I applaud Hillary Clinton for admitting she was wrong about Iraq.

[Cascadian]

I watched her speak on CSPAN on Sunday and I must admit I was impressed with the way she handled herself and I was very happy to see that she finally admitted she was wrong in supporting the Iraq invasion. So I will give her kudos for that but that does not mean I will let her go that easily, she ought to distance herself from the DLC agenda and not support anymore invasions on sovereign countries via PNAC. Then maybe I will give her more credit.

I will also note that I agree with her on Universal Health Care. Under a Democratic administration it has to a certainty.


So, Good job, Senator Clinton. You are finally coming out of the ether!


John

[eddiemunster]

1. I don't...

She flat out admitted she was fooled by George effing Bush. GW is a moron. She was fooled by a moron.

[tabasco]

2. Great. Now we can start looking for leaders with better judgment.

Keep your day job, Hillary.

[Cascadian]

15. I still won't support her candidacy.

What's done is done and she participated indirectly to the demise and death of a small, sovereign country who's people did nothing to America or Americans.

If Hillary spent more time with those wounded soldiers both physically and mentally, I would like to think she would better understand the error she has made.


John

[Kagemusha]

3. I'm OK with moving on to what a Hillary admin would do.

Fact is, her name would have been crossed off the list of possible '08 candidates if she'd opposed that resolution. She was in a big political pickle and chose the least worst option for herself, hoping that Bush wouldn't abuse her choice (but of course he did). I'm a realist: Hillary's not a "no war, never" type of politician. What's done is done; what happens from this moment onward, is very much a legitimate topic.

Like, you know, pounding Iran, say. But we'll see how all that goes.

[dflprincess]

26. I don't buy that Hillary was in a difficult position

Wellstone was in the midst of a tight campaign in 2002. He was told that a vote against the IWR would spell political doom for him. He decided to vote his conscience because as he said, "I have to live with myself". As it turned out, his advisors were wrong. After voting against the resolution he bounced up in the polls and was ahead of Coleman and out of the margin of error the day he died.

So don't tell me Senator Clinton voted the way she did because she was worried about an election that was 6 years away.

[Kagemusha]

41. So much for trying to be generous to Hillary... (for once)

"So don't tell me Senator Clinton voted the way she did because she was worried about an election that was 6 years away." <-- Wait, you're telling me with a straight face she wasn't?

Is it reasonable to argue that she's in the Senate for any long-term reason other than to pave the way for a run at the presidency? I do not think so, personally.

[dflprincess]

42. A very good point

And, now that you mention it, I agree with you that she went to senate only to pave the way for 2008. However, that still doesn't excuse her lack of integrity on Iraq.

[LeFleur1]

47. Obama, Too?

Quote from dflprincess: I agree with you that she went to senate only to pave the way for 2008.

And does that mean Obama went to the senate only to pave the way for 2008?
It could be possible that people run for office because they really think they can do some good for the country, including Hillary AND Obama.

[babylonsister]

4. Can you provide the quote where she actually accepted personal

responsibility for her vote? I didn't see/hear that. Thanks.

[shaniqua6392]

6. Look here:

http://www.listenhillary.org/article.php?id=762

[welshTerrier2]

10. great link! thank you.

it makes for quite a read ...

[babylonsister]

13. I must be looking in the wrong place; that link isn't

showing me anything about Clinton accepting responsibility or expressing regret for her vote.:shrug:

[welshTerrier2]

17. look at this quote:

"Obviously, if we knew then what we know now, there wouldn't have been a vote and I certainly wouldn't have voted that way."

I assume she was referring to the royal "WE" ...

this is an excerpt from her speech where she voted for the IWR:

"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."

No mention was made of the risks we faced by creating a power vacuum in Iraq. The obvious result: civil war and a totally unstable Middle East that threatens both peace and our access to oil.

For me, the issue is NOT that she voted for the IWR although that was a tragic mistake. I could forgive one vote. The mistake was 1. trusting that bush was NOT going to go to war (an absurd point of view) and 2. not even recognizing the possibility of a totally destabilized region. That kind of judgment is NOT what we need.

[babylonsister]

21. So much for accepting personal responsibility; I didn't think so.

And I also am not harping on the issue that she voted for the IWR, but that she won't acknowledge SHE made a mistake in doing so.

[Cascadian]

16. Excellent link and an excellent site!

Thanks a bunch. More people should really see this!


