Outwitted By Bush Again
I don't think I'm the first blogger to note this, but here's The New York Times in a recent political analysis, discussing Hillary Clinton:
[She] defend[ed] her decision to vote in favor of the 2002 resolution that Mr. Bush later considered an authorization to use military force against Saddam Hussein.
Poor Hillary, voting for a simple resolution only to have the President use it in ways she never could have foreseen. And what was the name of the Resolution? AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ RESOLUTION OF 2002.
posted by LAGuy @ 12:10 AM
4 Comments:
Hillary claimed that she thought the bill was an endorsement of more dialogue. Obama (rightly) said that this was nonsense during their primary fight.
So I was delighted to see Biden make this exact same claim in the VP debate to explain his vote for the resolution!
(That's probably why, the day after the VP debate, all the media outlets were talking incessantly about how inaccurate Biden was. Or maybe not.)
Obama would have voted for it if he'd been in the Senate, too. Out of such happenstance is how Presidents get elected.
Anon- there is absolutely no way to know that and given contemporaneous statements at the time, that is unlikely. The Clinton machine miscalculated and screwed the pooch on that one for which the nation is grateful.
The Clinton's didn't screw the pooch. Hillary tried to prove her bona fides in world politics by lurching into the right decision, which was repudiated by the insane Dem base, losing her the Presidency. At the same time, Obama, knowing he'd have to be an adult after the crazies got him the Dem nod, starting becoming more bellicose and voted for FISA, showing he'd have knuckled under in the Senate earlier as well if he had his sight set on the White House.
Post a Comment
<< Home