Susan Sarandon: Hillary failed me

[Cheese Sandwich]

Actress Susan Sarandon says she is backing Bernie Sanders for the White House because of Hillary Clinton's vote to authorize the war in Iraq.

Sarandon described the 2002 war vote as the most consequential foreign affairs action of her lifetime.

"She failed me," Sarandon said of Clinton's vote in favor of the war.

"That wasn't just a mistake, it was a disaster."

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/267307-susan-sarandon-hillary-failed-me

[cali]

1. It amazes me how easily Hillary supporters dismiss her role

in this monumental catastrophe.

[SunSeeker]

3. It amazes me how easily Sanders supporters dismiss Bush's role

in this monumental catastrophe.


Part of that "always blame the Dems" reflex.

[Fumesucker]

9. Bush's role was hoodwinking Hillary with his vast intellect and unparalleled command of vernacular

[SunSeeker]

20. Bush committed a crime against America. It wasn't a mere "hoodwink."

See how you downplay that shit? Bush had Colin Powell, who people respected and trusted, go to the UN and hold up vials of manufactured "evidence" of yellowcake development. Then Bush went in without getting UN backing and the other conditions of the IWR that Hillary voted for and without an exit strategy and committed one strategic blunder after another, including dismissing all of Saddam's troops so they could go on to form IS. But you want to blame it all on Hillary.

[Fumesucker]

24. I have a metric fuckton of posts on DU criticizing C+ Augustus

One of the reasons Hillary's support for the Iraq war pissed me off so much, I loathe Dubya.

Ever heard of the Powell Doctrine?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powell_Doctrine

Is a vital national security interest threatened?
Do we have a clear attainable objective?
Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
Is the action supported by the American people?
Do we have genuine broad international support?[2]

How many of those points were actually true for Iraq?

[randys1]

32. It was a terrible mistake by Hillary. I think she was looking at the politics of the vote

and wrongly concluded that supporting the option to go to war was where she needed to be.

That war destroyed lives, I hold them all responsible who voted for it.

It wont stop me from voting for her if Bernie isnt the nom, for obvious reasons.

Even though I am concerned that she maybe hasn't learned her lesson yet on this war issue, even with that, still the easiest decision I will ever make in my life...

I wont think twice, I will work for her campaign, I will vote and encourage others to do so as if my and their lives depend on it

because it will

[Fumesucker]

100. And yet that vote cost her the 2008 nomination, if she had stood up against Bush she would have won

Of course, that's the part you think of as a "mistake" because it made her lose the nomination. Never mind the literally uncounted deaths and the horror, focus on what's really important, how that vote cost Hillary her rightful place in the Oval Office.

[randys1]

122. You dont know who you are talking to, I was speaking of the war solely in the terms

of her political career since that is what we talk about here.

My step-son, my family, all drastically and negatively impacted by the one year he (step-son) spent in the 3rd ID being one of the very first to step foot in country in one of Saddam's palaces.

My issue was staring out the front window of my house on those nights my wife would work later than me, wondering if the late model sedan would pull up BEFORE she got him, so two uniformed soldiers could come to my door to tell me he was dead.

Wondering if they would do that and then I would have to be the one to tell HER that her beloved son was dead. Fortunately for him, he didnt die and had relatively minor injuries when compared to others.

For that year I figure the W admin owes me personally about a million dollars for the pain and suffering and damage to my heart, having had 2 heart attacks after that.

What W owes my son (step), my wife, and the thousands of other Americans I cant even tabulate, let alone the hundreds of thousands he murdered in Iraq.

I was against the war before many here probably paid a lot of attention to it, you see, given the DIRECT impact on our lives.

I was monitoring the night after night DEMANDS by Sean Hannity BANGING on his desk DEMANDING war with Saddam, while he refused to fight himself.

I could go on but it is giving me a fucking headache.

[Fumesucker]

125. It doesn't matter any more, Hillary's campaign is about to faceplant

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511091339

[randys1]

128. I accept your apology for implying I didnt care about the war, oh wait... you didnt

[Voice for Peace]

175. I'll apologize on fumesucker's behalf

People including myself reading too fast lately, responding too quickly or to wrong person. That was a really moving pist.

[greiner3]

131. Thomas Jefferson

Hi Benjamin or are you the 'Smoking Man'. Damn but you aged like hell

[IdaBriggs]

146. Thank you for one of the most eloquent rants on the human cost

of that Evil War.



And I agree with you that Hillary should have voted NO.

[randys1]

148. Thanks but I dont do it justice, for me it was more of an inconvenience compared to the

death and destruction.

I feel selfish even talking about my tiny little issues, and they are tiny in comparison.

I will NEVER forget watching that punk Hannity arguing with Colmes and pounding the table demanding war.

[IdaBriggs]

152. My wake-up moment on the insanity of the Bush people was when Rumsfield

was on one of the Sunday talk shows right after 9-11 and wouldn't rule out dropping nuclear bombs.

I will never forget that - it was just...obscene.

And they were talking like it made sense. It felt absolutely unreal.

Woke me up FAST - NEVER trust a Republican with any important decisions!!!

[randys1]

157. I should remember that, but I dont.

And if people thought Bush and Rummy and dickhead were bad, they were hippie pacifists compared to what Cruz or Trump want to do.

[PyaarRevolution]

167. I hope...

You meet Sean Hannity one day and read him the riot act.

[ljm2002]

110. It is more than obvious that she made a political calculation...

...as did many, many Democrats. So on top of making such a disastrously bad vote, she also miscalculated. She would have been better off politically if she had had the courage of her convictions. That's assuming she had any convictions on the matter.

[JDPriestly]

124. It wasn't her mistake. It was her fear.

It was the same thing that makes her think that going to Alabama "all by myself" was a big deal.

Fear.

Bernie Sanders is wise and not overwhelmed by fear.

Hillary is fearful. We do not need a president who makes decisions based on fear, whether fear that people will disapprove of her or fear of power.

Bernie is the courageous one of the two.

Especially now, America needs a courageous president. American needs Bernie Sanders.

[dflprincess]

187. The only thing she was fearful about was that voting "No"

would make people think she wasn't "tough" enough to be president.

[JDPriestly]

190. Right. That's just what I mean.

[Beartracks]

192. Bing. Go. ^^^this^^^^

I've always felt that any Dem who voted for the Iraq war resolution did so: a) knowing full well that Bush intended to go to war with it (thus making it a "vote for war" practically, if not technically); and b) out of fear of being labelled a pussy, peacenik, unpatriotic Liberal. The war drums were beating pretty loudly at that time in the media and on rightwing radio (of course), so voting No would've been political suicide.