John

[Hell Hath No Fury]

8. I haven't heard her say that either...

she is waltzing all around it but never really coming right out and say her vote was a mistake and that she was wrong. The talking heads were going on about her verbal gynmastics -- one (can't rememeber who) said they had tried various ways to get her to say she was wrong but that she just would not bite.

[babylonsister]

12. Olbermann said that last night; I don't think she's accepted personal

responsibility, or even expressed regret for her vote, so I'm not impressed.

[Cha]

37. Olbermann's not "impressed"? Cause

I'm not impressed, either.

Please deliver from bloody hillary.

[shaniqua6392]

5. I do too.

She was not the only one fooled by the intelligence coming out of the White House. I am willing to hear her out. The reality is that I am going to vote for whoever the Dem nominee is. Our choices are terrific all around. We should be really proud of the lineup rather than ripping the Dem candidates to shreds. What are we going to do? I am not going to vote for a repuke or waste my vote on an independent just cuz Sen. Clinton is the nominee. I am sure they are all going to have something about them that I do not like. We need the White House in 2008 and a larger majority in the House and Senate would not hurt either!!

[Tansy_Gold]

44. I don't think she said she was misled on the intelligence

My understanding of the quote upthread was that she was saying, regardless what the intelligence was or how good or bad it was, she (and others) trusted boooosh to use diplomatic means until those were utterly exhausted before going to war. That was the big lie that she (and others) fell for.

Back when a lot of retired generals were coming out against the war about a year ago, I heard Robert Jay Lifton on NPR (IIRC) explaining why these same generals didn't speak out while they were still in the military and might have been able to do something about the situation. Lifton said that there is a mindset one gets when one is in a particular environment that has a narrow focus, and one doesn't gain a clearer, more objective perspective until one is out of that environment. So military people inside the military establishment would naturally have a military perspective that conditions (not the best word, but it'll do for now) them to see the military solution as the "best" one. Only after they are outside that environment -- and able to hear and see other perspectives -- are they able to see the flaws of their insider mindset.

For those who are "working" inside the government apparatus, I think -- IMHO only -- it's possible that many have the same somewhat blinkered perspectives. In early 2003, booooosh had only been in office two years; he hadn't established as strong a pattern of lies and deceptions as he has now. The big lie, of course, was the 2000 election, and yes, most of us on the outside saw that for what it was: blatant political theft. But high-level elected officials, I would think, would be in a similar atmosphere and environment to the military generals who believed it was all going swimmingly. . . . . until they retired.

One of the problems of a representative democracy is that the people we elect to represent us are not merely our mouthpieces. They do not have to vote according to the will of the people who elected them. All we get to do is voice our opinion once: we elect them to do the rest, and yes, that includes "thinking" for us and making decisions that we might not agree with. Our recourse is to vote them out the next time, or impeach them. If we don't disagree strongly enough (in enough numbers), we basically have to shut the fuck up and let them represent us. Unfortunately, what they may believe and promise as candidates may not remain with them when they become part of the apparatus and another whole mindset invades.

I happen to like Hillary. I also like John Edwards. I'd be happy with Obama, and I'd gladly vote for Kerry or Gore. .. .again. (I'd have difficulty finding a clothespin big enough to hold my nose while I voted for Lieberman, but I don't think that's really a concern.) I'm not looking for or expecting a "perfect" candidate. I'm also willing to let people change their minds, see the error of their past ways. Few people remember that Kucinich, divorced Catholic that he is, was adamantly anti-abortion until he decided to run for president in 2004. So was his sudden switch to pro-choice a real change of heart, or political expediency? How many lives did his anti-choice voting record affect?

Hillary, who's been part of the DC machine for 15 years, has admitted she trusted boooooosh to use diplomatic means until war was a last resort. A lot of people who voted for him, who had access to the same information we at DU had, are also changing their minds and admitting they were lied to, bamboozled, flimflammed. Last November, a lot of them voted for Dems and gave us the House and Senate. I'm all in favor of letting them flip-flop -- so long, of course, as they don't flop-flip back the other way!

But no one listens to

Tansy Gold

[John Q. Citizen]

7. So why does Hillary keep voting to fund her mistake? Not responsibe at all.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

11. See how that helped Kerry. nt

[harveyc]

9. I would have been happier if she ...

had just said she made a mistake like John Edwards has said.

Instead, she said she was fooled by a Shrub. That is ridiculous.

It comes across as pure BS.

