Hillary is NOT very Sincere...

Hillary is being dismissive of the anti-war left and this will have grave consequences for her presidential chances. Here's why...

HRC isn't very sincere about the concerns from the anti-war left. A recent AP article reported that she told New Hamphshire primary voters it was more important to focus on ending the Iraq war than why or how we got into this mess in the first place.

"I have to say, if the most important thing to any of you is choosing someone who did not cast that vote or said his vote was a mistake, then there are others to choose from. But for me, the most important thing now is trying to end this war."

This dismissive "go vote for someone else" response is indicative of her sincerity to those who believe the how and the why matters. It matters because we don't want a repeat performance from the next president. She assumes (falsely, I believe) all she has to do is criticize Bush and enough people will be pacified.

In explaining her conference idea, Clinton took a shot at Bush, saying, "What we need is a president who will reach out to the rest of the world and make it very clear — the cowboys are gone."

That's not enough Senator! Even if she renunciated her Iraq war resolution vote in 2002 she needs to fully explain why it isn't a mistake to give away her congressional  war powers in such a reckless way. Isn't she responsible for that? Would she repeat that mistake? Without a clear renunciation of the act of relinquishing that power to the executive branch, I'm not convinced she understands her constitutional committment to protecting the separation of powers. Furthermore, I believe HRC owes America an answer to exactly how different she is from Bush and criticism simply isn't enough.

Many believe HRC isn't going to admit her Iraq vote was a mistake because she fears the change would represent the dreadful "flip-flop" image. I believe there's more to it than that. She voted for the war when she voted for the 2002 resolution and to try to color that vote as anything other than approval for war is either dishonest or ignorant. To ignore that as a mistake and openly shun those who believe it's important for our future will not ally the concerns of a repeat neo-con performance. I believe it matters because the how and the why is important for our future. Furthermore, HRC cannot win without support from the anti-war left. Or can she?

•  Triangulating

  She's triangulating already.  Hillary believes she has the nomination in the bag, and she's kicking her own party to show an "independent streak" to the "swing voters."

  Her recent message is to us, but it wasn't for us.  She can't be bothered to respect the concerns of Democratic primary voters.

  Joe Lieberman must be so proud.

  by HarveyMilk on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 06:53:28 AM PDT

•  She's scum

  We need to crush her campaign now.  Defeat this deluded, calculating, triangulating, warmongering fool.  We can do SO much better in 2008 than Hillary Clinton.

  by asskicking annie on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 06:59:43 AM PDT

  •  annie, don't sugar-coat it babe

    tell us what you really think! anyway, good luck crushing a billion dollar warchest (give or take a few mil)

    by memofromturner on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 07:25:13 AM PDT

    •  Careful about buying into that meme...

      ...that money is everything.  It ain't.

      by asskicking annie on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 11:10:02 AM PDT

•  It's not just the left that is anti-war

  A majority of Americans are against the war.

  That is the mistake people here tend to make.

  Hillary is not just blowing off the left, she is blowing off a majority of the U.S.

  by seminole83 on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 07:07:33 AM PDT

•  A tightly-framed poll question and answers

  ... too tight for me. I don't see HRC dismissing past mistakes, but she's not going to give the precise answer you want because (again) it's the wrong question you're asking, and a good politician will reframe the answer to give their message not yours.

  If you want a candidate who will resist the issue-framing that will dominate the presidential election, Hillary is a viable choice.

  by Joffan on Sun Feb 18, 2007 at 07:09:42 AM PDT