Oh, wait -- except it wasn't. Bernie voted No and that didn't ding his career one bit.

===============

[dflprincess]

199. Wellstone was locked in a tight Senate race and was told a no vote

Would guarantee he'd lose. He followed his conscience and took a jump in the polls.

[Beartracks]

205. Following one's conscience earns respect.

You know what earns even more respect? Following one's conscience and being right about it.



===============

[Rockyj]

196. How many died because of US!

https://www.iraqbodycount.org/

[sabrina 1]

204. It wasn't a mistake. W0w, all those innocent children, I remember Dahr Jamail's terrible photos

which I forced myself to look at because we had an obligation to at least look at the horror that was done in our name, the babies lying in a row, little bodies so innocent. How could ANYONE with any decency not have known what the consequences of supporting that lie, would be? WE KNEW.

A mistake is forgetting to take out the garbage, it is NOT contributing to the deaths of over one milliion mostly innocent men, women and children.

How on earth do you come with 'she thought it was the political' thing to do as an excuse for the horror in Iraq. She then went on pushed this administration into creating a similar, maybe worse horror in Libya, where are all the Libya cheerleaders these days btw? Maybe they prefer not to follow what happened to that once stable and well off African nation. Our FPs are so racist too just as the British and French and Belgians were.

And then there was her response to the question about torture.

If a soldier can use conscientious objection to refuse to go to war, voters can ceratainly use it to refuse to elect people who re likely to inflict this kind of damage on millions of innocent people.

And then there is Honduras. Hillary is a warmonger, period. Vote for her if you will, I sure hope you were not an opponent of Bush's Wars because that would make you inconsistent. I take it you supported Bush/Cheney's FP, Hiillary certainly does.

[merrily]

56. Let no one hoodwink you. The relevant portion of the Iraq War resolution:

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) Authorization.--The President is authorized to use the Armed
Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and
appropriate in order to--
(1) defend the national security of the United States
against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) Presidential Determination.--In connection with the exercise of
the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President
shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible,
but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make
available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the
President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that--
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or
other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately
protect the national security of the United States against the
continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to
enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq; and
(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent
with the United States and other countries continuing to take
the necessary actions against international terrorist and
terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations,
or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the
terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

(c) War Powers Resolution Requirements.--
(1) Specific statutory authorization.--Consistent with
section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress
declares that this section is intended to constitute specific
statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of
the War Powers Resolution.
(2) Applicability of other requirements.--Nothing in this
joint resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers
Resolution.

[Separation]

156. Lets be honest here!

The Powell Doctrine is a fine primer, but the facts were being skewed so badly,

Is a vital national security interest threatened?

Sadam is working with Al Queda and has weapons of Mass Destruction - Yes it was a lie, but it was the lie in our face 24/7. It was already a "fact" that if you were brown, muslim and not an American ally, you were the bad guy.

Do we have a clear attainable objective?

To Remove Sadam Hussein and secure WMD's

Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?

Absoluteley not, they didnt even know the differance between a Sunni, Shia, or Peshmerga

Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?

When Sadam kicked out the UN and was posit as if he did have WMD's, he played himself as a sucker

Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?

I believe that they intended to stay, but PM of Iraq gummed that one up.

Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?

It was at the time.

Is the action supported by the American people?

At the beginning of the war people were out for blood, do you remember the Dixie Chick's and what they went through?

Do we have genuine broad international support?

46 countries supported the invasion, although only 3 countries actually provided troops for the initial invasion, 37 countries provided troops after the initial invasion. Of course, it was mainly NATO countries.

So, using the Powell Doctrine as a primer the majority of those points were positive. I would like to point out however, there was almost half of the country that was not fooled by this BS. At the time however it was political suicide to object. The only politicians who objected put their value ahead of their job.

[A Simple Game]

45. Everything you say is absolutely true, all but the very last sentence.

Nobody wants to put all of the blame on Hillary.

But to understand the reasoning for placing a share of the blame on Hillary you have to know that our government operates on a system of checks and balances. The Forefathers were very smart setting up this system. It was designed to prevent just what you pointed out in your post. It removes the power to go to war from the Executive branch where one person could use that power for any number of unworthy reasons. Now here is where Hillary's role comes in, she was charged with being a part of that check and balance system and she failed to do her part, not by herself, but she still failed. Hundreds of thousands of people died because of that failure and many are still dying to this day.

Don't try to excuse any of those voting for authorization by saying they were dupped, I knew the truth and so did millions of others, the information was there. Hillary either failed to educate herself or she made a political expedient decision, either way she aided in the unnecessary death of hundreds of thousands of people and caused the suffering for untold millions more.

Our system can only work if the politicians we elect take their job seriously. As I was one of the one's that helped elect Hillary to be a Senator from New York, I can never vote to allow her to make a mistake of that caliber again. If I did I wouldn't be doing my job as a voter.

[tecelote]

59. And, what about her push for regime change in the Middle East?

She's a hawk and many more innocent people will die under a Hillary Presidency than a Bernie one.

[merrily]

68. It was not a hoodwink at all. See reply 56. The IWR authorized Bush to do whatever he saw fit.

Whereas clauses, whether in a contract or a resolution have no legal force or effect. Every lawyer knows that. Every lawyer also knows you don't agree to one thing verbally, then leave it out of the contract or resolution.

I can't tell if Hillary's supporters are trying to kid themselves or trying to kid the rest of us. They knew very well what they passed or they would have been screaming when he started sending troops there.

Please.

[Scootaloo]

102. And Hillary Clinton bought it completely.

She sold every Bush talking point. She advocated for military action. She stood by her decision for years, until it became a political liability in late 2007.

She has since expressed literal glee over the stat of Libya. She's advocated a Syria policy that would lead to a hot war with Russia. She's put Iran as her #1 enemy, and has vowed to "obliterate them."

Hillary Clinton has a pattern, and her Iraq War vote was just the tip of that iceberg.

[Android3.14]

66. Hoodwinked? I think not. She knew it was all lies and went along anyway

I remember the protests.

500,000 + dead, and the truth of the matter is that we all knew. Most of us tried to stop that juggernaut, but not Clinton. Nope, that pathetic coward went along to get along.



Nope, her hands, just like the hands of every elected leader that approved Bush' war, are red-red-red with the blood of hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

[Fumesucker]

91. Oops, I must have left off the sarcasm tag..

My bad.

[Android3.14]

185. 'Sokay

That thing was such a bad call.

[EndElectoral]

88. Yet quite a few Democrats saw through the Bush mirage, including Sanders. it's called leadership.

[Karma13612]

183. Leadership and Judgement. Sound reasoning,

being informed, and having the courage to do whats right.