"Obviously, I've thought about that a lot in the months since," she said. "No, I don't regret giving the president authority because at the time it was in the context of weapons of mass destruction, grave threats to the United States, and clearly, Saddam Hussein had been a real problem for the international community for more than a decade."

"The consensus was the same, from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration," she said. "It was the same intelligence belief that our allies and friends around the world shared.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/21/iraq.hillary/

[John Q. Citizen]

14. She's gutless. Did she forget to talk to Scott Ritter?

[AtomicKitten]

18. of interest

from http://tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/jan/13/hillary_says_its_time_to_start_leaving_iraq

Hillary Says It's Time To Start Leaving Iraq
By Greg Sargent

Via Atrios, Hillary Clinton has told ABC News in an interview in Baghdad that it's time to start bringing the troops home. "Clinton said it is time to start re-deploying U.S. troops out of Iraq," ABC says, quoting her as follows: "That would really demonstrate to the Iraqis that we don't have an open-ended commitment," she said. "We are not going to be here providing protection for their leaders, which we do. We are not going to be here standing by and trying to be called in from time to time as they see fit. That is not in the cards." Clinton also noted that the level of security was much higher than her first visit two years ago; on this trip, ABC reports, she had to wear body armor and was surrounded by soldiers.

[eddiemunster]

19. Master of the obvious...

The flipflop Queen.

[AtomicKitten]

24. she learned from the master

the last presidential hopeful ...

[blm]

20. And when Kerry and Murtha were saying so in the fall of 2005, you wouldn't lend

your voice to theirs and give political backup then or in June 2006 for the withdrawal plan submitted and the acknowledgement that Iraq had been in a civil war since the beginning of the year.

Now Hillary repeats almost everything Kerry has said the last two years and pretends she is the one leading on the issue.

[John Q. Citizen]

22. The answer my friend is a finger in the wind. the answer's a finger in the wind.

[AtomicKitten]

23. whaaaaaaaa!!!

I posted a relevant piece on a thread without comment. If you feel this somehow compromises your mission to besmearch the name of the Clintons here, tough shit.

[blm]

25. If you can't see that her words NOW would've been an IMMENSE help for the withdrawal vote THEN

then that exposes YOUR moving boundaries on the issue of Iraq war and withdrawal.

Since fall of 2005 Kerry has been submitting legislation to bring this war to an end and he gets nothing but attacks from you, and when Hillary FINALLY starts mouthing his words NOW, though will not be submitting a withdrawal plan, he's STILL your target for derision.

[Tellurian]

35. I don't believe Kerry should be used as any kind of example, after picking McCain as his VP..

Hillary doesn't need to apologize for a mistake. She didn't make one. She voted in good faith.
Why should she take responsibility for Bush lying to Congress?

The other candidates who apologized caved into pressure by pseudo-Democrats screaming for contrition.
I totally understand why she voted the way she did, with several, strong caveats attached to her statement.
It wasn't an UP or DOWN vote! Her statement is complete. I know what and how she was thinking at the time she cast her vote.

Here is the Kerry/McCain link discussion if anyone has any doubts Kerry asked McCain to be his VP running mate:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3083099#3084486

[Cascadian]

27. And she is doing that because she wants to win the election.

She is literally borrowing John Kerry's speaking points. But at least she fessed up she was wrong and it is on recrod now. No backing away now, Hillary!


John

[AtomicKitten]

30. It's Politics 101.

... saying things to win elections.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52839-2004Aug9.html

[babylonsister]

31. When did she fess up 'she' was wrong? I'm still looking for that quote. nt

[booley]

28. yes, how brave to kick that dead horse

yes, it certainly was brave to do what so many of her fellwo dems have already done and admit the obviouse after it was becoming a big wedge against her among her base.

Yes, very brave.

Oh and in case you didn't figure it out..

:sarcasm:

[Cascadian]

29. Already noted.

I call it a bit late but at least she put it all out there. All and all I would rather her just stay in the Senate until her next election and then get voted out by a real Democrat and then she can go back to being a lawyer.


John

[KenHodson]

32. Admission does not deserve applause

Nope. This war-bitch won't get my vote either.
Hell, there are thousands of us on this site that knew that even if weapons of mass destruction had been found, they would have had "made in USA" stamps all over them. (Our government supported Saddam and gave him war monies and munitions because he was the only secularist around.)
There are thousands of us on this site who knew this was "blood for oil" from day one.
There are thousands of us on this site who that heard the sneaky language tying Iraq to 9-11 and it made us sick. This was utterly repulsive to a bunch of us.
I can recall how yucky I felt when I witnessed good friends cheering on this war effort and buying into the lies.
I can recall how yucky I felt as I saw those crappy "Remember 9-11" e-mails spam both my work and home accounts.
I can recall how yucky I felt questioning myself about what the word "patriot" really meant.
Nope. This war-bitch won't get my vote.

