Hillary: But no one could have guessed Bush would screw it up like he did...

Because the intelligence agencies of at least thre major powers I can name have looked for that link and concluded, again and again and again, that it wasn't there?

 

Show me a politician who's neither a fraud, nor a hypocrite, and I'll kiss your ass.

 

I do find it a bit troubling that so many politicians -- Hillary included -- are taking the stance that they didn't realize things would get so messed up. Even if they couldn't anticipate how badly things would go -- and they have gone badly -- they should never take that cavalier an attitude toward sending troops into battle.

That being said ... instead of criticizing all these politicians for voting on it back then and distancing themselves now ... why don't we instead focus on the issue which caused all this in the first place. Politics doesn't need to be the issue here. American lives do.

 

False teeth.

 

And he did own, you know, about 1,700 slaves.

But all men are created equal, and all that crap.

 

Dammit. Got me on a technicality.

 

For what it's worth, David Brooks, the conservative columnist for the NY Times actually defended Hillary's vote.

Here's an abbreviated version:

Far be it from me to get in the middle of a liberal purge, but would anybody mind if I pointed out that the calls for Hillary Clinton to apologize for her support of the Iraq war are almost entirely bogus?

I mean, have the people calling for her apology actually read the speeches she delivered before the war? Have they read her remarks during the war resolution debate, when she specifically rejected a pre-emptive, unilateral attack on Saddam? Did they read the passages in which she called for a longer U.N. inspections regime and declared, “I believe international support and legitimacy are crucial”?

If they went back and read what Senator Clinton was saying before the war, they’d be surprised, as I was, by her approach. And they’d learn something, as I did, about what kind of president she would make.

The Iraq war debate began in earnest in September 2002. At that point Clinton was saying in public what Colin Powell was saying in private: emphasizing the need to work through the U.N. and build a broad coalition to enforce inspections.

She delivered her Senate resolution speech on Oct. 10. It was Clintonian in character. On the one hand, she rejected the Bush policy of pre-emptive war. On the other hand, she also rejected the view that the international community “should only resort to force if and when the United Nations Security Council approves it.” Drawing on the lessons of Bosnia, she said sometimes the world had to act, even if the big powers couldn’t agree.

She sought a third way: more U.N. resolutions, more inspections, more diplomacy, with the threat of force reserved as a last resort. She was triangulating, but the Senate resolution offered her a binary choice. She voted yes in order to give Powell bipartisan leverage at the U.N.

 

Well, it seems that Che might have dodged another bullet. Thanks for that column, jboy. Remember - the GOP wants Hillary to be the nominee.

Which brings me to this: Anyone seen anything of Willie the hubby lately? Did Che shove him in a closet and lock the door to shield the public from his sexual exploits?

 

Yawn would rather focus on assumed peccadillos of a man who is no longer even in office than he would a war that has claimed more than 3,100 lives.

And Yawn, you wonder why, when GOP supporters speak, the liberals always respond the same way. "But Clinton got a blow job!"

 

Just a product of the liberal media at work again:

The sexual exploits of Hillary Clinton's husband are getting so much rehashing (seemingly each night by the pitiful Chris Matthews) that they could turn out to be a campaign liability.

The sexual exploits of Rudy Giuliani himself don't merit mention. After all, he's the World's Mayor!