And THAT is the making of a great President.

[Paka]

166. +1

[KingCharlemagne]

10. Most Sanders supporters believe Bush and other members of the Bush

Junta should be facing war crimes charges in an international tribunal. But nice try there.

[merrily]

72. Bush went to Congress as required by the Constitution. They empowered him.

[KingCharlemagne]

136. I agree, although the Constitution does not require a President

to go to Congress. The Constitution merely says that Congress shall have the power to 'declare War.'

The law that Bush violated was international law as laid out at Nuremberg and in the Geneva Conventions. I suppose an ambitious D.A. could also make the case that Bush knowlingly committed fraud upon the people of the U.S. and their representatives.

[merrily]

144. How do you figure the Constitution doesn't require the President to go to Congress?

The Constitution does not empower the President to declare war, only to be CIC once war is declared.

[KingCharlemagne]

170. Sorry, I was indulging my pedantic side. I don't think the Constitution prescribes that

the President go before Congress to seek a Declaration of War. In theory, Congress could declare war on its own, without a president formally requesting it, at which point the President would serve as CiC in seeing that the war was prosecuted successfully. However, that Bork-lime pedantry on my part ignores what traditionally has happened in American political life.

In practice, it has been conventional for presidents to seek a Declaration of War from Congress (thinking back to FDR and World War II) or other congressional blessing for their military adventures (thinking back to the Gulf of Tonkin). Since Congress enjoys the power of the purse, a president who did not seek congressional approval would risk being thwarted via the appropriations process.

[JDPriestly]

202. Congress has the power to declare war.

US Constitution, Article I, section 8

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, to grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei#section8

Here, in Article II are the relevant powers of the president with regard to war:

The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii#section2

Many years ago, I learned in high school that Congress has to declare war and then the president is the commander in chief. Do you know of any law of constitutional provision that states otherwise?

[KingCharlemagne]

224. Your understanding exactly matches my own. Congress

has seen fit to circumscribe more narrowly Presidential war-making power by passage of legislation like the War Powers Act (early '70s).

I fear my pedantry and lack of clarity has wasted good folks' energies debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, when I asked whether the Constitution requires the President to ask for a Declaration of War (or whether, for example, Congress could simply declare war without a formal presidential request).

[JDPriestly]

229. The Constitution specifically provides that Congress has the power to declare war.

It says nothing of the sort in Article II which lists the president's powers.

The president has the authority to enter into treaties and is the commander in chief, but it is Congress quite specifically that is authorized by the Constitution to determine the budgets and overall policy of the management of our armed forces and prisoners, etc.

The War Powers Act is more a confirmation of the design set forth in the Constitution in my view.

[merrily]

206. Okay. I thought you were saying the President could do it on his or her own, without

Congress and I disagreed. You were saying the opposite, which is something I never thought of and is interesting.
Even if Congress were to act, though, the bill would go to the President, like every other bill.

[roguevalley]

12. no one anywhere does. If not for people like Hillary

rubber stamping his murderous rampage, it would not have happened. She is as responsible for this as all the others are and nothing, even your deflection will change that. ISIS is part of her legacy for voting for this vile event.

[cali]

16. I blame anyone who voted for the IWR obscenity

and anyone who acted as a cheerleader for the war. Hillary did both.

[EndElectoral]

89. Exactly. Well said.

[jeff47]

17. So, how exactly did Bush force her to not read the NIE and vote for the war? (nt)

[merrily]

65. Not only vote for. Advocate for. Help Bushco sell the war to the public, esp. Democrats.

[elias49]

35. Thing is, Bush isn't running for president.

See the difference?

[pnwmom]

81. John Kerry did, and few Dems here ever attacked him for that.

So did Joe Biden.

[frylock]

46. Who the FUCK has dismissed Bush's role?!

[OnyxCollie]

207. Obama?

[Betty Karlson]

60. Bush made the 3.00 AM call: "Are you with me for a war?" - and Hillary failed the test

by saying "yes" when he called. Blame both of them.

[JDPriestly]

78. In case you missed it, watch this video.

When that goes viral, Hillary will not have the support of Democrats.

Remember. She had been in the White House just a few years before making that speech. Her lack of judgment is downright scary.

And please don't respond to me without watching that whole video. It's her words. She is not to be trusted. That video is not negative campaigning. It's her words. There is almost no commentary at all in it.

That video is a confession to bad judgment.

Of all people in the United States, she and her husband could have and should have known.

[Duval]

120. Kudos! I had forgotten this.

[artislife]

177. +100000

[Jackilope]

180. Wow, didn't see the side by side video before. That is powerful.

I do remember seeing a Code Pink group video trying to talk to Clinton about Iraq back then ... and she didn't budge but dug her heels in. Bad judgement bacl then and I do not trust her judgement now.

[tom_kelly]

184. The look on the faces of those two boys at the end...

She HELPED ruin their childhoods and the lives of millions of people around the world.

[840high]

197. Thank you.

[ljm2002]

105. I hold Democrats to a higher standard. n/t

[Duval]

108. What Sanders supporters? On DU, we have a brain and can read.

Who can ever forget Bush's lies, Powell's, Rice's, Rumsfeld's, etc.? The whole world knows it, SunSeeker. The point is, we KNEW before hand about the lies, and still some Democrats and Hillary among them, voted FOR it. I know some were "afraid" of being labeled "Unpatriotic", but Sanders didn't fall for it.

[beam me up scottie]

119. I still burn to see him indicted and imprisoned for it.

So your post is a straw man.

[rhett o rick]

173. Bush isn't running in this election, H. Clinton is. She made a collosal mistake in forsaking her

own party, her own nation, the troops that died or wounded, the 500,000 dead Iraqi's including 20,000 children. A mistake that helped lead to a major redistribution of wealth to the Wealth 1% (of which HRC is a member).

We knew Bush was an idiot and should not have been given the authorization to kill Iraqi's. That's why we are disappointed that the balance of power failed when HRC a Democrat betrayed her Party and supported the Idiot Bush and Crazy Assed Cheney.

She made a huge mistake and doesn't deserve to be our president.

[shawn703]

225. We know Republicans are going to act like Republicans

When the Democrats we elect act like Republicans most voters would consider that a betrayal.

[pnwmom]

80. It didn't keep Dems from supporting John Kerry, who also voted for the IWR.

And Dems love Biden, despite his vote.

Oh yeah, there's that gender thing. Women are always held to a higher standard, even by other women.

[EndElectoral]

92. Neither Biden nor Kerry won the Presidency. Interesting. Perhaps a contributing factor.

[pnwmom]

97. Kerry was strongly supported by Dems, but he lost because of the lies

during his swift boating. The issue of the IWR was not part of it.

