All Things to All People
Hillary Clinton tries to be all things to all people in her desperate quest for the presidency.
For the hawks, she actually speaks with some sobriety about the threat of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons.
But the Iraq war? That's not popular right now, so she's against it. In fact, she said two remarkable things today.
(1) She would not have atacked Iraq had she been president in 2002 (which, of course, makes one wonder why she supported the invasion).
(2) If elected, she would end the Iraq war.
As for the latter, congratulations, Hillary. You've just wrapped up the Al Qaeda in Iraq vote for sure, and done your part to cement that Democrat/Al Qaeda political axis.
For the hawks, she actually speaks with some sobriety about the threat of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons.
But the Iraq war? That's not popular right now, so she's against it. In fact, she said two remarkable things today.
(1) She would not have atacked Iraq had she been president in 2002 (which, of course, makes one wonder why she supported the invasion).
(2) If elected, she would end the Iraq war.
As for the latter, congratulations, Hillary. You've just wrapped up the Al Qaeda in Iraq vote for sure, and done your part to cement that Democrat/Al Qaeda political axis.
posted by LadybugUSA at 2:10 PM
7 Comments:
Look, I'm getting rather sick of all the "the Democrats are horrible because they supported the war and then were against it" complaints.
Perhaps at the time they actually trusted that President Bush was telling the truth about WMDs and Nuclear weapons and Aluminium tubes and sourcing material from Niger - just like two-thirds of Americans did back then.
Now that they've realised that it was all a load of rubbish, they've turned against the president and the Iraq war - just like two-thirds of Americans today.
Deceit removes trust. Bush has destroyed the conservative movement.
The words Hillary Clinton use mean duplicity.
Just to clarify, people voted against the "party" due to less than Republican activity and/or against, not the president, but his management of the war. They did not vote against him for any so-called lies. Personally, I'm getting rather sick of libs complaining that they're being called on their lame anti-war/anti-Bush rhetoric.
In a press conference yesterday, General Peter Pace and Sec Defense Gates were asked what hard intelligence do they have that the Iranian government is undermining US efforts in Iraq. They replied they did not have any.
All presidential candidates try to be all things to all people, but really at the end of the day, they only owe those who have gotten them elected. Clearly Bush owed Parsons, Halliburton, Merck and Pfizer. Staking your belief in religion on a political party is foolhardy. Those are personal beliefs that have no place in the square of public ideas. There is no right and wrong religion there is only the Faith you have. Really simple to see where many of you have gone wrong. The political right in America believed Bush when he said he supported the religious right in all things they wished to do especially that he would place the judges on the federal bench with the right opinions about abortion and marriage in an effort to "take back America through the judiciary."
Like it or not this has been rejected by the bulk of America as the folly of the war in Iraq has. Preaching to a shrinking number who honestly believed everything that comes out of the mouths of Right Wing pundits does little to solve the problems in Iraq or in America for that matter.
Read the NIE where it says that American is in the midst of something more dangerous than a civil war and if they leave Iraq things will get worse but even if they remain they have no control over whether the nation collapses into anarchy, divides along sectarian lines into three nations, or finds itself dominated by a Shi'a government run by someone like Moqtada al Sadr.
Nowhere in that NIE did I read anything about "victory". That is because victory the need for America a nation among nations to seem superior even when it is being run by an inferior administration. The good coming out of this is that the GOP will return to the center and the more reactionary parts that held sway for six years will likely organize the foundation of the permanent majority of the Democratic Party by breaking off and forming a viable Christian Conservative third party that would get a percentage of the votes equal to the president's approval rating right now, around 28.
EtC,
Hard evidence is not needed for intelligence, only for convictions in court. Perhaps that is why they so easily replied in this manner. Yet, we did have a recent report of a couple of Iranians captured, as well as IED technology coming from Iran. How much Iranian involvement is needed for you to want to see some response? Do you require a few to aim, shoot and kill American soldiers first? So glad you're not running the war.
cavalor,
Always nice to hear from your little club.
Good presidential candidates stand for something and owe the American people the effort to lead according to those things for which he/she stands. To "be all things to all people" is a sure sign that one needs to look elsewhere for a candidate worthy of one's vote. Your baseless assertions that Bush is indebted to those corps have no place in serious debate. What does is the sincerely held beliefs of anyone who cares to debate in the public square, regardless of whether or not they are derived from a specific religion. A basic knowledge of our nation's history will bear that out. There is indeed a "right" religion and we will all learn the truth of that in time. To think otherwise is laughably illogical and it's easy to see that you ARE wrong in YOUR thinking. Bush DOES support the religious right insofar as those things that comply with the Constitution and traditional values. His nominees for the SCOTUS and lower courts reflect as much since his intent is to fill vacancies with those whose decisions are based on what the Constitution says, rather than what they might prefer it to say. It's what we've hoped for and what he has delivered to the best of his ability.
Like it or not, this has been accepted as one of the campaign promises he has unquestionably delivered. Preaching to those who have not swallowed the lib mantras spewed by both Dem politicians and lefty pundits may not be enough to counter the damage done by the defeatists among you, but the right doesn't throw in the towel because things get tough. That's the job of Dems and the French.
You'll need to provide a link to the NIE report that says we have no chance. NIE's change regularly as they are only status reports. They say where we are with little else of note and constitute one opinion. Real Americans don't believe in defeat. This last line covers what I think the beginning of your poorly constructed last paragraph is saying. The GOP did not come to power by moving to the center and it lost power because it seemed to do just that. You obviously don't pay attention. The rest of the paragraph is just naive speculation not worthy of comment.
Post a Comment
<< Home