Cal Thomas: Hazy stance on war will be Hillary's downfall

[ProSense]

Cal Thomas: Hazy stance on war will be Hillary's downfall

Article Launched: 02/03/2007 06:23:15 PM PST

WHEN it comes to flipping on an issue and making you believe he never said (or did) what, in fact, he said (or did), no one can top Bill Clinton. He makes you want to believe him because he is such a good old rogue with a unique gift of persuasion. Had he not been selling himself to voters, readers of his book and audiences at six-figure honorariums, he might have been the top salesman at any car dealership in the country. Bill Clinton could sell snowmobiles to Miamians.

Snip...

Last weekend in Des Moines, Sen. Clinton attempted to explain her 2002 vote in favor of a Senate resolution "to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq" (S.J. Res. 45): "I said that we should not go to war unless we have allies. So \ took the authority that I and others gave him and he misused it, and I regret that deeply. And if we had known then what we know now, there never would have been a vote and I never would have voted to give this president that authority."

Speaking to the left wing, anti-war organization, Code Pink, on March 7, 2003, which can be found on YouTube, Sen. Clinton tried to justify her pro-war vote: "There is a very easy way to prevent anyone from being put into harm's way, 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've followed for more than a decade. If he were serious about disarming, he would have been much more forthcoming. ... I ended up voting for the resolution after carefully reviewing the information, intelligence that I had available, talking with people whose opinions I trusted, trying to discount the political or other factors that I didn't believe should be in any way part of this decision..."

Sen. Clinton also told the Code Pink women that sometimes the United States has to go it alone and she specifically compared Iraq with Bosnia and Kosovo "where my husband could not get a Security Council resolution to save the Kosovar Albanians from ethnic cleansing. And we did it alone as the United States, and we had to do it alone."

So much for the necessity of seeking allies and additional UN resolutions to follow previous unheeded resolutions before America acts.

more...

Hillary Still has a Problem

The IWR wasn't a vote for war, but:

Why did Hillary Clinton vote against Kerry-Feingold?

[Larkspur]

1. What would be ironic is if the Republican Prez nominee supports withdrawal from Iraq and

Hillary is our nominee and she does a "Kerry" on Iraq.

Even though I detest Cal Thomas, he gives us a great glimpse into the Right wing's game plan against Hillary, if she is the Dem nominee. Hillary will be Kerry ver 2.0 in 2008.

[Hippo_Tron]

5. I don't like Hillary, but short of Ron Paul no Republican is better on the war

Chuck Hagel is just as much of a johnny come lately as Hillary.

[sendero]

7. I believe the same thing....

... Hillary has dug her political grave with her sometimes tepid support, other tepid condemnation, of this war.

She will not be able to run against the war, the Republicans have plenty of her own words to paint her as a "flip flopper" , "triangulator", etc, because that is EXACTLY what she is.

She turned against the war in earnest when it was politically impossible not to.

[karynnj]

22. A "Kerry"

You mean you think that she would author the first binding piece of legislation that would have had the US out of Iraq in 12 months?

Kerry spoke against rushing to war on January 23, 2003 - before the war started. Hillary's March 6, 2003 comments don't seem to do that - but there is no link to the full comments.

The deciaion to go to war in March 2003, was Bush's. Kerry and Hillary have both said that had they been President they would not have led the country to war.

Does the left wing want to harm another Democrat by conflating the Oct 2002 vote and the March 2003 decision to go to war?

[Larkspur]

34. "Kerry" as in "I'd vote for the war again if I had it to do over again"

Kerry played footsie with his IWR vote too and it cost him credibility with the electorate.

[papau]

2. at the start of the war her words made sense based on the prior weak intel now was strong - and

that is what she was told about the intel.

Is Cal Thomas faulting her for not being as wise as Obama and not seeing that Bush was a liar from day one? I sure wish Cal had made mention of Bush and the liar thing back in March of 03.

[saltpoint]

3. Senator Clinton's position on the war notwithstanding, Cal Thomas

is a fool.

He's a windbag of the worst possible kind.