[nyabingi]

106. I knew the Democrats had messed up once again

in nominating a centrist like John Kerry when he stepped up to microphone and said "I'm John Kerry, reporting for duty!" while saluting.

Not only was it corny as hell, but it signaled the right-wing Democrat's continued obsession with trying to out-conservative conservatives and their stupidity in believing conservatives were going to vote for them as a result. The establishment is still trying to play the "we like war too" card with Hillary and it's not going down very well with many people.

[rhett o rick]

174. It certainly did for me. In 2002 when the vote was taken, I was devistated by the betrayal

of Democrats that were to exercise the fracking BALANCE OF POWER, and try, at least try to keep the crazy-assed Republicon in check. But nope, they acquiesced before the Idiot King. Clinton even gave a speech to try to convince other Democrats to bow down and capitulate to the Republicons. A mistake that should eliminate her from contention for the presidency. In 2002, I pledged to never support any of the turncoat Democrats that bowed before Bush. May they all rot in hell for their failure to act with Democratic principles.

[Tanuki]

2. Ralph Nader failed you, Susan. If not for him peeling off votes from Al Gore,

there wouldn't have been an Iraq War Resolution in the first damn place. Plenty of blame to go around, starting with you.

[Kall]

4. Oh brother

Ralph Nader didn't vote for the war "with conviction". Hillary Clinton did.

[Maedhros]

5. There is one sure sign of a lack of critical thinking,

and that is blaming Nader for the 2000 election. What is shows is that the poster has internalized the Democratic establishment's weak rationalization for blowing the election.

With that in mind, you go on the ignore list. I have no interest in posters parroting the excuses of the Third Way.

bye.

[Tanuki]

21. Not parroting anybody. Didn't internalize anything. It was abundantly obvious.

You think you can insult your way out of your complicity and culpability for the disasters of the two G.W. Bush administrations (if you supported Nader against the Democratic candidate in the 2000 general election)? I've got a book to recommend: "Mistakes were made, but not by me." http://www.amazon.com/Mistakes-Were-Made-But-Not/dp/0156033909
Can't imagine why you would think I'm "going" anywhere. Your "ignore" list has nothing to do with reality.

[dreamnightwind]

30. For the thousandth time

Far more Florida Democrats voted for Bush than voted for Nader. Yet people would just rather punch "down" to blame the left-leaning Nader voters rather than the right-leaning Bush voters. Blame the ones that voted for Bush, please! How could any Democrat ever vote for Bush? Yet all we hear is Nader, Nader, Nader...

[daleanime]

37. +1

[Tanuki]

53. I do blame Bush and the Republicans, Democrats, Independents, or anyone else

who supported him. I blame them the most of all. The reason I mentioned Nader and not those others is that the thread is about Susan Sarandon, who was a prominent supporter of Nader's in 2000. I knew I was opening myself up for attack (not from you, as I find your response very civil and reasonable), but I have always regarded Nader and his supporters as being unintentionally complicit in the 8-year fiasco that followed when Gore's number of votes were diminished to the point at which the Supreme Court could stage a coup. (And yes, for all of you who might seek to "school" me about Gore's loss in his home state, etc. etc. etc., I already know, so save your energy for the primary). I am supporting Hillary, but as I have said on several other threads, I would fully support either of the other two Democratic candidates should they be the eventual nominee. I see posts here every day from people who say they would not support the Democratic rival in the general election, and that they would abstain, write in their favorite anyway, or vote for a third party. I know that by mentioning Nader I will antagonize some, but even if it is for the 1,000th time, I think it is worth revisiting this sorry bit of history in the hope that it will not be repeated again this November. Again, thank you for your heartfelt but totally appropriate response, in which you stuck to your issue and did not feel the need to resort to insults or put-downs.

[dreamnightwind]

63. Thanks for the tone of your response

Sarandon is an excellent progressive activist.

Far better to take shots at conservadems who voted for Bush, or the ones who now support corporatist leaders in oour own party, IMHO.

You still see this dynamic today. When Bloomberg stuck his head up the other day saying if Bernie and Trump win he will consider running, immediately some prominent Democrats said they would absolutely support Bloomberg over Sanders. Those people are the problem, and in 2000 there were far more of them than there were Nader voters. I'm sick of seeing the left attacked for voting their progressive conscience while the right-leaning Democrats are given a pass.

[JDPriestly]

127. Be sure to watch this before you vote for Hillary.

I posted this above, but it is important that you do not miss it.

[Enthusiast]

212. It's even worse when you watch that and the memories come flooding back.

I knew the Neo-Con claims leading up to the Iraq War were lies. I knew it at the time. Why didn't Hillary?

SIL.

[merrily]

112. They would rather blame leftist Democrats than the rightist Democrats who deserve the blame.

[merrily]

74. Blaming Nader for Hillary's vote has to be the worst excuse I've seen on this board and that's going

some.

Stop. You're embarrassing yourself.

[Tanuki]

99. Thank you for taking the time to respond. Actually, I blamed Nader (in part) for Bush's

ascension to the presidency, without which there would never have been an IWR to vote on. I did not mention Hillary or any of the others who voted for it, but I did say that there was plenty of blame to go around. As far as blame goes, I don't know why you are not placing any on Bush, Cheney, et al. these days and instead seem to be styling Hillary as practically the architect of the Iraq war. Since you have misunderstood me (or perhaps not) let me make it clear that Hillary bears responsibility for that vote, even though she has subsequently renounced it, and I have never blamed that choice on anyone else. Beyond that, I will simply say that I will "stop" when I damn well please, and that even though I have read enough of your posts to know that you have some expertise on the subject of embarrassing oneself, I will not be bullied into shutting up.

[merrily]

109. Sorry if you see a reply on a message board as bullying.

I didn't tell you to shut up. I told you to stop embarrassing yourself.

[Enthusiast]

213. Huge +1!

[Unknown Beatle]

93. How many times must this be said,

the election was stolen for Bush, simple as that. No Nader, no voters, no nothing. It was planned for Bush to become president no matter what. Scalia and the rest of the right wing SC justices handed it to Bush.

[Duval]

123. With the help of his brother, Jeb.

[Enthusiast]

214. They cheated in dozens of ways.

[KingCharlemagne]

6. Never mind the FACT that Gore actually won Florida. Facts, meh - nt

[SunSeeker]

8. Nader siphoning off votes made the election stealable. nt

[KingCharlemagne]

13. Oh, so now you concede that Gore actually did win Florida, amirite? If so, the

next question is this: why did Gore concede? No one held a gun to Gore's head and forced him to, certainly not Nader.

