Does the support of Hillary mean that many Democrats think attacking Iraq was right?

[Smith_3]

:shrug: That is something I really wonder.

It really seems to me like the Hillary supporters don't fundamentally think that the war was a mistake. Maybe they just disagree with the way it was fought? I don't get it.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[boricua79]

2. I think it just means people want a return to the Clinton years

so bad, that they'll take anything with that name-brand on it.

and I wouldn't put it past Clinton supporters to not be totally anti-war. Remember...this is still a massively jingoistic nation.

[Popol Vuh]

22. I agree

And I also wonder why they'll dismiss so many things when the Clintons were in the White House. About the only thing that I can think of that was somewhat good was the balanced budget. But how quickly people forget the signing of NAFTA, the forcing of striking American Airline pilots back to work, the forcing of striking American Airlines stewardesses back to work and not to mention the foreign policy issues and other issues.

[boricua79]

45. Anything but Bush syndrome at work

in comparison, they look great. Without the comparison, they were Centrist Elitists, and wouldn't be much appealing to real Progressives.

[surfermaw]

54. Why wouldn't they, she is running agains a candidate in my opinion bought and paid for by rep.

[Perry Logan]

3. As Bob Dylan says, "Don't criticize what you can't understand."

[rodeodance]

60. oh my--what a wise saying. thanks

[Uben]

4. You probably never will get it.

When you dwell on the past, you chances of changing the future are diminished.

[Smith_3]

5. I doubt you would say that if your child was murdered as a result of someones decisions. nt

[Uben]

8. How extremely ugly of you

Your life must really suck.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

37. And your life must be a paradise of oblivion

Don't want to trouble your beautiful mind do you?

[rodeodance]

62. Obama FUNDED theis WAR--that was HIS decison--and they DIE because of it.

[krkaufman]

6. No. Dems picked Kerry, too.

I just think many don't see that her vote (and failure to read the full Iraq NIE prior to the vote), will weaken her ability to attack the Republicans on the war issue.

[MadHound]

7. No, what it means is that a lot of people are more willing to put

The deaths of over a million people on the back burner for the hope of an upturn in their own personal situation. It means that personal accountability takes a back seat to the cult of Clinton.

[Popol Vuh]

21. Right on the money

I am sure you join me in thinking what a shame and how disgusting that people could just ignore so many deaths, especially for political purposes.

[DemGa]

9. Did you hear about the manipulated intelligence?

Good place to start.

[Smith_3]

19. Her stance on Iranian Nt. Guard and Cluster bombs doesn't exactly suggest she has "changed her ways"

I doubt that she was fooled by "manipulated intelligence"

[TexasObserver]

10. Yes, it means saying Iraq was the right war at the right time.

It means forgetting about having any kind of rebuke of the past 7 years. It means no investigation into the lies that built the war.

[donheld]

11. Sadly too many American's have forgotten all about Iraq.

How much does MSM actually cover it?

[mmonk]

12. No. They are thinking she represents change, think of her as progressive,

and they remember Bill Clinton's presidency as something positive. My fear; I fear the future of the progressive movement.

[Iceburg]

13. It means they believe she is the only one competent enough to get them out of it

safely and with some dignity. Foolishly, most of Dems (and the the Repubs)in the senate vote for the IWR...only a handful were against it.
I am a Hill supporter but more importantly I was/am vehmently against both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

We don't know how BO would have voted wrt the IWR (since he wasn't in the Senate) ...he himself says he doesn't know.

She, as did all the other senators made a mistake in voting for the IWR. But I firmly believe she is the only one capable of ending it and restoring good relations with the rest of the world. If you don't travel much outside of the US you will not know just how much America is loathed abroad (and the hate is not just limited to Bush). And yet they (the foreign countries)still speak respectfully of Hillary and Bill. The next president of the US must have as a number 1 priority to repair the damage done to its foreign relations or he/she can kiss the economy goodbye.

[shayes51]

14. You are right.

[Radical Activist]

23. Where does the idea of Clinton being competent come from?

Ok, I understand its an attack of Obama's experience. But what has Clinton been so competent at doing?

