- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
johntfrazer: "So, Groenhagen is arguing that Clinton and Bush were fundamentally similar on this issue. That's actually a fairly reasonable claim to make."
Reasonable in what sense?
Groenhagen is using this inane tact to divert attention from Bush's failure.
His argument seems to be, "Bush did not fail because if he did fail, that would mean Clinton was wrong, and Clinton couldn't be wrong because a lot of left-leaning people like Clinton."
Huh?
It doesn't even make sense. What is his point? This comments section isn't even ABOUT Clinton. And who cares what Clinton had to say? Wrong is wrong, left or right.
The Iraq war: Wrong or right? That is the debate. I don't care whose mouth the foolishness came out of, it's still foolishness.
Groenhagen and others here can't be bothered to defend their pro-war stance on its own merits. It is just too much for them to handle. So instead they attempt to throw it back on Clinton somehow. That's just a diversion.
The question is, Is the Iraq war, or is it not, a failure?
The answer to that question is a resounding YES.
The next question is, Who is to blame?
The answer to that question, first and foremost, is George W. Bush.
There are many people down the list from Bush who are also responsible: Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, Wolfowitz, Rice, Powell. Further down the list we have Ted Stevens, Hillary Clinton, Larry Craig, John Kerry and everybody else who voted to authorize the war powers.
You could probably go even further down that list and find a way to blame Bill Clinton, who could have done something different years earlier that would have created a different situation. But, to be intellectually honest, you'd have to keep going back from there, to Bush Sr., and to Reagan.
You don't hear the "B-b-b-b-but Clinton!" crowd doing that, do you?