[jeff47]

18. Nader got 20k registered Democrats. W got 200k registered Democrats.

If you think 20k is a bigger problem than 200k, you need some remedial math.

[SunSeeker]

23. Nader's votes were enough to muddy the results and make the election stealable.

Nader helped W steal the election. That's the math.

[jeff47]

25. And W got 10x more Democratic votes than Nader.

Yet you only blame Nader.

Almost like you're mindlessly repeating an argument without bothering to think about it.

[dreamnightwind]

33. +1

Just made the same point, hadn't read down the thread to see your posts.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

34. Math?

Bush didn't get the votes that went to Nader. 0 - 0 = 0
Gore didn't get the votes that went to Nader. 0 - 0 = 0

[progressoid]

38. Nader wasn't the real betrayal of Democrats. Democrats were.

191,000 self-described liberals voted for Bush. Let that sink in for a minute.


And then there was the butterfly ballot (designed by a Democrat & cost Gore thousands of votes), Katherine Harris and illegally purged voters, hanging chads, the Supreme Court etc.

[frylock]

47. 200,000+ registered Democrats in FL voting for Bush..

made the election stealable.

[SunSeeker]

194. Some registered Dems vote GOP in every election. 2000 was not unique in the regard. nt

[artislife]

178. Perot syphoned off votes allowing Bill to win.

People can run for office. They do not have to be rep or dem.

[SunSeeker]

193. Actually, Perot was not why Bill won.

But the GOP love telling that story. When Perot temporarily dropped out, they polled Bill against Bush I and Bill was ahead. Rachel Maddow had a whole segment on it, dispelling the old Perot was why Bill won myth.


But yes, people do run for office. They do not have to be Dem or GOP. But they (and we) do have to live with the consequences of their campaign.

[artislife]

195. It is up to us to run a compelling candidate. nt

[progressoid]

11. O.F.F.S.

[litlbilly]

14. Al Gore actually won fla, so your sentence is wrong...

[FlatBaroque]

19. One reply and off to the trash pile with you

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

29. Susan Sarandon caused Bush to be elected and start a war?

How does that work? Did she call him a and tell him to go to war and to get Democrats like Hillary to bless his decision?

[onehandle]

41. Yep. nt

[A Simple Game]

58. Gore won, Nader didn't do anything to stop that, the Supreme Court did.

The Supreme Court disenfranchised my vote, not Nader. If you can't recognize the problem and who was at fault you will never be able to prevent it from happening again.

Like it or not as most Americans do Nader had every right to run, it is the Supreme Court had no right to prevent the counting of votes. They go unpunished or blamed because too many believe what the Republicans want them to believe happened. Please stop perpetuating this Republican lie.

[NurseJackie]

73. Thank you!

[Uncle Joe]

79. Bill and Hillary actively worked to undermine Al Gore's election

(snip)

As a sitting president, Bill was in a unique position to boost his vice president's candidacy by scheduling White House events to highlight his achievements. But in 1999 those resources were diverted from Gore to Hillary "in a big way," said one member of the Gore team. "The Clintons come first. That was their basic framework." From June through December, Bill and Hillary appeared at 20 events under the aegis of the White House, including a celebration of Hillary's 52nd birthday, where in typical style Bill larded his tribute with statistics on welfare, poverty, crime, and economic growth as he touted his wife as a "genuine visionary" needed by the Senate—the ultimate confluence of the personal and political. During the same period, Gore was featured only at a White House Conference on Mental Health—with Bill, Hillary, and Tipper.

In 1997, Hillary's office had 31 major speeches listed on the White House Web site. Two years later, that number had jumped to 86—four times as many as those listed for her husband and Gore combined. She ran White House symposiums on equal pay for women, youth violence, and philanthropy, and she spoke out on a spectrum of domestic and foreign issues, such as foster care for teenagers, gun control, and the plight of refugees in Kosovo. She published 50 "Talking It Over" columns, syndicated in more than 100 newspapers, and she signed a contract to write An Invitation to the White House, a book on entertaining and décor.

With the Hillary and Gore campaigns revving up at the same time, the three-way tensions evident in the White House since 1993 became a more serious problem. "If she runs, we'd wish her well, but we sure could use her help," a top Gore aide had said back in February, when Hillary first publicly signaled her interest in the Senate race. Now Gore's campaign advisers began to worry that Hillary's candidacy would actually have an adverse effect on their candidate. "The implications for Gore are very serious," said New York's former Democratic governor Mario Cuomo. "She has to think very hard on this issue." Not only was Hillary unavailable as a campaigner, she was poaching top Democratic fund-raisers and donors who would normally concentrate on the vice president. She had already enlisted Syracuse native Terry McAuliffe, the Democratic Party's biggest rainmaker, who in the months to come cast a nationwide fund-raising net for her.

A Nasty Range War

Before Hillary officially established her exploratory committee, she began directly competing with the vice president for money, sometimes even at his own fund-raising events. When Tipper's friend Melinda Blinken and a group of women planned a Gore fund-raiser in Los Angeles, Hillary insisted on being invited—over the objections of the event's organizers. Hillary then shocked the vice president's supporters by soliciting donations for herself in front of Tipper.

At a White House reception in late July for the winners of the Women's World Cup soccer championship, Hillary singled out "my dear friend Tipper Gore" as "a great athlete in her time." But by then Hillary had privately frozen out Tipper, who had given her steadfast support during the Lewinsky ordeal. Hillary never made clear her reasons for the snub, which became apparent once she started running for the Senate. Tipper was reported to be stunned, believing she had been cast aside because she was no longer useful.

(/b)


http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2007/11/clinton200711

[Duval]

129. Almost makes me gag, but your post deserves it's own OP!

Uncle Joe, did you ever serve in the Intelligence field? I know you can't answer, but just had to ask!

[artislife]

179. Lovely. nt

[Enthusiast]

215. Huge +1!

[SammyWinstonJack]

172. Ugh.

[rhett o rick]

176. I think is was Barbara Bush that failed us because she gave birth to George. You give

Mr. Nader too much credit. There were a lot of illegal things that happened in 2000 and Nader wasn't one of them. Looking for a scapegoat in lieu of facing the reality that Americans didn't want the continuation of Clinton via Gore.

H. Clinton is responsible for her vote, for her acquiescence to George "The Idiot" Bush. Millions died and she shares responsibility.

