Opinion of Hillary Clinton

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Oh yes, just like Bill Clinton saved America by screwing over Democrats by getting NAFTA through in his first 2 years, and then his party lost the House for the first time in 40 years, and which time Clinton worked with the Republicans in Congress to ensure that the Great Depression happened.

How about we find someone who doesn't piss on their party so bad that if they manage to get elected President with a decent House majority that they don't lose it after 2 years?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

It's going to be funny when all the True Leftists here jump on the Hillary bandwagon toward the end of election season, just like they did with Obama in 2012.

Despite Obama being a massive disappointment, he's still better than Hillary.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Biden, Kerry, and Edwards votes for the Iraq War should disqualify them. from ever holding office, just like Hillary's

They weren't as unapologetic in their support, but I agree that it's ridiculous that Democrats have nominated 3 (and quite likely a 4th in 2 years) people who voted for it for President or VP, and 0 who voted against it.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I still am perplexed at how people STILL use Iraq against her.

Iraq was a major policy decision. The vote on that war resolution demonstrates how a President Hillary Clinton will respond to the intelligence she is shown by her generals and military advisers. In 2003, she chose to go with panic over WMDs and a destructive war. That is still fair game.

However, to be fair to the former Secretary of State she has said she regrets the vote and this reflects a lot better on what her foreign policy may be as president.

No offense, but how old were you in 2002-2003? It's utter revisionist poppycock that president Bush just listened to the intelligence he was getting from the government and made an objective decision that Saddam had WMD. He decided to go to war first and then pressured the intelligence community to come up with "information" to support his political decision. However, that did not become fully clear until much later. The Downing Street memo was incendiary, but was not leaked until April 2005. Similarly, ambassador Joseph Smith's article saying Iraq had not bought yellowcake uranium from Niger did not appear until July 2003.

Hillary's sin, along with others who supported the war in both parties, was essentially to trust that the POTUS who had stood on the rubble of the WTC barely 12 months earlier was not manipulating intelligence to monger the country into a war. Congress has to be able to trust that the president is telling the truth when it comes to matters of national security. If they cannot trust him, who oversees the CIA, DoD, and State, who can they trust? No one. Then the system is fundamentally broken. Call me old fashioned, but I still think the president had a sacred duty to the Constitution to he truthful about such matters, where hundreds of thousands of troops are going into harms way. I still think that those who try to shift the blame to Hillary or other Senators here with the benefit of hindsight are implicitly letting Bush off the hook and assuming that a dishonest war presidency should be expected. I think that's a dangerous precedent.

There is a difference between Senator Clinton and those other Senators, Kerry, Biden, and Edwards, though. The difference was that more than 2,000 of her constituents had been killed in the most dramatic terror attack in world history just a year earlier. These were the people she was sworn to represent and whose interests to look after. Now a war president was claiming, with the backing of the whole edifice of the US government, that a new terror threat was being presented. Just imagine for a moment had she been wrong the other way- if she had opposed the war, (implausibly) stopped the war, and then the threat was realized and more if her constituents were killed in another terror attack. Can you even imagine the epic dereliction of duty she would have been accused of? These are serious matters which is why everyone must play their role. Intelligence was the role of the executive branch and the fault lies solely with the president who failed to carry out that role.

The moderate chair of the Senate intelligence committee, Bob Graham, started off trusting Bush, and then quickly realized that would be a very bad idea, and urged all Senators to read the full classified report, and voted nay.

Of course one didn't need access to classified information to realize that something was up when Bush's Chief of Staff Andrew Card said ""From a marketing standpoint, you don't roll out a new product in August." I guess imminent threat had to wait until closer to the elections for maximum political impact.