John McCain's support of Bush's troop surge is by far the more grievous political misjudgment. McCain's numbers are tanking. He sounded like he was on smack on THIS WEEK this morning.

[Hippo_Tron]

4. dupe n/t

dupe

[babylonsister]

6. Big Fat Ugh - Cal Thomas. nt

[Katherine Brengle]

8. Curious why you felt this paragraph was unnecessary -

I posted about this the other day but will do so again now...

Paragraph 2:

"Not so with Hillary Clinton, who thinks the Democratic Party notion of entitlement entitles her to be president. We are asked to believe that this woman is the most intelligent female in America, a person with deep convictions, unique vision and the experience to lead the nation in troubled times."

Not sure why you chose this of all paragraphs to delete. As much of a dink at Thomas is, he's not completely wrong about Hillary Clinton. The only part of this entire column that truly showed the typical conservative right-wing Good Old Boys club colors was the 2nd paragraph, where he insinuated that in order to be worthy of the presidency, a woman must be the best among all women, head and shoulders above her female brethren, while a man with a C average at Yale is perfectly deserving.

[Clark2008]

9. Maybe the OP left it out because it's so assinine that (s)he

felt it didn't deserve merit. (Thomas's statement, not your post KB)

[Katherine Brengle]

10. Perhaps - I will give the benefit of the doubt lol.

Great point, and I hope that is why.

[mitchtv]

18. Don't forget the 4 paragraph limit!

the best reason

[ProSense]

12. From the right or left

pounding the IWR argument is not helpful. Trying to stop the war over the past four years would have been, and putting every effort behind ending it now is. Also, Bush has to be held accountable.

As for the paragraph you cited, the point I wanted to focus on is in the snip posted.

[benddem]

11. and Cal Thomas has

been correct WHEN?

[AZBlue]

13. Perhaps if the election was in a month or two, yes.

Maybe even in 6 months. But the election isn't for another 22 months. There's a lot of time for her to take action and make certain statements and moves - for better or worse. I think it's too early to tell anything about any of the candidates yet.

[Zynx]

21. Eh. It's implausible Hillary was ignorant about W's intentions.

Hillary is not stupid and her staffers certainly aren't stupid. I'm not buying the idea she was "misled" by marketing spin aimed at the American mass market, who aren't generally nearly as well informed as she is.

[AZBlue]

26. Well, hopefully you have the exact same attitude toward everyone else who voted yes.

I'm not a one-issue voter, but there are many who are and I respect that, as long as they hold everyone equally accountable and don't just use it as a justification to pick and choose who they criticize.

[Mass]

14. Coming from Cal Thomas, this is meaningless.

[bigdarryl]

15. well unfortunately i have to agree with him. Hillary is starting to make some dumb mistakes.

[Mass]

16. I am not disagreeing with what the OP means. I have issues with using RW writers

to make the point. This gives them a credibility they should never have on a progressive blog.

[ProSense]

17. I agree with you.

The OP contains a post from the right and the left, both making the IWR an issue. As noted in post 12, the issue now is ending the war.

[rhett o rick]

19. Boy oh boy, if we only knew then that GWB was a liar and a cheat.

Some of us knew that then, but some how it got past HRC. Now she is trying to spin her way out of it.

[rhett o rick]

20. Why would anyone read Cal Thomas? Clearly a propagandist for

the Corporate Neocon Nazi's.

[AtomicKitten]

23. any 'ol port in the storm

"unfocused" was apparently epidemic: http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2004-10/20landau.cfm

[MGD]

24. More like: Hazy stance on war will be Democratic party's downfall.

We are divided and without a concensus view on foreign policy. Get ready to lose in 2008.

[Boo Boo]

25. "Not so with Hillary Rodham Clinton, who thinks the Democratic Party notion

of entitlement entitles her to be president."

Man, that's rich coming from a Republican. GWB is the poster child for entitlement.

[paulk]

27. using right wing hate mongers like Cal Thomas

to attack a Democrat with is despicable.


You used a Washington Times article by Donald Lambro, another RW whackjob, on Saturday.


Once again - despicable.



------------------------

[ProSense]

29. Nice

try.