[Enthusiast]

216. The Nader claim has always been a smoke screen.

[rhett o rick]

226. And what's sad is we are again facing the same situation. Do we want to continue with

Conservative Democratic leadership that has not stopped our progression into poverty, a war state and a Security State. In 2000 the Democratic leadership (DLC), bought and paid for by major corporations, thought they knew what was best and went with Gore, a continuation of the Clinton Conservatism that didn't help the 99%. Now here we are again. Should we continue the Conservative Democratic leadership and replace Obama with another Clinton? Those of us that are awake say no. We need to a change from the corrupt Establishment in DC. But will the Conservative, corporate owned Democratic leadership listen to us? Nope, they would rather risk losing the general than let the 99% speak out. They lost to Bush in 2000 and they will lose again in 2016 unless we can override the massive financial control of our Party.

[Enthusiast]

228. I'm with you. nt

[dflprincess]

188. Right, voter purges. rigged machines in Florida

and a right wing Supreme Court had nothing to do with it.

[840high]

198. That's BS

[gyroscope]

7. Vote for Warhawk Hillary

if you want even more war and escalation in the ME.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

27. You're SO right... No thanks!

I'm with Bernie!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[daleanime]

39. Definitely......

not wanted here.

[VulgarPoet]

169. If it walks like a hawk and talks like a hawk...

eom

[Punkingal]

15. She failed us all. Susan. Now she wants us to give her the power to fail us in even bigger ways.

[farleftlib]

22. Yes indeed. Iraq and Libya in ruins, now onto Syria.

Epic fail.

[CharlotteVale]

165. Well said.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

26. Hillary failed ALL of us. Why we need Bernie!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[elias49]

36. That'd be a dream come true.

[Gamecock Lefty]

28. I wonder . . .

if Tim Robbins failed her, too?

[closeupready]

31. K&R Yes, she failed spectacularly on that, she later doubled down that

it was the right vote, and also that when asked, responded that she had nothing to apologize for.

[oasis]

40. Sarandon has to face the consequences of her strong Nader advocacy.

No Nader, no Bush no 9/11 and no Invasion of Iraq.

Those who insist that Hillary, and only Hillary, must be held accountable for her IWR vote, are revealing their hypocrisy in a very clumsy fashion.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

42. Nader didn't support Bush's war. Hillary did.

And, a number of other Democrats.

[oasis]

49. Dems did not support "Bush's war". They signed on IWR with

the understanding that "war would be a last resort". They had no idea Hans Blix and the weapons inspectors would be run out of Iraq by Bush.

And please spare me the worn out "we at DU knew not to trust Bush, so why didn't our congresspersons" crap.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

55. Sure they did. They thought all the troops in Kuwait to improve their tans and play golf.

Either she is monumentally stupid or was indulging in political expediency. She vocally supported the war(s) and voted for them.

[oasis]

69. Troops are placed in a state of readiness. If Ike needed

to invade Normandy in '44 it would be dumb to signal the move from New York.

For the record, I was against the war in Iraq.

[beam me up scottie]

70. Hillary voted for it, she promoted it and she endorsed the invasion:

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members...

It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well, effects American security.

This is a very difficult vote, this is probably the hardest decision I've ever had to make. Any vote that might lead to war should be hard, but I cast it with conviction."

In March 2003 she fully endorsed the invasion:

There is a very easy way to prevent anyone from being put into harm's way, and that is for Saddam Hussein to disarm, and I have absolutely no belief that he will. I have to say that this is something I have followed for more than a decade.

For now nearly 20 years, the principal reason why women and children in Iraq have suffered, is because of Saddam's leadership.

The very difficult question for all of us, is how does one bring about the disarmament of someone with such a proven track record of a commitment, if not an obsession, with weapons of mass destruction.

I ended up voting for the Resolution after carefully reviewing the information and intelligence I had available, talking with people whose opinions I trusted, trying to discount political or other factors that I didn't believe should be in any way a part of this decision, and it is unfortunate that we are at the point of a potential military action to enforce the resolution. That is not my preference, it would be far preferable if we had legitimate cooperation from Saddam Hussein, and a willingness on his part to disarm, and to account for his chemical and biological storehouses.

With respect to whose responsibility it is to disarm Saddam Hussein, I do not believe that given the attitudes of many people in the world community today that there would be a willingness to take on very difficult problems were it not for United States leadership.

This is all a matter of record.

[oasis]

82. Hillary: "this is not my preference". You say "fully endorsed".

Does Hill really sound like she giving a full throated endorsement of the war? C'mon now.

[beam me up scottie]

83. I didn't say "fully endorsed" I said endorsed and yes, she did.

She had a chance to pull back her support for the invasion and she doubled down.

[oasis]

90. Please see your post#70. "fully endorsed" your words in

the message text.

[beam me up scottie]

96. Whoops, my bad. Sorry.

That's what I get for copy/pasting.

[oasis]

115. No problem.

I gotta run some errands now. See you later.

[beam me up scottie]

117. Take it easy, oasis!

You're a good person.

[merrily]

116. UNDERSTANDING? That understanding was not in the IWR they passed.

How gullible are we? We're supposed to believe lawyers--as most of them are-- not only believed the President they despised, but trusted him so much they passed a war resolution that contradicted the "understanding" they had with him?

Come on, now.


And, if he acted so contrary to their oral understanding, why weren't they jumping up and down in the media as he started sending troops?

And if their judgment was so poor as to trust him, why should any of them be President? If there were conditions--and I sure don't believe there were--they should have been specified clearly in the IWR. Any way you spin it, the judgment was horrific and killed, maimed and displaced millions. That's not something you do on a wink while giving Bush unlimited discretion in your resolution.

[Enthusiast]

219. PLUS ONE, a huge bunch!

[cui bono]

162. Of course they did, the ones that voted to give him the power to declare war absolutely did.

And they abdicated their constitutional duty by doing so.

Nader is against globalization and war, how the hell is he responsible for the IWR? SCOTUS gave us Bush. Purge voter registrations by the GOP gave us Bush. Bad ballots gave us Bush. Not demanding a full recount gave us Bush. Enough with the bullshit Nader excuse.

Even if you want to blame Nader (and now Susan Sarandon?!?!?!?!) there is no way in hell you can say that he made Dems not only vote for, but advocate, the Iraq War. Hillary spoke out in favor of it using all the same lies Bush used.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1090453

.

.

[Enthusiast]

220. PLUS ONE, a huge bunch!

[Enthusiast]

218. If Hillary wanted war to be a last resort why did she cite the reasons to support the war?

[Bohunk68]

44. The hypocrisy is blaming Iraq on Sarandon

when she did not have a vote on Iraq but Hillary did.

[frylock]

51. Unfuckingbelievable.

How can anyone possibly reason with logic like that?! People think Sarandon is more culpable for Iraq than Hillary. Just smdh here.

[oasis]

57. But it's easy to take the leap and lay the Iraq War on Hillary's doorstep.

Got it.

