Clinton Gives War Critics New Answer on ’02 Vote - New York Times. The story goes that she's not going to apologize for voting to authorize the President to wage war in Iraq. I agree with her decision. I'm just put off by what I consider her true feelings on the subject.
Hillary's not opposed to the war in Iraq. She's just opposed to the way Bush is waging it. I get the impression that she's convinced that if she were in charge, it'd be going a helluva lot differently than it is presently. She will not apologize for upholding the Imperial Presidency. She intends to be both President and Imperial. Therefore, why should she tell Bush how to win the war in Iraq when she can do it herself in another couple of years and get full credit?
As a candidate, Hillary doesn't do shit for me, but if she's the Democratic Party's nominee, I can get behind it completely. I think Hillary would make an excellent president. I don't have a real favorite right now. I like John Edwards because he's so good looking and speaks democratic populism so well. I think a snowball has a better chance in hell than he does at getting the nomination.
Among the Republicans, I think Mike Huckaby is seriously cute. The rest are a bunch of idiots, and he's probably as looney as the best of them. Regardless of who the nominee is for either party, I would probably vote for a yellow dog as a Democrat before I voted for any Republican under any circumstance. I hate what I just confessed to, but the truth is what it is.
I like the way you think. :-)
Posted by: aikane | February 19, 2007 at 04:16 PM
i don't blame Hilary for her vote at all. at the time she cast it, it was an understandable call, given the information available. granted, it's not the call i'd have made, but i'm not a legislator, thank God.
i like Giuliani.
what do you think of this hubub over the Edwards aids with the Mary-having-sex-with-Jesus-thing?
Posted by: Crys | February 21, 2007 at 07:03 AM