it. Please don't ever say there is no difference between a Democrat and a Republican.
Gothmog
(143,998 posts)YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)Gothmog
(143,998 posts)A vote for Stein helped trump and was in effect a vote for trump.
The idiots who voted for stein need to take responsibility for their stupidity
Response to Gothmog (Reply #4)
Post removed
ismnotwasm
(41,916 posts)What would you have Clinton do? And a vote for Stein ~was~ a vote for Trump. End of story
Aristus
(66,075 posts)Anyone still bleating "But Hillary..." at this point is beyond any rational persuasion...
Heartstrings
(7,349 posts)Eliot Rosewater
(31,096 posts)her?
I cant fucking believe you wrote what you wrote and that you are on this message board.
god DAMMIT
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)They are so quick to cast blame, but there no self reflection at all. I honestly don't think nuclear war will change them.
hay rick
(7,520 posts)Taking responsibility for the consequences of your actions is so, so...so like being an adult.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Gothmog
(143,998 posts)Why was Stein eating dinner with Putin http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/guess-who-came-dinner-flynn-putin-n742696
Hekate
(90,189 posts)...suppression, gerrymandering, Putin, hacking, lies, bots, and all that shit. SHE WON THE ELECTION. All that other shit is NOT HER FAULT. Get over yourself.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)barbtries
(28,702 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)never want to own it, but you're exactly right. Their actions belie their "strongly held convictions".
SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)pnwmom
(108,925 posts)SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)If there is a hell, there is an especially hot corner of it reserved for that traitorous sack of shit.
emulatorloo
(43,979 posts)You vote for the person who has no chance of winning rather than the Dem, you've more or less enabled the Republican's victory when the votes are tallied. See those razor thin margins in Wisconsin for example.
"Lesser of two evils" is also a metaphor. Since no candidate will match you ideological 100% you vote for the candidate who is closest to you. The Dem candidate is not literally "evil"
BarbD
(1,190 posts)JHan
(10,173 posts)JHan
(10,173 posts)These aren't just "two difference people" and you know this....... this is politics and it's deadly serious. Elections are about consequences.
If you don't vote you amplify the power of those who are voting.
If don't vote wisely, you end up with outcomes paradoxical to what you wanted: e.g. Stein voters voted their "conscience" and in so doing ended up with a President 100 times less liberal and less progressive than Hillary.
Their votes became meaningless for their cause and contributed to an EC loss resulting in no progressive agenda being implemented.
So yeah, they have to own their choice and deal.
George II
(67,782 posts)BainsBane
(53,001 posts)I believe they deliberately sought to punish the people they knew would most suffer under Trump. They chose to deliver the country to fascism. Whether that was because they aren't capable of thinking about anyone but their own bruised egos or they support Trump's White Nationalist agenda, it doesn't much matter because the result is the same. Actions are what count. Fascism is as fascism does.
George II
(67,782 posts)...have been for trump.
That's how it works. Remember Nader in 2000?
ProudLib72
(17,984 posts)I think it was. Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria (remember there was talk of invading there?). Somewhere down the line was NK. They had it all planned out.
RandySF
(57,588 posts)ProudLib72
(17,984 posts)Although there were other reports that marked more countries that the neocons considered hostile to the US, or more accurately, hostile to US (Western) imperial ambitions, the September 2000 report focused on five countries. With Iraq and Libya already liberated, three countries are still on the hitlist: Syria, Iran and North Korea. Coincidentally (or not), these are some of the main countries that the Trump administration is targeting, and we are only a few months into Trumps reign.
It's the list made by Bill Kristol's group. Might take decades, but the design hasn't changed.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,096 posts)But look, she gave a speech, so it is appropriate that now the world ends.
I know, sarcasm , but it is our reality.
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)maryellen99
(3,781 posts)keithbvadu2
(36,360 posts)Trump tweeted a warning about WWlll
July
(4,750 posts)SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)Amazing how all his predictions are now coming true!
SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)xmas74
(29,658 posts)Then one of the Bros jumped all over me.
He couldn't handle me. Neither could his friends.
Blue Ridge Virginia
(26 posts)Always loved the Clintons, but won't be talked down to by their self-elected surrogates seeking to polarize DU rather than discuss honestly the complexity of US history over the last two decades. PLONK.
Hekate
(90,189 posts)...in the short time you've been with us, Blue Ridge Virginia?
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)DUers don't think Hillary was a war monger. That's the lie pushed by Jill Stein and her ilk.
Link to tweet
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)mcar
(42,206 posts)did to these two people. Never.
yardwork
(61,408 posts)SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)Tactical Peek
(1,204 posts)JHan
(10,173 posts)#TweetsThatDontAgeWell
betsuni
(25,120 posts)The Clintons as warmongers is one of the cornerstones of the religion of anti-Democratic idiots.
Stonepounder
(4,033 posts)How about positive efforts to elect Democrats NEXT year? I don't give a rat's ass about Jill Stein, or who did what to whom!