[frylock]

94. When she made a fucking speech about the urgency of going to war?!

The fuck you think the answer is?

[oasis]

104. No Nader, no speech needed. Same cause and effect logic.

the truth is the light.

[frylock]

107. No logic ^^

[oasis]

113. No matter how you look at it, Sarandon gets no pass.

Over and out.

[frylock]

114. Your knowledge of radio operation is as vast as your knowledge of politics.

Out.

[oasis]

52. Please see post. # 49

[senz]

101. Sarandon isn't running for office.

She has no "consequences" to face.

Hillary, on the other hand, does.

[oasis]

103. Sarandon's culpability in IWR carries as much weight as Hillary's.

If you embrace Sarandon, your argument against Hillary is clumsy, at best.

[senz]

118. Mm, kinda weak, honey.

Nice try though.

[panader0]

161. Mr Natural supports Bernie!

[artislife]

181. Unbelievable. You sound like you even believe it. nt

[mikehiggins]

189. I didn't know Sarandon was on the Supreme Court

If your memory suffers from occasional lapses, the Supreme Court put Georgie in the White House in a decision that they themselves described as not setting precedent. And how many states did Nader win, by the way?

[Nedsdag]

43. Hillary failed me too, Susan!

And not just on her vote on Iraq.

[democrank]

48. Clinton`s Iraq War vote

the #1 reason I can not support her.

[valerief]

50. Sarandon was very vocal against the Iraq War but was ignored by the U.S. PTB.

They also ignored millions and millions of people who protested against the war.

[kennetha]

54. 1 vote almost 16 years ago now, is the entire basis

of Sander's claim to be a great commander in chief and architect of foreign policy. really?

[Romulox]

64. That's how life works. One disastrous decision can haunt you forever.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

67. See Libya for update.

[senz]

95. + 1

Then consider her support of a Syria no-fly zone and continued sanctions on Iran.

[Nyan]

201. And Syria.

And Honduras. Ukraine. Saudi Arabia. Yemen. On and on it goes. Her neocon connections are stretched all over the world.

[mountain grammy]

85. Yes, really!

[kennetha]

135. And that proves what about Sanders

and his ability to be commander and chief. I was against the war. Would have voted against it had I been in the Senate. Does that make me fit to be commander in chief?

Are you fit to be commander in chief, assuming you were against the war?

[mountain grammy]

141. No, you're not. And I'm not, but Bernie Sanders is

Most definitely qualified.

[kennetha]

142. On what basis?

He opposed the war? That all he ever cites by way of foreign policy qualifications

[mountain grammy]

145. On the same basis as Obama

Who won on his opposition to the war, and before him, Kerry, who also ran on his opposition to the war and almost won. Get the picture? I am opposed to war. Many Americans are opposed to war.

[kennetha]

149. You do know

That Obama so trusted Clinton's judgment on matters of foreign policy, that he actually made her Secretary of State, in which capacity they worked very closely together, and forged all sorts of policies. Grown ups make mistakes, learn from them and move on. Ask yourself if Obama thinks Sanders would be a sound manager of America's foreign policy.

[mountain grammy]

186. Why yes, I do know that

And what, pray tell, was her "experience?" You might say Kissinger had enough experience to be Sec of State, but his policies were awful. Did Hill consult Henry? I think so.
Honestly I think she was adequate for the job, but not particularly outstanding. She wasn't involved in most of the Iran negotiations that took place before she left, and it was Obama himself who restored much of our credibility abroad.

[Nyan]

203. You think Obama made her SOS because "he trusted Clinton's judgment"?

He made her SOS because she was going to run in 2016. And she needed to look good as a potential commander-in-chief. It was something that Obama had to give her because he won, as a tradeoff.
And no. She didn't "learn" from any of her past "mistakes." Her SOS tenure was horrendous. Libya bombing is the greatest failure among them. And saying that Iranians are her biggest enemies? Tell me how that stance differs from Neocons'?
That's the worst quality in the commander-in-chief. We may survive her as a commander-in-chief, but many people in the MENA won't (and quite possibly elsewhere, too).

[aikoaiko]

111. Thousands of US and coalition soldiers died, tens of thousands of civilians

Many more were maimed.

and people are still dying and being injured by this war.

[kennetha]

133. That's because of the conduct of the war.

Are you really blaming the conduct of the war on Clinton rather than on Bush and Cheney?

[Bluenorthwest]

182. It's her vote which undermines her claims of foreign policy excellence, rather clearly.

nt

[Warren DeMontague]

61. K&R

[Faux pas]

62. Kicking in Total Agreement!

[Uncle Joe]

71. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Cheese Sandwich.

[merrily]

75. Before the invasion, Sarandon made an anti-war commercial with her own money.

[Z_California]

76. Decision making based on the most recent polls

Leads to very very bad decisions.

[Live and Learn]

77. That is exactly how I feel. nt

[in_cog_ni_to]

84. She doesn't get a pass for voting for the worst foreign policy blunder in U.S. history! No.

4,497 DEAD American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent DEAD Iraqi men, women and children.

THAT wasn't bad enough for HRH, she continued the reign of terror in Libya and Syria - giving us ISIS.

No, she doesn't get a pass on that IWR VOTE. SHE helped create the ME disaster and it was ALL based on LIES. She owns it. The warmonger shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the WH!

Latest numbers on antiwar.com

4,497 Dead U.S. Soldiers

320,000 Vets Have Brain Injuries

18 Vet Suicides Per Day?

THANK HRH by electing her president? I don't think so.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE <------ THE MAN WHO KNEW THE WARMONGERING BUSH REGIME WAS LYING

[frizzled]

86. It would be very satisfying if Iraq scuppers Hillary

Much more so if Dubya and Blair and co are brought to trial, of course. Not that I'm holding my breath.

[EndElectoral]

87. Agree with Ms. Sarandon. It is a show stopper for me as well.

Her Wall Street connections are the icing on a very unappetizing cake.

[senz]

98. Her vote showed her judgement on a major life-or-death decision.

Hillary supporters can deflect all they want, but they can't change her record.

[merrily]

121. Thank you. The spin and excuses on this thread are something else.

[senz]

130. Never seen such wiggling and fancy dancing

as our Hill friends treat us to every day. It's a veritable burlesque!

[merrily]

132. .

[senz]

137. !

Always loved that. Impossible not to move with it.

We should play it every time they get going.

[merrily]

143. There's nothing to stop us! But, I have another idea.

[senz]

147. Also good. And very appropriate.

On a smaller scale, there's this:

[img][/img] [img][/img] [img][/img]

http://cosgan.de/smilie.php?wahl=14&ziel=musik

[merrily]

150. When they try to confuse you, always leave 'em laughing (or just leave 'em).

[senz]

155. Might work with the few who have

a sense of humor.

