Christopher Hitchens: The Case Against Hillary Clinton

[JRP1994]

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2008/01/the_case_against_hillary_clinton.html

"Indifferent to truth, willing to use police-state tactics and vulgar libels against inconvenient witnesses, hopeless on health care, and flippant and fast and loose with national security: The case against Hillary Clinton for president is open-and-shut. Of course, against all these considerations you might prefer the newly fashionable and more media-weighty notion that if you don't show her enough appreciation, and after all she's done for us, she may cry."

This was from 2008, but still is relevant, considering the likelihood of her running and winning the nomination.

[bedstuy]

This first issue of her name is pretty much nothing.  The Lewinsky scandal wasn't her fault at all, so I think that's very unfair.  The Iraq issue is a problem obviously, but it's not exactly a revelation. 

I didn't caucus for Clinton in the primaries in 2008 because of the Iraq issue and her lack of standing up to George W. Bush during her Senate career.  For some people, that's still disqualifying.  And I would respect that as a reason to oppose Hillary Clinton.

But, I really dislike this whole inchoate cloud of resentment for Hillary Clinton.  She's "shrill," a "sociopath," "evil" and "vindictive," that's just name-calling.  If you don't like her, pick a decent reason and don't just throw out a grab bag of coded sexist language.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Her support for the Iraq War is a serious issue, does America want another hawk in the White House?

[Potatoe]

Her support for the Iraq War is a serious issue, does America want another hawk in the White House?

Well, America seems to be fine with hawks, considering they've elected them since 1952.

[daveosupremo]

This first issue of her name is pretty much nothing.  The Lewinsky scandal wasn't her fault at all, so I think that's very unfair.  The Iraq issue is a problem obviously, but it's not exactly a revelation. 

I didn't caucus for Clinton in the primaries in 2008 because of the Iraq issue and her lack of standing up to George W. Bush during her Senate career.  For some people, that's still disqualifying.  And I would respect that as a reason to oppose Hillary Clinton.

But, I really dislike this whole inchoate cloud of resentment for Hillary Clinton.  She's "shrill," a "sociopath," "evil" and "vindictive," that's just name-calling.  If you don't like her, pick a decent reason and don't just throw out a grab bag of coded sexist language.

Oh here we go.

[Cory]

Her support for the Iraq War is a serious issue, does America want another hawk in the White House?

Well, America seems to be fine with hawks, considering they've elected them since 1952.

Are you saying that Carter was a hawk?

Carter Doctrine/Material Intervention In Afghanistan/End of Detente.

["'Oeps!' De blunders van Rick Perry Indicted"]

Hitchens was pretty annoying but it's still a shame the Clintons had him whacked.

[JRP1994]

Her support for the Iraq War is a serious issue, does America want another hawk in the White House?

Well, America seems to be fine with hawks, considering they've elected them since 1952.

Whether America has elected hawks consistently in the past doesn't answer whether America should elect a hawk in 2016.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Her support for the Iraq War is a serious issue, does America want another hawk in the White House?

Well, America seems to be fine with hawks, considering they've elected them since 1952.

That's because the media paints them as the only electable candidates.  Some candidates campaign as doves and govern as hawks (Obama).

[MurrayBannerman]

Her support for the Iraq War is a serious issue, does America want another hawk in the White House?

Well, America seems to be fine with hawks, considering they've elected them since 1952.

Whether America has elected hawks consistently in the past doesn't answer whether America should elect a hawk in 2016.

There is, after all, that whole Cold War thing comprising most of that time period.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Her support for the Iraq War is a serious issue, does America want another hawk in the White House?

Well, America seems to be fine with hawks, considering they've elected them since 1952.

why 1952?  If you are going to count Ike and Carter as hawks, you have to include Truman and FDR as well.

[Mister Mets]

If Hillary Clinton is a horrible person, it's not a rarity in politics.

[eric82oslo]

To say that Hillary is hopeless on health care, is like saying that Ellen DeGeneres is the most hated woman in America just because noone would touch her during the 90ies (at least not advertisers).

[eric82oslo]

Obama governs as a hawk? That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard for quite some time. I think you should have a really hard time trying to find someone who thinks Osama bin Laden or Muammar Gaddafi actually deserved to live. Even Saddam Hussein doesn't come remotely close to the cruelty those two persons embodied. Most Libyans today pretty much consider Gaddafi as the equivalent to Satan. Few people since Hitler has perpetrated more evil than Gaddafi.

[MurrayBannerman]

Her support for the Iraq War is a serious issue, does America want another hawk in the White House?

Well, America seems to be fine with hawks, considering they've elected them since 1952.

why 1952?  If you are going to count Ike and Carter as hawks, you have to include Truman and FDR as well.

It's also worth noting that Obama, in 2008, wasn't running as a hawk. America thought that they were getting a dove.

[bedstuy]

Her support for the Iraq War is a serious issue, does America want another hawk in the White House?

Well, America seems to be fine with hawks, considering they've elected them since 1952.

why 1952?  If you are going to count Ike and Carter as hawks, you have to include Truman and FDR as well.

It's also worth noting that Obama, in 2008, wasn't running as a hawk. America thought that they were getting a dove.

It's not that simple.  Obama was known for being against the Iraq war.  But, being against the Iraq War does not make you a dove.  Obama was actually hawkish on a variety of other issues including going into Pakistan to root out Al Qaeda.

[Mordecai]

I wish Hitchens would have lived to see this day, I would have liked to see his reaction to the prospect of another Bush-Clinton presidential election.

Her support for the Iraq War is a serious issue, does America want another hawk in the White House?

Well, America seems to be fine with hawks, considering they've elected them since 1952.

That's because the media paints them as the only electable candidates.  Some candidates campaign as doves and govern as hawks (Obama).

Obama did campaign as a hawk on al-Qaeda and bin Laden, he just wasn't a hawk on Iraq.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Her support for the Iraq War is a serious issue, does America want another hawk in the White House?

Well, America seems to be fine with hawks, considering they've elected them since 1952.

why 1952?  If you are going to count Ike and Carter as hawks, you have to include Truman and FDR as well.

It's also worth noting that Obama, in 2008, wasn't running as a hawk. America thought that they were getting a dove.

Obama was not one of the dove candidates in the primary, even though he was certainly less of a hawk than Hillary.

[Angel of Death]

Christopher Hitchens? As in the token atheist cheerleader for the Iraq War, that Christopher Hitchens?

[Simfan34]

Isn't he dead? How can he be writing things if he's dead?

[Mordecai]

Isn't he dead? How can he be writing things if he's dead?

It's from six years ago.

[IceSpear]

Hitchens is dead. Hillary is alive. I know who I trust more.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Christopher Hitchens was a bloodthirsty monster anyway who supported Bush in 2004 because of his love of warmongering, mass murder and torture, so why should anyone give a [inks] what that dead monster thought?

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Obama governs as a hawk? That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard for quite some time. I think you should have a really hard time trying to find someone who thinks Osama bin Laden or Muammar Gaddafi actually deserved to live. Even Saddam Hussein doesn't come remotely close to the cruelty those two persons embodied. Most Libyans today pretty much consider Gaddafi as the equivalent to Satan. Few people since Hitler has perpetrated more evil than Gaddafi.

The majority of Americans believe we should not interfere in the internal affairs of other nations.  Obama continued the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, intervened in Libya, and nearly got the US into the Syrian Civil War.  Yes he's a hawk, the only reason he got away with it in 2012 is because Romney took an even more hawkish position.

[they don't love you like i love you]

I'd put Hitchens in the same category as Gaddafi and bin Laden. All three were bloodthirsty thugs who loved torture and mass murder.