Memo to Hillary Supporters - Tell it like it Really is

[illinoisprogressive]

I have a favor to ask of some of you Hillary Clinton supporters, particularly the females among you. And you are legion.

* Email
* Print
* Comment

For once, I'd just like to hear one of you say something along these lines:

"Yes, I know Hillary was wrong to vote for the Iraq war. But I'm going to overlook that because she's a woman, and so am I. And it's time we had a woman president in the U.S."

I suspect that a lot of women, most of them committed Democrats, feel precisely that way. But they won't admit it, at least not the ones I talk to.

I understand why Ms. Clinton has decided not to come clean on why she voted for the war, and why she feels she can't apologize.

To disclose the former would reveal the kind of political calculation she'd rather not be known for, but is. And when candidates apologize, that can be seen as a sign of "weakness."

But I would hope that some of her fans could be honest enough to say what really happened in the Iraq vote. And why they still support her, despite hating the war.

But rather than do that, Hillary's supporters subject us to these absurd verbal contortions in trying to justify their candidate casting the same vote as the Republicans she's running against.

(And please, stop with the semantic, hair-splitting canard about the difference between voting for authorization and voting for the war. That's a ridiculous argument, always was.)

Hilary's supporters won't acknowledge that, in voting for the war, their candidate was still pandering to her New York constituency, well after the 9/11 attacks.

They won't admit that, like Cheney, Hillary has linked the Iraq war to 9/11, as recently as earlier this year.

And they try to paint her as a "victim" of bad intelligence, the exact same way the White House does with President Bush.

Think about that for a minute, in light of what we've just heard from Bill Clinton.

On the one hand, Hillary's campaign likes to point to her being more experienced than Barack Obama, because of her time as the First Spouse. But when it serves her political purposes, they'd rather we ignore what she learned during her time in the White House.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-gizbert/london-calling-_b_66503.html

[Evergreen Emerald]

1. Hillary did not vote for the war.

Perhaps the problem is that those who are opposed to Clinton do not get nuance.

[Forkboy]

3. I'm sure the near million dead will be thrilled to hear about said nuance.

[Evergreen Emerald]

4. yeah, I forgot

its Clinton's fault.

[still_one]

9. no, but she was an enabler which allowed it to happen. It also reflects her judgement

since it was a DIRECT VIOLATION of the War Powers Act. Her recent vote on the Iran War Resolution, says she has learned nothing, and make no mistake about it, that is exactly what it is

[Forkboy]

10. Partly...yes, it is.

And all the others who voted to give a madman the green light. :shrug:

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Most Congressional Democrats Voted Against The IWR. Were they Wrong?

A poll taken shortly after the IWR vote found that most Americans thought that Bush had already made his mind up to go to wat with Iraq. Clinton was one of the minority who didn't realize?

[still_one]

6. Oh, I get it the IWR which gave the president the authority to declare war

instead of congress, and a direct violation of the War Powers Act was the nuance you are talking about

[zulchzulu]

14. OK then...then her vast experience brought her to trust Bush, who everyone knew wanted war

She DID vote for the war. Her own words on record can't take away what she thought and said.

Even though she didn't read the NIE and other information that would have told her not to vote for the war, she apparently was either too stupid to trust Bush or thought it was politically expedient to send our troops into a premptive war.

Door Number One: Pandering for votes and having blood on your hands

or

Door Number Two: not trusting Bush and voting against the War

She probably giggled as she chose Door Number One.

Since people seem to think she isn't stupid, then perhaps she brought out her Inner Goldwater Girl and voted to kill people for votes. Now she wants to carry the bloodlust party over to Iran for more giggling fun.

Is Hillary Clinton on record for voting for war in Iraq and now Iran?

You decide....or put both fingers in your ears and shut your eyes and go "blah blah blah blah"...