[bigwillq]

126. Good for you, Susan.

K and R

[TIME TO PANIC]

134. K & R !

[gordyfl]

138. Hillary Continued to Support Bush and Republicans...

[SamKnause]

209. Excellent.

Please start a new thread with this video.

Video evidence of her poor judgment pointed out by her peers.

Excellent !!!

FEEL THE BERN

[Enthusiast]

222. +1 a huge bunch!

[Duval]

139. K&R!

[Amimnoch]

140. Odd she endorsed Edwards in 2007, and didn't seem to have issue with his vote.

http://nymag.com/news/intelligencer/41555/

Must be some very deeply held convictions she has over who did and didn't join in on that particular roll call vote. Especially since John Edwards, John Kerry, Chuck Schumer, and 25 other Democrat Party Senators (58% of the Democratic Party Senate at that time) were in on that same vote.

Come to think of it, I don't recall much concern at all about Kerry's run for President either.

All I have to say is.. if you were a member of DU at the time either Kerry or Edwards ran for president, and you have insulted the Secretary on this issue, and have made it your stated key issue, and can't produce a single thread where you condemned the Kerry or Edwards vote, you might want to reevaluate your ACTUAL reason for suddenly having major issue with it on someone who was a first term Senator and went with the leadership of the time.

I also do find it interesting that at least a couple (that I've found so far) who have a major issue with this vote were, just months ago, wishing that Joe Biden would enter the race (another vote on that list btw). I'd link them, but that would be a call-out and a no-no.

[gordyfl]

151. But at least Joe Biden and John Edwards had to Sense to Vote Against Giving Bush More Authority

to Wage a War Against Iran....

[senz]

154. Her insincere laughter is a smoke screen

to hide her discomfort when confronted with the truth.

[gordyfl]

158. I've Been Hearing a Lot of That

Insincere Laughter coming from Hillary.

[polly7]

160. I truly hope it is insincere. I'm not sure about that though. nt.

[840high]

200. Glad to see I'm not

the only one thinking that.

[Warren DeMontague]

211. Since we're submitting our resumes.

Last edited Sat Jan 30, 2016, 09:55 AM - Edit history (1)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=3052140&mesg_id=3052457


"he's the best choice" here is referring to Al Gore. Like many at the time (Jan of '07) I thought it was "too soon" for an Obama run, but I reconsidered that eventually.


FWIW, I don't want Biden, either. In addition to his IWR vote, his record as architect of the Drug war (along with legislative turds like the RAVE act) make him less appealing to me as a primary voter even than Hillary. Like the guy as a person, think he's been fine as veep, but he would need to make up some serious ground- more than HRC- to ever get my support for the nomination.

[seaglass]

221. Well that's interesting. I was against IWR but voted for Kerry, in what world is it fair to hold

one person responsible for their vote and not another.

I usually ignore discussions about Hillary's IWR vote because either the DUer is not on my side because they didn't vote for Kerry or the DUer did vote for Kerry and is a hypocrite.

[green917]

231. i voted for kerry in the ge

I think many of us did even though we disagreed with him on many many things (including his iwr vote) because we were holding our noses to try to prevent the debacle that was the gw Bush presidency from continuing! it was, very much, a lessor of 2 evils calculation (as it will be should secretary clinton win the nomination and we have to vote for her to keep a Republican out of the white house). I, personally, would rather support a candidate who got it right the 1st time and who actually shares my ideals and vision for this country (which was why i supported Gov. Howard Dean in 2012) and that's why senator sanders has my vote. I knew the iwr was a sure (and fast) road to war and that none of what they were telling us was true. Why didn't senator clinton, or senator kerry?

[treestar]

153. Failed HER?

Who friggin' cares about HER? What an idiot? All the people who died there and it is a failure to HER! She doesn't even say "us." An egomaniac of the highest order.

And that is being only against Hillary and for Bernie only because he is not Hillary even though he is not qualified.

[polly7]

159. Wow.

So you're this enraged that she spoke of how it affected her - as many here have said it did them, personally, and I've never seen you even comment on that - yet not one word about the person who voted for the permission to obliterate "all the people who died there" and even pushed for it.

Not believable.

[cui bono]

164. At least you admit Hillary bears responsibility for the deaths in Iraq.

We're making progress.

The rest of your post is rude and nonsensical.

.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

217. Yes, Failed her. It's pretty straightforward.

[cui bono]

163. You and me both sister.

[jalan48]

168. Bad judgement seems to be a hallmark of Hillary.

[dorkzilla]

171. GODDAMMIT CHEESE SANDWICH

...runs off to kitchen for bread and cheese....

DAMN YOU TO HILLARYVILLE.

[SoapBox]

191. No More Clintons.

America has had enough...America can't take it anymore.

[bluestateguy]

208. Nader voters are disqualified from complaining about the Iraq War

I said that in 2003, and I'll say it now.

[Warren DeMontague]

210. We controlled the Senate. If Democrats hadn't voted for it, it wouldn't have happened.

I voted for Gore, so am I allowed to complain about it?

[green917]

232. i think you need to look up "democracy"

I voted for senator gore though so, apparently, I'm free to comment about it. Since, in your esteemed lexicon, I'm allowed, I say this: i knew the intel was bs, senator sanders knew the intel was bs, as did my senator at the time (Paul wellstone, rest his soul), and many others (far too few in congress though) ...why didn't senator clinton? when later presented with an opportunity to explain her vote, why did she double down on her decision? To me, that says she either didn't know that the intel was bs (when millions of lay people all over the world did) which made her vote incompetent or she voted the way she did (knowing that it would, more than likely, lead to a costly war) out of political expediency which makes her a craven political panderer. I don't want either of those 2 characteristics in my president!

[Enthusiast]

223. Kicked and recommended!

[arely staircase]

227. She is over the Hill? nt

[vkkv]

230. K&R

[aDCBeast]

233. BERNIE Voted in favor of the CFMA ... that caused the 2008 World Banking Collapse ..

That's right folks Good old Bernie Sanders voted for the 1999 CFMA bill that caused the 2008 world banking collapse. He voted for the CFMA which had Phil Gramm's amendment that banned the govt. from regulating the derivative market. The derivative market caused the 2008 world banking collapse. It bankrupted 30 countries and put another 30 countries on the brink.

Where was Bernie's judgment on that one?

Instead Bernie is trying to distract everyone about Clinton believing the Bush admin lying to congress and the American people about WMDs in Iraq. Looks like a very weak argument in comparison.