[Cascadian]

34. I feel like voing for her would be a form of whoring.

I would feel very dirty and I don't think I could involve myself in the political system that enthusiastically ever again. She is just the wrong candidate.


John

[closeupready]

33. Agree 100% with you, John!

:hi: Not ready to support her, but if she continues to evolve, it can happen. :)

[elizm]

36. WAY too little and WAY too late! n/t

[bigdarryl]

38. then why doesn't she vote to DEFUND the war than. she's not doing that

[The Count]

39. hey, she is now just as "anti-war" as Edwards...No, actually more so, as

she isn't threatening Iran...

[gratefultobelib]

40. I'm sure you knew your OP would create a firestorm of replies--so I applaud YOU!

[Infinite Hope]

43. What she said this weekend was what she has always said.

She's said for a long time the war was wrong and unfounded. She didn't apologize because she felt the Congress was misled and the administration was to blame.

[ima_sinnic]

45. if it was now not "acceptable" to call for ending the war, she wouldn't

... you don't see how she is just reacting to the winds of change? that she has no moral/ethical/principled ground on which to stand? that she will say whatever she thinks will make her "look good"?
why is she now, FINALLY, saying something that is still even kind of noncommmital? too bad it has had to come this far before she finally summoned up the almighty courage to speak out against it in her own triangulating way. Deep down she is as blood-thirsty as the rest of the PNACers and imperialists but can glide on the magic Clinton name to make herself look "liberal" or "enlightened" or whatever.

For HRC, it's all about HRC, 24/7. I will never vote for the corporatist DLC candidate. If she is the nominee, I will write in Al Gore or Wesley Clark or even Howdy Doody, as I did for Florida senator in 2006 (considering that Nelson is pretty much a zero). Since it'd be six of one, half a dozen of another, I will exercise my democratic right not to vote for a war-mongering triangulator who could care less about what We The People have been screaming for six years now.

[Apollo11]

46. Does Hillary's explanation hold water?

In today's New York Daily News, columnist Michael Goodwin calls her a liar.

People will continue to ask Hillary about her shifting positions on Iraq.

Michael Goodwin, New York Daily News

Wednesday, January 31st, 2007

Hillary's big lie grows

There she goes again. Hillary Clinton told another whopper. Actually, it's the same whopper she and her husband told before.

In Iowa last weekend, Clinton was asked about her 2002 vote to suppport the Iraq war. It's a tough question for her, given the war's unpopularity among Democrats. Moreover, her two leading opponents for the 2008 presidential nomination have crowd-pleasing positions. Former Sen. John Edwards said his vote for the war was a mistake and he regretted it, and Sen. Barack Obama opposed the war before the invasion.

So Clinton's camp sees her pro-war vote as heavy baggage. She has never denounced it or said it was wrong, but, at times, has done something worse. She has lied about the reasons for it.

Sunday in Davenport, Iowa, was one of those times. Asked about her vote by a man in front of a mostly adoring rally, Clinton trotted out the whopper. She said she was misled by President Bush about the resolution. "He said at the time he was going to the United Nations to put inspectors back into Iraq, to figure out whether they still had any WMD," she said, adding, "He took the authority that others and I gave him and he misused it."

That's very similar to how Bill Clinton defended her last year. In an interview with ABC News, he said Dems who voted for the resolution did so only to force Saddam Hussein to give up, not to use force. "They felt, frankly, let down" about the invasion, Clinton said, painting Dems as dupes of Bush.

It's a clever argument, but it's not true. It's not even within spinning distance of being true.

(edit)

That the war has gone badly is a tragedy and a disaster. It is why Democrats won Congress last year. But anybody who wants to be President and commander in chief cannot play the role of victim when the going gets tough on the campaign trail. Blaming others for your own conduct and fudging history are not the right stuff for the Oval Office. Even, or especially, when your name is Clinton.

Read the full article here:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/493272p-415451c.html

[noonwitch]

48. I'm voting for her

She acknowledged she voted based on information she thought was factual.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Adelante]

50. I applaud all the sorry Democrats

I don't think it means they deserve to be president. Just an opinion.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.