Get a grip. Move on. Get out and work to elect YOUR candidates and quit worrying about something that you no longer have ANY control over and no ability to change.
DeeDeeNY
(3,352 posts)nini
(16,670 posts)By trying to keep pounding into idiots heads to not make the same mistakes of not seeing through the likes of Stein etc..
progressoid
(49,824 posts)There will always be a Stein or Nader or Johnson that will get a small percentage of votes.
Also, treating them like idiots won't win them over.
nini
(16,670 posts)Last edited Fri Aug 11, 2017, 07:51 PM - Edit history (1)
I don't coddle disruptors. I call them out and mock them. They are ruining this country and if they want their ass kissed this Homey don't play that!
Voters are adults who have a responsibility to do what's best for the country. If they do not - the gloves are off.
KitSileya
(4,035 posts)Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Deval Patrick et al are being accused of the same fake smears as Hillary Clinton was by the same fanatical "Our Revolution" "dirtbag left" bots and trolls.
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)I understand people's anger and frustration, but yeah, let's stop it now.
Bladewire
(381 posts)Martin Eden
(12,801 posts)In matters of war or anything else.
The administration of GW Bush is overwhelmingly responsible for launching the 2003 war of choice based on lies in Iraq.
However, I will also say that John Kerry, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, and any other Dem who voted in October 2002 to give GW Bush authority to invade Iraq forever lost my vote in Democratic primaries (though not the general election, of course).
xmas74
(29,658 posts)Compared to what they know now. It's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback.
Martin Eden
(12,801 posts)We knew about PNAC and we knew the case for war was bogus and we knew that once given authority Bush was going to invade.
BEFORE, not after it all went to hell.
We called and wrote our reps, and ultimately slightly LESS than half the combined Dems in the House & Senate voted for the IWR.
But some politicians stuck their finger in the post 9/11 political winds and calculated it was better to appear tough on national security.
Either that or they were less informed than we were at DU or they deluded themselves into thinking Cheney/Bush would act in good faith or they were on board with the neocon agenda.
shadowmayor
(1,325 posts)President Clinton was working (negotiating with the enemy) on a long term path to peace. Part of that deal was for North Korea to not pursue nuclear weapons. Things were moving forward until the Texas Turd announced that North Korea was part of the axis of evil. Another Texas cowpie, Karen Hughes came to the microphone and said that we don't negotiate with our enemies and we don't do nuance.
The situation we're in, is due in great part to lil' Bush scrubbing years of work. The Obama team reached out, with no support from the Republicans in Congress, but North Korea felt their best position was to develop nukes.
This recent history is never mentioned in the media reports on our current situation. And that's a damned shame. It was the Republican leadership and party that pushed North Korea to build a nuclear arsenal.
Ford_Prefect
(7,817 posts)yardwork
(61,408 posts)Dark n Stormy Knight
(9,760 posts)Diplomacy is for cucks!!
not fooled
(5,791 posts)Don't forget President Obama getting Iran to sign the nuclear deal, which the crackpot actual warmongers in the White House now are trying to undermine in order to foment war with Iran, i.e. returning to the position held by the neocons during chimpy's admin, when only the clusterf*ck that Iraq turned out to be prevented them from going to war in even more Middle Eastern countries.
Just citing another example of a Democratic president preventing war while puke administrations (not just the figurehead boobs they get into the presidency) try to go to war to fulfill crackpot schemes while of course using other folks' children to fight.
Cosmocat
(14,543 posts)Telling them to not do the deal.
That this country, time after time after time after time indulges their fuck wittery and dies not punish the at the ballot box is why we care were we are today.
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(107,063 posts)spanone
(135,627 posts)lutherj
(2,485 posts)Amendment against her to secure the nomination. Clinton voted for the Iraq war, the Patriot Act, Patriot Act II, an amendment that would have sunsetted certain more extreme provisions of the Patriot Act, and as I have mentioned the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment, which was strongly supported by John McCain and which encouraged the Bush Administration to designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist group, this in 2007 when Bush and Cheney were eager to bomb Iran and start another war. As for her record as Secretary of State it's well-known and can be reviewed here (as well as friendships with conservative and hawkish generals):
http://www.salon.com/2016/04/27/democrats_this_is_why_you_need_to_fear_hillary_clinton_the_ny_times_is_absolutely_right_shes_a_bigger_hawk_than_the_republicanse/
During the recent election campaign she promoted the establishment of a no-fly zone over Syria which would have led to a confrontation with Russian war planes.
Hillary's record is clear. She's a war monger. (And just for the record, I voted for Hillary in the general election because I regarded it as the only responsible choice. But I voted for Obama in 2008 because I didn't like Hillary's voting record in the senate.)
ismnotwasm
(41,916 posts)And one Salon article doesn't prove anything about any topic, particularly complex ones.
lutherj
(2,485 posts)Anyway, I just listed her voting record in the senate. Look it up if you don't believe me. Did you vote for Obama or Hillary in 2008?
ismnotwasm
(41,916 posts)Anything that reduces Hillary Clinton to "Warmonger" is simplistic bullshit.
lutherj
(2,485 posts)I'm willing to bet the majority of DU voted for him over Clinton. I remember why he won. You could easily find it on the internet. It's because he DIDN'T SUPPORT THE WAR IN IRAQ!
