Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Hillary explains her "hard choice" in voting for Iraq invasion [View all]Sparkly
(24,149 posts)38. It's called agitprop.
It's heavily edited to make her seem as sinister as possible. I didn't subject myself to the whole thing but I did manage to track down a couple of the videos that were used.
The full interview of the first clip: Snipped out of context. The interviewer pivoted from Iraq to ask for a comparison to Syria where there was NO invasion, as the president's decision. She answers the question.
The full transcript of the clip about business investment in Iraq: This was a forum with international representatives to encourage businesses to work in Iraq. This is not a bad thing-- it is to create economic stability and opportunity there.
http://articlesofinterest-kelley.blogspot.com/2011/06/hillary-clinton-and-iraq-transcript.html
From NPR around the same time:
I made the best decision that I could at the time. And as we went through the years, and I saw the way that the president [George W. Bush] and his team used my vote and the other votes to authorize action, I became increasingly distressed. I did not believe that it was in the best interest of our country, and it was not something that I any longer wanted to be associated with.
(snip)
Also interesting re: conservative attacks:
I am so used to these people; they're like a bunch of gamers. They're trying constantly to raise false canards, plant false information, and that's what they do. They don't want to have a real debate about what the tax policy should be. They don't want to have a real debate about how we begin growing the economy again. ... They don't want to have a real debate about climate change and clean energy. They want people to get diverted and totally off subject, and that is their modus operandi.
But I have to say that if that's the best they have to offer, let them do it. Because that's not the debate that I think the American people want to have. There's a difference between fair game and playing games. And it is unfortunately too common in today's political environment that people want to play games that divert attention from the real issues that affect our country and its future.
http://www.npr.org/2014/06/12/321313477/hillary-clinton-the-fresh-air-interview
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
101 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
If you can't see the difference between Hillary and Trump, between a Supreme Court after
Squinch
Apr 2016
#70
If that is the case, then I guess you don't see the difference in the country under the Bush and
Squinch
Apr 2016
#87
“It's time for the United States to start thinking of Iraq as a business opportunity,"
bahrbearian
Apr 2016
#29
Hard choice. . . .she makes the same choice every time. . . Money vs. what's good for the country.
pdsimdars
Apr 2016
#4
No, it's just that, as we are on Democratic Underground, I assume all those people who are saying,
Squinch
Apr 2016
#47
Nobody would ever assume it's objective and balanced. Call it agitprop. But, it's still accurate
leveymg
Apr 2016
#52
If it's factual, it's accurate. There is no such thing as objective political communication.
leveymg
Apr 2016
#57
It's a representative sampling of an ugly side of HRC that is evident to everyone
leveymg
Apr 2016
#100
She's just advertising her impeccable foreign policy experience...at making "mistakes" and CYA.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Apr 2016
#21
No, it's not about being cool. It's about being stunned that someone who voted for Bush
Squinch
Apr 2016
#73
Ah, I see. Only you understand... No one but you understands. Those who disagree with you are,
Squinch
Apr 2016
#75
Voting for war is always a hard choice. I'm sure it was hard for Bernie to vote for war
Nye Bevan
Apr 2016
#43
Should she not have gotten the funding to rebuild the site of the worst attack on US soil ever?
Squinch
Apr 2016
#72
In your opinion, if Hillary got up on the Senate floor and argued against the Iraq war
LondonReign2
Apr 2016
#83
New York had just been bombed. That's why she got $20 billion. Take your bullshit
Squinch
Apr 2016
#86
So then it had nothing to do with Hillary? NY had just been bombed, so Bush was going to
LondonReign2
Apr 2016
#91
Except everyone with an IQ over 80 was able to distinguish between Afghanistan and Iraq.
Warren DeMontague
Apr 2016
#56
Voiting to invade a country that had nothing to do with 9-11 was the right thing
LondonReign2
Apr 2016
#92
I called it correctly from my easy chair, before sundown that day. I was right. She wasn't. nt
silvershadow
Apr 2016
#82