illiterate Electorate: Hillary Clinton supported the Iraq War...

Saturday, March 15, 2008

Hillary Clinton supported the Iraq War...

....don't ever forget that.

7 comments:

Bradda said...: As much as I hate to back Hillary but she didn't "support the war". She voted for authorization of the use of force if that was a last resort as Bush claimed. Read her speech from that day in the Senate. She specifically says that force should be the very last resort. We all know Bush didn't care about first or last resort but that doesn't mean she was for the invasion. All she is guilty of is really poor judgement on the "character" of Bush. Pretty bad call on her part but it was still just a call. Either way, go Barack Obama!; March 15, 2008 at 10:10 PM
Bradda said...: Hillary's speech; March 15, 2008 at 10:16 PM
Sal Kilmister said...: I disagree. In that speech, she said:

"This is a very difficult vote. This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make -- any vote that may lead to war should be hard -- but I cast it with conviction."

Her words from that speech. She, and others who are trying to triangulate the position ex post facto, could have demanded language in that vote that said if all else fails we need to vote again to give the President full authority, but she, and they, did not. Instead George W. Bush was given the full muscle of the U.S. military to use however he wished without any real conditions attached. That, at least to me, is support for war. And she did not begin backing away from this until she ran for president. She casted the vote with conviction.

Here is the meat of the resolution:
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) AUTHORIZATION. The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION.

In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon there after as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq, and

(2) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

That is very clear. In my opinion, anyone that voted for this bill made one of two calculations:
A) That war was necessary if negotiations within the international community failed.

B) That war was not necessary if negotiations within the international community failed, however, it would be bad politics to vote against this measure.

Remember, Bush's popularity was still in the mid 60's at this point, and an election was only one month away. I am not sure what her real motivation was to vote in the affirmative for that resolution, but my guess is her calculations were political above all else. Her deplorable behavior in the last few months seem to show a behavioral pattern in this direction.

I of course may be wrong.

Just my 2 cents...; March 16, 2008 at 6:22 AM
Sal Kilmister said...: Upon further reflection, a responsible administration would have held off the vote until just after the election so that war would not be politicized, but I digress...; March 16, 2008 at 7:00 AM
Bradda said...: Of course her vote was political. No one argues that. I just don't think she was a full blown hawk when it came to this vote. She made a bad decision and it should bite her in the ass, but that doesn't mean she was "for" the war.; March 16, 2008 at 10:44 AM
Sal Kilmister said...: I will say only this, she was closer to Cheney than Kucinich.; March 16, 2008 at 10:14 PM
Bradda said...: No one argues that point.; March 16, 2008 at 10:42 PM