Taylor Marsh is making the same argument as Cal Thomas, not one person mentions that link from a left leaning blog.

Then there is the question: Why did Hillary vote against Kerry-Feingold?

No one addressed that either.

[paulk]

31. then post taylor marsh

don't give assholes like cal thomas any credibility by posting his garbage.

or donald lambro, like you did the other day.




-------------


maybe hillary voted against kerry/fiengold, along with 86 other Senators because she

THOUGHT IT WAS A BAD IDEA.

[ProSense]

33. I post what I choose to, thank you.

The point seems to escape you because you want this to be about Cal Thomas. You can also point to the article you keep referencing.

Your answer to the question makes no sense since Hillary Clinton now seems to be advocating a defined end to the war by Bush, which is why she opposed the deadline in June and in her the Q&A she did shortly before the election.

[paulk]

35. HRC can't change her mind?

Why does she get held to a different standard than other Senators who've changed their minds about Iraq?

---------------

you can post whatever you like, I suppose, although it used to be against the rules on DU to use right wing pundits to attack Democrats with. OTOH, after 5 years at this site, I no longer have a clue as to what the rules are here, since they increasingly seem to be either enforced or not enforced in a completely arbitrary manner. Which has nothing to do with you...

What I will say though - even though I know you could care less - is that your credibility is somewhat tied up in what you choose to link to - there are a large number of people who are going to question your motives if you link to articles by people like Cal Thomas.

[ProSense]

36. You make a lot of accusations, and

back them up with more accusations.

Right wing or left, the IWR argument is used to distract from the real focus, ending the war. I question those who have remained silence for so long, and still refuse to put real effort behind ending the war now.

Your credibility it suspect as you want to make this about mine and not the facts.

[paulk]

37. and you use a right wing hate monger to trash a Democrat with

despite your best efforts to deflect, that fact remains.

You will stoop that low.

And that says worlds about you and what you're trying to achieve on this website.

[ProSense]

39. Get over yourself. n/t

[paulk]

40. always like you to also stoop to personal insults.

that also says a lot.

[ProSense]

42. Here are some other Hillary threads you missed:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3093334&mesg_id=3093334

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3096722&mesg_id=3096722

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3092896&mesg_id=3092896

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3096733&mesg_id=3096733

[paulk]

44. what's your point, Prosense?

spell it out for us.

Is it that I defend Democrats from posters like you, whose goal on this website is to bring them down - using any tactic, any smear, even if that means using right wing hate mongers like Cal Thomas?

[ProSense]

45. Ok Paulk, you win, I will never criticize Hillary Clinton ever again.

Geez!

I provided those links so that you could defend Hillary's honor in those threads too, or are you simply obsessed with my threads?

[paulk]

46. what you are doing doesn't fall under the heading

"criticize".

Using a right wing whacko like Cal Thomas to assist you in your daily trashing of Hillary Clinton goes well beyond that.

And I'm pointing it out, not just to you, but to others who read this board, so that they will see to what depths you are willing to sink ... in your campaign to trash her.

[mtnsnake]

28. Cal might be right. It's the same thing that contributed to Kerry losing in '04.

Kerry's campaign message was so muddled nobody knew where the hell he stood on the war or anything else. He'd make a campaign speech and you'd sit there scratching your head going "WTF?" after he stopped talking.

Hillary should learn from that mistake. If she doesn't, it'll cost her just like it did Kerry.

[wyldwolf]

30. Cal Thomas?

:rofl:

[AtomicKitten]

38. clearly used as a means to an end

But, seriously, Cal Thomas? Ugh.

[johnlal]

32. Who cares what Crazy Cal has to say?

He's a part of the republican propaganda machine. He can't be trusted.

[SaveElmer]

41. Lets see Washington Times, Fox News, Insightmag, and now Cal Thomas...there is no source...

Too batshit crazy to attack Hillary with at DU I guess...

[ProSense]

43. You missed these:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3093334&mesg_id=3093334

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3096722&mesg_id=3096722

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3092896&mesg_id=3092896

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3096733&mesg_id=3096733