[sandnsea]

28. She didn't know the intelligence was a lie

How could she not know that, what with all her insider White House experience. She supported the war policy, when she voted, when Bush invaded, in Nov 2003 when she said we had to "stay the course", all the way up to the time she realized she couldn't win the primary without calling for some kind of troop withdrawal. The Clintons are DLC Dems and they support this war policy and always have. If that's what her White House experience has taught her, then I think we need someone with different experience.

[fightindonkey]

30. Well Let's Start For What She Voted For

The Clinton DU Bashers will try anything. I would never vote for a woman because she is a woman. Hillary is gender neutral in the political world. She has bigger balls then both parties combined and has the most experience. Her being a woman, the first female President, is cool, but I wouldn't vote for any woman. Hillary gets my vote because she is Hillary and is a political dynamo. She doesn't play around and she is the smartest, the toughest, and has the best team around her. She will not hire "yes-men". She gets the job done.

[Tesha]

32. Of course she did.

When she voted for the Enabling Acts, there were only two
possibilities:

o She expected the war to go well and reflect favorably
upon her when she ran for President, or

o She was too stupid to understand that she was giving
Bush cover so he could startthe war he'd talked about
since before he was selected in 2000.

Which is it? Is she calcualting or just stupid?

Tesha

[mark414]

38. you're right, she only voted for Bush's excuse and justification for the war

[Vickers]

2. You raise some interesting points, but you neglected to mention that

she "sashayed" onto the national scene, and that is something none of us in good conscience can forgive.

[still_one]

7. Yes, sashayed to voting for the Iran War Resolution, I see, thanks for clearing it up

obviously, very little was learned from the IWR

[Vickers]

8. I believe she do-si-do'ed in the IWR vote.

A fine distinction, but an important one.

[fightindonkey]

31. It's Non Binding. It's A Political Move. It Shows Her Being Against Iran, Which She Is

She has continuously said we can bring them down from the inside, and you don't start a war for the sake of starting a war. She has said, we don't even know who controls what in that country with no intelligence. You talk to your enemies, which she has said countless times.

[papau]

11. A psychology 101 C- first paper-amazing how he divines motivation- how it is not Bush's war - as if

an imperial president would have been stopped by a Congress - or stopped by any "check and balance" provision, since all such provisions do not operate in a time of war that began on 9/11

At least that is the law per Bush.

How the heck Hillary is the cause of the Iraq war is a bit beyond by ability to spin logic -

Obama deserves points for reading Bush lack of morals - and just not trusting him -

but to tar and smear Dems for what Bush did is just a little unfair.

[still_one]

13. Because it was a direct violation of the War Powers Act, and Congress GAVE UP

their authority to the executive branch. You can nuance it all you want, but if there was NO IWR, if bush went into Iraq without Congressional approval, the War Powers Act would have kicked in within 60 days, where Congress would have had to delcare war, extend it one more month to get out of the country, or immediately get out

Hmmmm, sounds to me that those who voted for the IWR are at least partly responsible for our invasion of Iraq, because otherwise, the War Powers Act WOULD HAVE KICKED IN, IMPERIAL PRESIDENT OR NOT

[papau]

20. The War Powers per the "new" USSC judges is not "Constitutional" - albeit the full court has never

ruled on it.

In any case the Bush interpretation is that he didn't need a IWR (see his transcriped talk to Spanish PM the summer before IWR vote) -

indeed if we can't impeach at this point, adding on a war powers complaint would not affect our ability to impeach.

However, I agree re "the War Powers Act WOULD HAVE KICKED IN" that we would have finally got a USSC opinion on the War Powers Act if there had been no IWR.

[still_one]

33. You said it yourself, it has never been ruled on, by them, therefore the statement

that it is not constitutional is meaningless

Incidently, the war powers act did take effect in other activities we did after it was passed

As far as the bush interpretation that he didn't need a IWR, who cares what HE THINKS, the War Powers Act WOULD HAVE KICKED IN

which you do agree with, and the only point is how the Supreme Court would have ruled, and I don't think anyone knows since I believe Oconner was still justice, and Kennedy was a definite unknown

[papau]

36. True on all points - but the fact that Bush does not care what Courts or Congress does makes

checks and balances of our imperial president difficult - and if impeachment is not possible, there are no real checks and balances.