She says the top issue of her life is universal health care. She had eight years of her husband being President and failed to get it done. She dropped the issue for over a decade after it failed until she ran for President again, preferring instead to push minor changes far short of universal coverage. That looks like a record of incompetent failure to me. Why should I believe she's suddenly going to get better at this?

[mrreowwr_kittty]

38. You should see how people in other countries speak of Obama. They love him. nt

[rug]

63. And France loves Jerry Lewis.

Go figure.

[CatWoman]

64. ooooooo SNAP

:rofl:

[rosetta627]

15. I don't know how else to interpret support for Hillary

She did something unforgivable for political gain, voted to invade a country full well knowing that the Bush regime couldn't be trusted with to speak the truth, and is personally responsible (as is everyone who voted for war) for tens of thousands of deaths.

Ergo, the Iraq invasion is totally fine with them.

It's the new breed of Progressive.

[yardwork]

49. Nobody in Congress "voted to invade" Iraq. The White House did that.

You are misrepresenting the votes in Congress, and shifting the blame to Democrats.

[rosetta627]

53. I'm not misinterpreting anything

You, on the other hand, are believing their spin.
The congress creatures who voted WITH Bush (who after all has just stolen an election) knew exactly what they were doing and why.

[liberal N proud]

16. It means people can have more than one issue they are concerned about

It means that people are not "single minded" I leave that for the republicons and other stupid voters.
I have several issues that are important to me and can not agree with any one candidate on all of them.
Simply not possible.

[Dogmudgeon]

17. DUers are obsessed with the IWR vote

Most Americans and Democrats do not see it the way we do.

We look for reasons to damn Hillary Clinton. Most people see it as a case where Hillary -- and about 3/4 of the rest of Congress -- was lied to by a psychopath in a thousand-dollar suit.

I don't think they dismiss it, not for a moment. After all, she trusted the wrong person, a serious lapse of judgment. That does count against her. But the way we tend to look at it just isn't the majority view. Close to half the DUers are single-issue voting on the IWR and see her vote as the equivalent of sending a donation to Stormfront. Most Americans will vote for whom they feel will be the best president. If she can stop the war with a minimum of fuss, the vote will be forgiven.

We do make a fundamental mistake thinking that support for Hillary is support for the IWR. It is not. Hillary herself has said that if she knew then what she knows now, she would not have voted for it. You may think that's insufficent explanation, but she has a reputation for honesty and straight talk (keep in mind, most people don't read Counterpunch and The Nation). They know that she's telling the truth and can rescue the economy in a matter of days, as much as you know she's a liar and a cheat and she eats babies.

And please, I've heard all the outrage and the conscience-talk a hundred times. If you want to examine the beliefs and reactions of other people, you have to put your self aside for a few minutes. Your anger will keep.

DU is a political niche unto itself. We can't map our politics onto the rest of the country, or even other Democrats. The safest way to proceed is to ask people what they think. And if we disagree -- it's a good opportunity to use our powers of persuasion.

--p!

[Smith_3]

20. Good post. nt

[PassingFair]

30. MOST of Dems in Congress voted NO

Jeez.

126 vs. 81 in the HOUSE

23 Senators Voted NO.

The MAJORITY of SITTING democratic legislators were NOT fooled.

Those who WERE, like LIEBERMAN, should be weeded out, one at a time.
NOT rewarded for their mistakes.

[polpilot]

59. She 'trusted the wrong person'...Gotta be right on day one

gotta be

[Tarc]

18. No, it means that Clinton supporters are generally not single-issue robots

There are other issues facing the next president besides Iraq, and on the majority of those I feel Clinton is far, far stronger than Obama.


"You don't get it" you say? No kidding. :eyes:

[PassingFair]

32. "One issue voters"

Pre-emptive war, 500,00 to 1 MILLION dead
4 MILLION displaced, is just an ISSUE to you?

“I find it surprising now, in 2008, how many Democrats are running for president after shirking their constitutional duty to check and balance this president,” writes Chafee. “Being wrong about sending Americans to kill and be killed, maim and be maimed, is not like making a punctuation mistake in a highway bill.

“They argue that the president duped them into war, but getting duped does not exactly recommend their leadership. Helping a rogue president start an unnecessary war should be a career-ending lapse of judgment.”

