Sometimes it’s hard to tell what the American people are thinking. We never want to give a straight answer in politics, but we always want to receive one. And despite the phenomenon of a society run by polls, our politicians still can’t get their policies straight, or even principles for that matter. What’s worse is that we condone this behavior. The 2008 race for the White House provides insight as to how Americans will say one thing, but support another. When looking at the front-runner for the Democratic presidential race one can’t help but assert, to steal a line from “Cool Hand Luke:” I think what we have here is a failure to communicate.
Enter Hillary Rodham Clinton. At age 59, she stands 5-foot-4 and weighs in at 120 pounds with a 65-inch reach. Most polls show Hillary holding around 50 percent of the primary vote, too much for any other Democrat to overcome. With the war in Iraq holding steady as the centerpiece in American politics, and the Democratic Party claiming to run on an anti-war platform; why is Hillary Clinton so well-liked? Do Democrats know that she voted for the war? Do they care? Does it not bother Clinton supporters that she can suddenly change her position on an issue as important as this one with the flick of her pen? What about her foreign policy record as a whole, which shares a closer relationship with Reagan than Carter? When I think of Hillary Clinton I can’t help but think of John Kerry’s famous line that all but ended his presidential run, when he said, “I voted for the 87 billion dollars, before I voted against it!”
Hillary Clinton’s pre-presidential Iraq war record is spotless, but only in the sense that there is not one anti-war spot on it. Clinton delivered a speech on October 10, 2002 to justify her vote for the war in Iraq. In it, along with explaining how evil Saddam Hussein was, and giving us a history lesson of how her husband bombed Iraq in 1998, Clinton included interesting statements, including, “…[Saddam Hussein] has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaida members.” She also articulated the danger Saddam presented: “In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program.” And it’s not like Hillary voted for the war and then realized her mistake the next day. No, she supported the war for years… right up until she began running for president. Through March of 2007, Hillary’s voting record shows her consistency in opposing the redeployment of our soldiers from Iraq.
Of course, listening to Hillary one would have to conclude that she had no part in this war. Because there is no question, as Hillary says, that, “The Iraq war is Bush’s war.” Accountability anyone? One of my favorite lines that Hillary uses in defense of her vote for the use of force in Iraq is, “Bush misused the authorization for war.” Now, I know that senators don’t actually read the legislation they vote for, but in this case the title of the bill was “A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.” If there is anything clearer than crystal, this is it.
Today Hillary is walking to a new beat. In fact, she is tripping over herself trying to find her way to the anti-war left. About five months ago, Hillary concluded, “…[the] authorization to use force has run its course, and it is time to reverse the failed policies of President Bush and to end this war as soon as possible.” She added, “If the president will not bring himself to accept reality, it is time for Congress to bring reality to him.” In this last statement, Hillary manages to contradict her own vote to go to war without recanting that very vote. Democrats, progressives, liberals, whatever you want to be called; does this not upset you?
So, why is Hillary Clinton being held in such high regard by Democrats to be the next President of the United States, and not someone like Bill Richardson or Dennis Kucinich? Is it for electability reasons? I don’t know because I am not a Democrat. But I do know this: Hillary has succeeded in indoctrinating people into believing she can lead an anti-war party despite being a hawk when it comes to foreign policy. This woman knows what she is doing. I would urge all Clinton supporters to re-evaluate your principles. If you truly disagree with Iraq policy, then Hillary Rodham Clinton is not your girl.
[email protected]