Today's non-stop coverage of McClellan's book shows another reason why Hillary can't be our nominee

Obama was able to give a strong statement connecting McCain to this ill-conceived war. Hillary didn't give ANY statement. And why not? Because SHE VOTED FOR IT!

Pat conceded that it would contribute to the mindset against Republicans on the Iraq war, and said "and frankly, this hurts Hillary too, because she voted for the war too", and Wes Clark said "Excuse me, that was COMPLETELY different. Senator Clinton voted for the war reluctantly, while John McCain voted for the war enthusiastically!" (or something. anyone see this? Wes Clark was very polite about it of course, just because he's classy. But I'm not sure if his argument really helped her case on this particular front)

I wonder how much he regrets hopping aboard the shabby HillaryWagon.

It just happened to come up while I was writing this. Yeah, I saw Wes Clark (whom I supported in '04) saying that, but I don't buy it.

by saying such shit in an effort to cover for Shrillary.

Hi-liar-y claims trusted Bush which alone shows poor judgment. But we know the real truth:
- she didn't bother to read the NIE report
- she didn't bother to ask critical questions
- she didn't bother to heed the warnings of some of the 23 Senators who voted NO
- she didn't heed her NY constituents who called, faxed and emailed their opposition

She's a cold, calculating, immoral, narcissistic coward who did what she thought was politically expedient to run for POTUS.

Fuck her and shame on you, Wes Clark.

who emailed, called, and wrote letters to Senator Clinton..but, she knew better over the blood and treasure of our country.

And, the poor Iraqis.

:hi:

way, jenmito:hi:

:hi:

from hilary's YES vote that she gave Without reading the 90 NIE report.

"President Bush's speech in Cincinnati and the changes in policy that have come forth since the Administration began broaching this issue some weeks ago have made my vote easier. Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first and placing highest priority on a simple, clear requirement for unlimited inspections, I will take the President at his word that he will try hard to pass a UN resolution and will seek to avoid war, if at all possible."

The problem with hilary as we now know(and I'm sure the good General is fully aware) is she Lies to keep from telling the truth so I don't believe anything she said.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6154620

we think favorable, then? Maybe "palatable" is a better word, whatever specious reasoning that we think might make dishonesty tasteful.

Now lemme see, here, if I can recall some vids I saw of Hillary's pro war speeches at the time. Seems I recall they were right down the line identical to the neo-con Bush regime's pro-war talking points. Quite enthusiastic speeches, to my ears - just as enthusiastic as her primary speeches are at this time.

Yah, she included the same escape door caveat that she included in her pro Kyle/Lieberman amendment statements. I.e., that she trusts George W. Bush. Whoa! Now that's some demonstration of judgement! One thing I can say for her, she's consistent on *that* score. But somehow I don't count that as a bonus.

I remember the events as they occurred in real-time. That is, I remember cradling my head in my arms, trying to soothe myself, thinking (not just of Hillary, or any particular one of the crowd salivating for war, lying for war) that these people were the furthest thing from innocent. They weren't ignorant, or ill-informed. Quite the opposite. They were totally informed and were doing this deliberately and with full awareness, even while the whole world watched in horror. Now I hear folks excusing them all, saying that these politicians, these media pundits, were ill-informed, that even Bush was ill-informed, and that they aren't culpable because they were totally ignorant of everything.

True, this isn't the first time for this kind of thing. Politicians lying about militarily aggressive policies, whether directly or by proxy, whether open or covert, has become the norm. Gradually. Such systematic lying got ramped up in the US (covert) war against Nicaragua, and (again covert) against Chile, and it got ramped up again, by another qualitative degree, in the run-up to and continuation of the Iraq war - or, what is now an Iraq occupation. This ramping up marks out points on the same curve. (In case some people still don't get it, NO, insurgents fighting an occupation are NOT "terrorists").

You're right.

:hi:

Man, just when you think she's had enough of being ignored, she gets ignored again!

Ouch!!

McCain fundraising with Bush, and said "Oh, they're both republicans, the American people know that they are separate people even though they are both Republicans."

He is a loyal Hillary toady, and the fact that he would praise anything coming from Karl Rove shows Clark's head is so far up Hillary's ass he can't see anymore.

than a Democrat.

:hi:

is if you ignore his actions (oh, except he gave a speech once).

"Iraq De-Escalation Act." He spoke out strongly against it when it was popular to be FOR it (like Hillary). Stop the "he gave a speech once" bull. He was against it and predicted, correctly, what would happen.

His voting record is no different than hers.

This "he only gave a speech bull:" ACTIONS speak louder than words. He GAVE A SPEECH. And when he had the opportunity to ACTUALLY DO something about the war. The VOTED FOR IT EVERY TIME. If he was that strongly against it he should have fought for it. HE VOTED FOR IT.

We need a fighter. He has not fought.

help get the bus out of the ditch which she helped drive into the ditch.

Nothing. He could have helped to stop it if he was against the war. He DID NOTHING. He was purposeful in his inaction: he wanted to be President. So, he did the politically safe thing FOR HIMSELF. He made no tough choices (except to hide his ONE speech he made against the war).

I am so tired of this "he was against the war" argument: it is a FAIRY TALE.

:hi:

Talking point from Obama: "I was always against the war"

war is one of the reasons she won't be the nominee. The sooner you face that, the better. Will you be voting for Obama in Nov.?

that go away no matter how high you pile dung on someone else. that is one of the major reasons she is losing.

x(

Let McCain go after Obama's "judgement" now -- he bought all this bullcrap hook line & sinker!

he already TRIED going after his judgement, but that won't work.

if she would have said she made a horrible mistake and she will regret her decision till the end of her days then in my mind i could accept her. she has`t and that will be her legacy....to proud to say she made a mistake.

voting for the IWR. And her husband, who HAD to have known better, advised her to vote FOR it, probably thinking it would be politically expedient.

t right now.

ncy. Whether she thinks we are right or wrong about that is irrelevant. You have to begin with folks where they are and THAT IS how her IWR vote looks. She voted for an at least 50:50 chance of war because she planned to run for pResident.

The fact that she has not addressed our perceptions of this matter indicates that she does not consider Us her constituencey. So be it.

The rule that HC acts upon is "Go with those who represent your interests."

Obama HAS demonstrated his interest in Us as his constituency.

:hi:

on the Today show this morning. He was pretty damn strong in his condemnation of the buildup to the war and how the American people were deliberately misled into this war and I thought damn, it's a good thing Hillary ISN'T the nominee. I mean, when even the former press secretary puts out a book with all the lies in it, that's pretty bad.

nominee. And it's an ADVANTAGE, really.

on the Today show this morning. He was pretty damn strong in his condemnation of the buildup to the war and how the American people were deliberately misled into this war and I thought damn, it's a good thing Hillary ISN'T the nominee. I mean, when even the former press secretary puts out a book with all the lies in it, that's pretty bad.

If you vote like them. Obama can say I didn't support the war and it resonates. Clinton is Kerry Part II.

least. But an apology wouldn't change the fact that she voted for it and would be a negative for our side).