--Lincoln Chafee (Republican Senator who voted NO)

[Tarc]

34. Yes, it is

[Fran Kubelik]

24. Nope.

That's not the case at all. But thanks for your concern. :)

[Marrah_G]

25. Wow_ Thank you for your concern.

This Clinton supporter has marched against the war along with my teenage daughter, also a Clinton supporter. My brother just returned from Iraq after being reactivated after to years of retirement. He even missed the birth of his son.

There are many choice things I would like to add to this post. But since it would violate the rules I will just say "Enjoy your very short stay".

[BootinUp]

26. Does the rejection of Hillary mean many Democrats think forcing UN inspections was wrong?

:shrug: That is something I really wonder.

It really seems to me like the Hillary is a warmonger folks don't fundamentally think we should have enforced the UN sanctions with the country obviously strongly in favor of that. Maybe they just thought Sadaam would have started cooperating with the UN one day without a threat of war. I just don't get it.

[Smith_3]

40. And the Clusterbombs? Where they necessary too? nt

[bigtree]

27. It means we don't buy the bullshit that they 'authorized' Bush to go to war

or anything else he did with regard to Iraq.

[bigwillq]

28. No

Kerry voted for the IWR as did Dodd, Biden, Edwards from this past cycle. I don't think the War is the No. 1 issue right now and even in the thick of it, it still didn't stop the DEMS from choosing Kerry.

[PassingFair]

36. And Kerry lost.

Flip Flop, remember.

This is the biggest blunder in our history.

It is costing US (not to mention IRAQ)
treasure and BLOOD.

Dubai based Halliburton grows FAT off of
the profits. Exxon rakes in RECORD amounts.

U.S. near bankruptcy and foreclosure.

Can I remember any stirring moments from
progressive leader Ms. Clinton?

Ahhh Hill NO!

She will basically be in the same position
in the debate with McCain that Kerry was
with Bush.

[bigwillq]

50. Good points.

I do think Clinton will (is) having a harder time in the DEM primary with Obama then she will with the GOP nominee since McCain still wants to continue the Bush policies in regards to Iraq.

My only issues with Obama concerning the war is 1) I believe he is quoted as saying he does not know how he would vote. He does say that he doesn't think they made the case but, imo, it is alot harder to sit on the sidelines (not in Senate at time) then actually being in the middle of the action and making a speech doesn't really hold much water with me. Anyone can make a speech. He has that leeway to say whatever he wants b/c he didn't have to go on record at the time.

Also, if Obama is so anti-war, why wasn't he had the forefront of the Let's Get Out of Iraq movement? I will have to do some more research but as far as I know, he hasn't sponsored any bills for the immediate withdrawal or at least setting a timetable for withdrawl. Sure he voted to fund bills with timetables but if getting out of Iraq is such a major issue for him, he should be making that his No. 1 priority.

Believe me, Clinton was dead wrong (sorry for the bad pun) for voting for the IWR and she needs to just say it was a mistake but Obama hasn't done nearly as much as say Kucinich to try and help us get out of there.

[PassingFair]

55. Here:

Remarks of Illinois State Sen. Barack Obama Against Going to War with Iraq
| October 02, 2002

http://www.barackobama.com/2002/10/02/remarks_of_illinois_state_sen.php

He spoke at rallies, too.

Nancy Skinner had no quibble with him regarding
his anti-war stance, and she is VERY progressive
and was vocally against the war.

The DLC PUSHED for the war, they did
nothing to stop him...

Just what IS the difference between a pre 2006 Lieberman and a Hillary Clinton?
I'm not being smarmy, I REALLY want to know.

[bigwillq]

56. I've read the speech

I am talking about since he got into the Senate. He hasn't really been the anti-war crusader that some people think he is.



"Just what IS the difference between a pre 2006 Lieberman and a Hillary Clinton?
I'm not being smarmy, I REALLY want to know."

There really is no difference except Clinton is still aligned with the Democrat party. I think Lieberman is much more of a jerk. Did you seen him behind McCain today in Arizona? Makes me sick.

[PassingFair]

57. She's still "aligned" because we're not crowbarring her out...

like you angels did to Joe. :yourock:

And yeah, I saw him....