The latest idea, that a non-binding Senate resolution on the militia of another country being a terrorist organization being the equivalent to a declaration of war has about as much legal validity as saying a comment on Fox Cable News has the force of law - but there is no rule that you can not claim that effect for either.

With a president out of control, I do not see how legislative activity or lack thereof stops anything.

[illinoisprogressive]

12. Voting for Iran no longer makes Iraq just Bush's war. complicent in this warmongering

[oasis]

15. "...bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely

and therefore, war, less likely".

That's all you really need to know.

[Der Blaue Engel]

16. So any woman supporting Clinton must surely be doing so only because she's a woman

That's a very interesting (and insulting) theory. (And for the record, I'm not even planning to vote for Hillary in primary. I still find that an atrocious broad-brush smear.)

[Forkboy]

17. It seems pretty insulting towards women, doesn't it?

I'm voting Kucinich because he's a guy, like me. :)

[Cameron27]

22. Glad I'm not the only one.

:thumbsup:

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

18. Hillary voted for IWR for the same reason Kerry did, the same reason that...

Edwards and Biden did, and the same reason Gore voted for Iraq War 1.0 in 1991...

Political calculation regarding one's electoral viability. Of course.

It's an apalling vote but I don't find it utterly disqualifying in Hillary, Biden or Edwards because I had no trouble voting for Kerry. Politicians do awful things. I voted enthusuiastically twice for a guy who executed a retarded guy, followed by a guy who voted for Gulf War I, followed by a guy who voted for the IWR. Too late to be a virgin.

[janx]

19. ...

:rofl:

[Cameron27]

26. !

:spray:

[Ethelk2044]

37. And Edwards knew he was being sold a pack of goods. Those on the committee voted against the war.

[jillan]

21. I am not a Hillary supporter, but that is a pretty ugly post.

[Skittles]

23. I agree

Hillary's IWR vote disgusts me but I know of no woman voting for Hillary solely because she is FEMALE. I do, however, know plenty of men who hate her PRIMARILY because she is FEMALE, including, no doubt, the auther of that ugly piece.

[JeffR]

27. Well said, pirhana. I don't support her either, but

my jaw dropped at the sexism of the author. The guy would fit right in in the era of tailfins and Sputniks. Maybe this genteel chauvinism still gets a chuckle over a game of squash at the club or something, for old times' sake.

[countmyvote4real]

24. And that’s the least of my problems with HRC.

It’s true, the one you site is a big one that she has dodged from the get go. If I wanted to vote for Condi then she would be running. Oh, she’s not yet?

This is not about black/white/gay/straight/male/female/immigrant/foreigner/whatever issues. It’s about ALL of us. We need a real change for the better. That would be us. Not the corporate sponsors of both dynasties.

i can't vote for her or her husband again. Yes, they did us some good, but still sold us out at the same time.

[silverojo]

25. I'm a woman, but I support Edwards first, then Obama

I don't vote for a candidate based on whether their crotch looks similar to mine. :rofl:

[BenDavid]

29. NO! I know exactly why, HRC will not

grovel to those on the far left that want her to give an apology for her vote....WHy does she have to apoligize? Do you want all the Dems in the Senate to give an apology for their vote? Trying to hold HRC to some other standard then you would your own Senator is wrong.....unlike Kerry in 04 when asked the question....If you knew then what you know now would you still have voted for the Iraq resolution.....It is forever in my mind, Kerry standing there with the Grand Canyon as his backdrop and he knowing what the question was to be, answered.....YES! Therein with that answer lay the 04 election....Now on the other hand HRC did not wait to be even asked the question, she answered that months ago......No, from my view HRC does not need to give an apology.

Ben David

[wyldwolf]

34. Obama supporters sure do stress over this kind of thing,

[rinsd]

35. What a misogynist douchebag

Yeah stupid women will vote for Hillary just because she is a woman.