2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary Clinton: No regret on Iraq vote
Well let's not beat about the Bush?
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said she is not sorry she voted for a resolution authorizing President Bush to take military action in Iraq despite the recent problems there but she does regret "the way the president used the authority."
"Obviously, I've thought about that a lot in the months since," she said. "No, I don't regret giving the president authority because at the time it was in the context of weapons of mass destruction, grave threats to the United States, and clearly, Saddam Hussein had been a real problem for the international community for more than a decade."
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/21/iraq.hillary/
Fast forward to the future - it was a mistake....
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Sanders.
Rogue Democrat
(71 posts)whereas Bernie Sanders has always stayed consistent
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Yeah, go with that.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)At the end of the day she won't stand up to Republicans, she'll get sucked in again.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)SCantiGOP
(13,881 posts)Overzealous supporters hurt their own cause with desperate hyperbole.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)have the strawman all set up for an easy and historically inaccurate RW-like bashing session!
Who was it who said we need to talk about the issues....I keep forgetting who said folks are sick and tired of hearing about......anything but the issues?
Isn't throwing the first stone reserved for those without sin?
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Interested in reading why the ISIS Resolution was voted down and why Sanders voted against it in light of the Paris attacks today.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)I sometimes wonder if Sanders fans do not want to know what both sides of all the current issues really are and how close all the candidates are on those issues, because it seems questionable interpretations of past deeds is the main course.....and all it leads to is tit for tat and all amounting to nothing that helps anyone but the mendacious to the core GOP.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Clinton to work for our future. Her issues have brought the concerns of our citizens in her agenda, an agenda if the future.
Joe Turner
(930 posts)It provides us a record of what a person actually did as opposed to what they said. Should be common sense right? You don't like the past because it is something that hurts the candidacy of Hillary. I suppose if a convicted felon ran for office supporting all your favorite causes you would be cool with it, because whatever the crimes the person did, it is the past and that's not relevant now.
tecelote
(5,122 posts)You're right about everything.
My vote is for the consistent and morally superior candidate.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)NanceGreggs
(27,822 posts)Did her poll numbers go up again today? That usually triggers these posts.
Maybe BS can bring it up at tomorrow's debate, so he can "mop the floor" with Hillary - ya know, just the way he did in the first one!
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)That would be interesting to find out if he was able to move the poll numbers at all.....after all there is not an unlimited amount of vacuum pennies one can rely on.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)I am moving on. You are right, the worn out debunked talking points has not worked in the past month and I doubt they will this month either.
NanceGreggs
(27,822 posts)... as a signal that HRC must be doing really, really well!
In addition, given the tragic events in Paris today, I guess a lot of Bernie fans are worried that foreign affairs will be a big topic at tomorrow's debate - and we all know that's BS's weakest point.
So out come the same old OPs that have been posted a zillion times - like clockwork!
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And there isn't one with the tragedy in Paris. No bombings, no invasions, no "boots on the ground" cam ever lead to anything positive or liberating in the Arab/Muslim.
All wars for the rest of eternity will solely be wars for the rich.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)SunSeeker
(51,898 posts)And most certainly will again.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Many of us are tired of unending war.
And... the people that benefit from it.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)He is a big supporter of the F-35 program, one which still has not developed a plane which is functional in battle but they continue to throw good money after bad. He has said he will take military action and use drones. Look at the votes on military programs, see who supports those programs.
R B Garr
(17,026 posts)It didn't matter with Kerry in 2004. Its now just a holier-than-thou talking point to browbeat people to gain some phony moral high ground. Very RW.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)R B Garr
(17,026 posts)Issue. It didn't affect Kerry 11 years ago.
coyote
(1,561 posts)We are the seeing the blowback for the irresponsible decision of going into Iraq and Hillary's bad judgement in enabling it....not to mention Syria, Libya, Yemen, And Somalia.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)It simply isn't possible that they could have thought anything else would happen. All of them knew Bush could only get re-elected if he got something like a war to protect him from a serious opposition campaign.
Like the people who lived around the death camps, they KNEW. They couldn't not know.
senseandsensibility
(17,280 posts)The Straight Story
(48,121 posts)Oh wait, I can't say that - it means I am sexist according to some.
Hillary was totally right in what she did. Thank you Hillary! (Don't criticize her - it is wrong, she is above reproach because of her gender).
ismnotwasm
(42,037 posts)The Straight Story
(48,121 posts)The sexism thing? Thread last night where I was accused of being sexist because I questioned her, perhaps. Can't criticize her because I am a "male" and humans with a penis aren't allowed to say anything negative about her. Only women can discuss Hillary. Oh, and the poster says that in 2008 I never said anything bad about Obama (that was a long time ago, apparently they read every post of mine from then) because he was a male.
And I am the sexist one. Right.
gordyfl
(598 posts)Almost every time there was an internal disagreement within the Obama administration about whether to use force, Clinton could be found on the interventionist side.
While you cant draw a direct correlation between the two, its nevertheless intriguing:
So many of the Obama administrations major diplomatic successes have occurred in the years since Clinton departed.
askew
(1,464 posts)Kerry has had enormous diplomatic success in his shorter tenure at State.
I am really curious how Hillary responds in tomorrow's debate after today's attacks in Paris. She is hawkish and an interventionist so I am wondering if she will propose boots on the ground in the Middle East.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)Kick in to the DU tip jar?
This week we're running a special pop-up mini fund drive. From Monday through Friday we're going ad-free for all registered members, and we're asking you to kick in to the DU tip jar to support the site and keep us financially healthy.
As a bonus, making a contribution will allow you to leave kudos for another DU member, and at the end of the week we'll recognize the DUers who you think make this community great.