No. She voted for the AUMF to force UN inspectors in, which would have removed the need for use of military force, and said so right before the vote. It worked and the inspectors went in, but Bush invaded anyway. Not because she was gung-ho to invade.
If it had been President Gore, we would not have invaded Iraq. And if it had been President Hillary Clinton in 2002-2003 (as the thought experiment since she was not even running in 2000) we would not have invaded either, because UN inspectors would have been in and determined once and for all that no WMDs were there.
Which is the larger point which the partisan attempts to demagogue on the AUMF vote ignores.
Didnât think I was throwing poop or pillorying her. On the contrary. I thought I was more or less expressing a healthy skepticism of her. ⌠Iâve never been much of a bandwagon rider.
There is a difference between not being willing to admit any criticism, and my point, which is that this particular line of criticism is idiotic. These are not actually the same thing.
Besides, I donât think the call for civility and demonstrative self-doubt is really that helpful. Itâs not my responsibility to preface every statement with âNow, we all know Clinton isnât perfect, butâŚâ out of some misguided urge to comfort people making dumb arguments.
Your comment is based off of things you imagine I may think about you, rather than anything I said above. Iâm not engaging with a fictional complaint.
I agree for the most part though Bernie is an evader/panderer on some issues too. While she is solid on gun safety/regulation issues and the NRA, Bernie is the equivocator this issue.
yes, it wasnât just her vote, but the refusal to publicly recognize that it was the wrong decision, as well as the other hawkish positions she took as senator. I donât think she has good political or moral instincts when it comes to questions of war and peace - this is my biggest problem with her. I think sheâll be good on domestic policy, indebted as she is.
I felt AUMF was bullshit at the time. I thought it was like throwing a hand grenade to a chimpanzee in the hopes that it would never pull the pin. Seriously, les, it was Authorizing (BushCo, a subsidiary of Halliburton and The Carlyle Group, to) Use Military Force. Sadly, it unfolded exactly as I â and many, many others â predicted it would. Pretty unforgivable in my book. Then again, Iâm Quaker by nature.
Ah, she said that the vote (the AUMF) was a mistake because of what Bush did with the authorization it granted him. How is that not ârecognizing it was the wrong decisionââŚ?
I have no problem admitting Clintonâs got flaws, but it seems you want people to agree that the stuff you view as flaws are her flaws, and if they disagree then theyâre unable to admit she has flaws. Thatâs not exactly fair either.
I think her biggest problem is that sheâs too guarded and wonky sometimes. I donât think sheâs particularly bad at giving speeches, but itâs certainly not her strong suit, which is especially magnified by the two most recent Democratic presidents who are two of the greatest orators in modern times. I also think sheâs too worried about how sheâll be perceived and that causes her to retreat to a sort of stiltedness.
Every pundit who has engaged with her personally, to a man, talks admit how funny and personable she is in private. She needs to learn to show that Clinton.
As far as her hedging in some issues, thatâs exactly what I expect her to do in the primary. Unlike Trump or Sanders, sheâs actually been playing this thing to win both the primary and the general. That involved necessary hedging. Her problem there is that sheâs not as good at it as some others. Sheâs not as good at polishing up a turd the way that, say, Obama is. I dare say sheâs even uncomfortable with it which is why it can come across as insincere.
But, like Obama, I think sheâs being held to a completely ridiculous standard that none of the men in the race have been held too. There was almost nothing from the MSM about Sanders crime bill vote or the unfortunate comments he made. And there are countless other examples, like anything to do with guns, where Sanders has been a House of Waffles. We donât even need to go there with Trump, the guy whoâs so sincere in his religious convictions that he called 2nd Corinthians âtwo Corinthiansâ.
I opposed the AUMF because of its blanket authorization wording, and opposed the invasion full stop. Even protested it, because I was not convinced of the evidence of a nuclear program (the only WMD program that really matters).
But how you personally felt (or me) is not really that relevant now is it?
That said, I was also 100% for getting UN inspectors into Iraq with unfettered inspections to finally put the issue to rest once and for all.
That Bush flat-out lied about it and invaded despite saying that if inspectors went in, military force would not be needed, is 100% on Bush. Not on Clinton or anyone else.
And again, if it had been President Gore or even President Hillary Clinton in office in 2002-2003, there would have been no invasion.
Aargh, can we please just get off the merry-go-round about whoâs imperfect? Weâre hiring somebody for a job here. Whoâd do it best? Is there any argument about that? We donât have to do this just because Jon Stewart threw a spitball at Hillary after torching Trump.
I have always thought that if there were some way to go drinking with her, that she would blow all of us here away with how funny and snarky she actually is. I know itâs in there, its a shame so few get to see it.