Let's see, now? Who did? Hmmm . . .
xmas74
(29,658 posts)The 2008 primaries.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)So much so that I skipped our caucuses. I knew I'd be fine with either one of them.
xmas74
(29,658 posts)But I did lean towards her at the time. I felt her experiences lent more towards being ready for the office. But I did like him and I campaigned in the GE.
I just don't get where the poster thought DU was totally for him. I remember some nasty fights from the primary season.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)voting for it doesn't make her a war monger. Neither did any of the other votes you cited.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)lutherj
(2,485 posts)you can check the facts for yourself. BTW, the Salon article references a NY Times article if that's more PC for you.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)You should learned more about the votes before you cited hers completely out of context.
Hekate
(90,189 posts)...to the point of slander.
Only a few weeks before the election I had lunch with one of my longtime friends in the antiwar movement, and she filled me in on how Hillary was going to take us straight into war with I-now-forget-who, because she just looooves her some war.
I felt sick to my stomach, not only for my friend's sake but for all those I used to work with that she was still so involved with. I tried to draw my old friend out on her deeper understanding of probable threats from, say, China. China has global ambitions, and all the instances I mentioned were as Greek to her. Nope, Hillary was a warmonger, and probably worse than Trump.
We parted in sadness at each other's ignorance, and have not spoken since.
The point of this little anecdote is that spreading this false meme has real consequences, and I don't mean the loss of a friendship. I mean the loss of a presidency.
lutherj
(2,485 posts)the public record. Moreover I spent a good deal of effort during the campaign trying to convince my leftist friends to vote for Hillary. I was not then calling her a warmonger. When they brought up her record I argued that it would be easier for the left to sway Hillary than Trump, and that in other areas the left would be making progress. But there's no point in whitewashing history. Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it. I'm well aware that it's a complex and dangerous world, but the history lesson that I have taken is that the last 15 years of endless and immoral wars is a monumental clusterf*ck.
Hekate
(90,189 posts)lutherj
(2,485 posts)war have been, in my opinion, a monumental clusterfuck. Do you support endless war?
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)then the Republicans in January would give him a blank-check IWR.
It wasn't any Democrat's fault that Bush chose to ignore the conditions and go to war even though WMD's were never found.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)for the Patriot Act -- where she was in a 98 vote Senate majority -- somehow made her a war mongerer.
wryter2000
(46,016 posts)How can anyone in their right mind believe such a thing? Same with the "no difference" crowd.
IMHO, it's perfectly reasonable to say our candidate isn't good enough or liberal enough. I might disagree with you, but I won't call you irrational. The "worse than" and "no difference" nonsense is ridiculous.
I was a mod here when "Obama = Bush" was allowed, and it drove me nuts. I believe DU policy has changed since then.
NewJeffCT
(56,827 posts)when he claimed he was against the Iraq War from the beginning, even though he was on tape on Howard Stern saying he supported the war. A few on the left (not many, but enough) thought that since she had voted for the Iraq War and her husband had signed NAFTA, it made her worse than Trump, who said he wanted to scrap NAFTA.
wryter2000
(46,016 posts)You mentioned what he said on Howard Stern. Plus, he was running as a crazed rightie. There was no way to trust what he said.
JI7
(89,172 posts)KG
(28,748 posts)pnwmom
(108,925 posts)pnwmom
(108,925 posts)Obama shouldn't have criticized her for her IWR vote. Hillary voted for an IWR that was conditioned upon finding WMD's. We never found them but Bush went to war anyway.
She voted for the conditional IWR knowing that the Republicans were about to come into power in Congress; and that if the conditional IWR didn't pass, then they'd simply vote for a blank check IWR in January.
So it wasn't as if a vote against the IWR would have prevented Bush from going to war. He could simply have called for a another vote in January, when the Republicans had the majority.
With regard to the Patriot Acts 1 and 2, only 1 Senator voted against the 2001 Patriot Act, so it is ludicrous to claim that made Hillary a war mongerer. Only 10 voted against the re-authorization.
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/patriotact20012006senatevote.shtml
And with regard to Kyl-Lieberman, Obama abstained from the vote, he didn't oppose it. And John McCain, who you claim was a strong supporter, also abstained.
https://thinkprogress.org/breaking-lieberman-kyls-iran-amendment-passes-44ab3a7b1182/
betsuni
(25,120 posts)pansypoo53219
(20,906 posts)David__77
(23,214 posts)One could have thought Clinton was a warmonger and still vote for her. I disagreed with foreign policy very much and still voted for her.
Opposing Trump didn't and doesn't require praising Clintons foreign policy.