:puke:

First time I wished I HADN'T won that big screen TV!

KEErist! Turn it OFF!

[bigwillq]

58. You won a big screen?

:shrug:

I wish we sent Joe all the way out though. Bastid.

[Evergreen Emerald]

29. It means...

It means that people think past the superficial, intellectualy lazy idea of blaming Clinton for Bush's war and really disect the issue.

It means that People are not lemmings who nod in unison to whatever the media tells us to think.

It means that not everyone is fooled by the glitz of Obama, and really want substance.

It means that many people see that Clinton is the right kind of change that we need in America--to oust Bush and the neo-cons.

[lwcon]

31. What *you* don't get, for Christ knows what reason, is...

... that the AUMF gave Bush authority that he abused, after the most open inspections ever in Iraq were accomplished in the aftermath of the vote. The AUMF would have been a smashing success, if it weren't abused by Bush.

We can debate whether it was smart to expect that Bush wasn't batshit crazy enough to start a war when inspections were proving it was unwarranted, but it's incredibly indigenous to keep pretending that Hillary (or any sane person) wanted that outcome.

You can further criticize her for being tricked by lying intelligence leadership into believing that the threat was real, and not standing up to Bush and joining those who protested the decision to commence fighting.

But your "Hillary supporters don't fundamentally think that the war was a mistake" is one of those bogus fake-shame questions/assertions like the GOP's "Would you prefer that Saddam Hussein was still in power?"

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

[MethuenProgressive]

33. Only an uninformed fool would make that assumption.

"I don't get it," you say.
Yeah, that's obvious.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

35. oh please

[Enrique]

39. Lynne Woolsey's endorsement of Hillary proves this false

"Hillary Clinton is the candidate with the strength and experience to bring about the change that California families need," said Rep. Woolsey. "I trust Hillary to end the war in Iraq, bring our troops home quickly and safely, and regain our nation’s standing around the world."

As Co-Chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, Congresswoman Woolsey is a vocal and visible leader on progressive issues, particularly those dealing with children and families. A passionate and outspoken opponent of the Iraq war, she has helped move public opinion against President Bush’s failed Iraq policy. She introduced the first resolution calling for our troops to be brought home and convened the first congressional hearing on military exit strategies. The San Jose Mercury News recently called her "the unofficial matriarch of the movement in Congress."

[mondo joe]

41. I support Hillary and oppose the war.

I voted for Kerry and Edwards too.

I don't consider the IWR to be the single factor in my vote or support.

[PassingFair]

42. And the definition of insanity is....

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

"I voted for Kerry and Edwards too.

I don't consider the IWR to be the single factor in my vote or support."




They couldn't make a strong argument against the 'pukes, either.

[mondo joe]

44. Depends what you think "the same thing" is.

IMO, Kerry was a bit of a wimp, not able to defend himself.

I don't consider Clinton the same thing.

[PassingFair]

46. Kerry was a war hero.

Clinton is the cuckolded wife of an ex-President.

Kerry was no wimp.

[mondo joe]

47. True, he was. And yet he bent over and spread for the swiftboaters.

It's why I stopped my monthly donations back in 2004.

[Little Star]

43. The war was totally wrong. Still, there were.....

75 Dem senators who made a mistake and voted for it. Should Hillary be the only one we hold this against? Obama was not in the US senate at the time, so we will never know how he really would have voted, he said this himself.

[PassingFair]

51. 29 Dem senators.

Where do you get 75?

[yardwork]

48. No. What an asinine observation.

Hillary wasn't my first, second, or third choice for president. I disagreed with her votes about Iraq, but Obama has voted the same way ever since he got in the senate. Not much difference between the two. I don't think that either of them would have invaded Iraq. I don't think that either of them would have allowed 9/11 to happen.

It wasn't Hillary's idea to invade Iraq and she didn't make the decision to do so. Nor did she decide how to invade and occupy. That all lies with the Republican White House.

To accuse Hillary or any Democrat of "causing the war" is just repeating right-wing talking points.

[robbedvoter]

52. No. It means they know Obama didn''t DO any different, and BOTH would end war

[Avalux]

61. It means they have a Republican mentality; they forget what's important for emotion.

Sorry, but that's how it is.