Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
It's not my fight because I'm not American but what's disturbing to me is Hillary Clinton's attitude to the Iraq war.
Some letter writers here suggest that she acknowledges she wouldn't have voted for the war if she'd known the mess it would turn out to be, but that she still broadly approves of US policy in the region, if not the execution of that policy.
Please tell me that's not true, because if the US under Clinton were to go down the same foreign policy road as it is now, then that spells trouble for all of us, not just America.
Walter,
If Dennis Thatcher had become Prime Minister someone would have been guilty of body-snatching the entire UK population and replacing them with aliens. If Hillary Clinton becomes President those of us in the rest of the world will thank (first) the Democratic Party for making up its mind about three very strong contenders (I'll settle for any one of Clinton, Edwards or Obama) and thank (second) the voters of the USA for stepping away from the madness of Bush/Cheney. Please choose well America and, Democrats, on your route to choosing, remember that your fellow Democrats are not your political enemies.
The carpetbagging former First Lady is being promoted by big money corporate interests because 1) she's just about the only Democrat that could possibly lose the White House in the wake of the disastrous Bush Administration and 2) she's somebody that the corporate globalists could pretty well control even if she was elected.
The last thing we need here is "moderation", continuing the same road to ruin laid out by Bush. When you're driving full tilt toward the precipice, a "moderate" course of action is suicidal. The country needs to deal swiftly and perhaps harshly with the problems of sustainable energy, restoration of civil liberties and checks and balances in government, overpopulation caused in large part by illegal immigration, the exploding national indebtedness, both government and private sector, and readjusting our foreign policy from one of military intimidation to harmony with other nations.
Hillary Clinton is the only major Democrat I most certainly would not vote for. I really don't have any use for her kind of closet Republican.
The right wing has appropriated everything "in the middle" for the past six years. There is no middle.
Hillary is not a moderate, she's a pandering opportunist.
Hillary may be wonderful, and may even turn out to be a better President than her husband, but I can't vote for her, simply because to do so means that for at least 24 years you would have to be either a Bush or a Clinton to lead the United States of America.
Either Walter Shapiro is on crack, Hillary's payroll, or both!
Poco
Hillary Clinton may be very capable but comes with a lot of baggage that even WE need to overcome, and if moderates, liberals, and Democrats perceive that Clinton has a lot to overcome, how about the rest of the country?
At the very least she needs to be a good speaker. Can someone please help her become a better speaker by adding warmth to her delivery? (Doesn't she have Hollywood friends to help her out?) If Clinton is an authentic moderate, she needs to COME OFF as an authentic moderate. If she is not selling females how is she going to sell males? Image is part of this, if not Everything.
The American public could take a more personal ownership of the war.
At the anti-war protests which I attended, I was not surrounded by a sea of like minded people making their position known. A lot of people indeed, but a tiny minority of the population at best. I ask all people to answer these questions: "What did we do to prevent the war?" "Why did we leave it to our leaders to make these decisions without vocalizing our opposition and with great numbers?" I doubt any Senator would have authorized the war with a large and vocal opposition in place. We (a generalizing collective) not only didn't make much of a peep, we re-elected all of these pro war authorization voters. I would suggest we were all secretly hopeful that the war would work out to our advantage as a nation and it is only hindsight and political expediency that allows us a moralist position late in the game.
It was Hillary Clinton's responsibility to put a check to the unfettered power of the Executive branch as well as uphold the constitution and all international treaties and laws of which this nation is a signatory.
It is our responsibility as citizens to participate as active and not passive members of this democracy. Our responsibility to educate ourselves about war and its inevitable price, and to then teach our children well.
Richardson that is. I don't get why Salon won't get behind his candidacy. He's got more relevant expereince than any of these current front runner. UN Ambassador and diplomat, something we can sure use these days; energy secretary who has been doing great things for energy and the environment as governor of New Mexico. Part Latino who can speak to the immigrant community with authenticity. Good record on gay rights and civil rights. No Iraq taint, but has spoken out unequivocally about what a disaster it is. And plenty of charisma and charm. But because the media, including Salon, insists on making it Obama v Hillary (v. Edwards sort of) the guy can't get much publicity. He's at 5% in the polls now. I think as people get to know more about him that will rise quickly.
Thanks for responding, WS. All I would say is, just because "everyone's doing it" doesn't mean something's not patriarchal, infantilizing, and dumb.
During slavery, a Black person was only addressed by their first name, if that. Because of internalization of oppression (and, oh, the fact that white folks robbed them of their family names), that was the norm and it took a lot of struggle to get out of that habit. Just because it was deeply rooted didn't make it okay.
What I was asking was that Salon take a step outside of the mainstream and show some respect to a presidential candidate who certainly deserves at least some.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
