Reading today's New York Times front page, eye-opening article, "Clinton, 'Smart Power' and a Dictator's Fall" reminded me of how exasperated and angry I felt when I was marching against going to war in Iraq and how sickened I felt when I listened to the vote to authorize military action. I heard Hillary Clinton's vote with a feeling of confusion and betrayal. If all the people I was marching with understood the 'unintended consequences', and we were by no means privvy to CIA intelligence or secret meetings with questionable emissaries, then how could Hillary Clinton and her colleagues in Congress, with all the information they had, misjudge this authorization of going to war?
Well, the answer, my friends, is in this New York Times article for those who prefer to deny the glaring reality that Hillary is a died-in-the-wool war hawk. A war hawk whose lack of judgment is downright scary as summed up in this quote: "Mrs. Clinton understood the hazards, but also weighed the costs of not acting, aides said. They described her as comfortable with feeling her way through a problem without being certain of the outcome." Of course, no one can be certain of an outcome, but this quote may as well have said, "Let's wing it!" and signals a rush to making decisions without serious and deep consideration of what is to come afterward. Vice President Biden was correctly concerned with "not the day after, but the decade after." You can't just 'feel your way' through such a monumental decision.
As for intelligence about Iraq, Derek Chollet, a State Department aide, said that "We, the U.S., did not have a particularly good handle on what was going on inside Libya." "American officials were relying largely on news reports." Comforting.
And disturbingly, "Mr. Ross, speaking generally, said she had frequently consulted her husband: "I'd say, 'Here's what I think we should do.' She'd say, 'That's what Bill said, too." I don't think Hillary Clinton has had an original idea in thirty years - currently, witness her appropriation of Bernie Sander's ideas as they morph into Hillary Clinton's ideas. And I most definitely do not want Bill Clinton as co-President. It's been interesting to watch the hashtag #whichHillary take on a life of its own. I would also ask #whoisHillary.
Hillary supporters will undeniably view this post as 'hating on Hillary' when my concern about Hillary has always been a question of character...nothing else.
Read the Times article. Perhaps you will see it differently but facts cannot be ignored. Unless you are a denier.
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
Saturday, February 20, 2016
Vaginistas Not Ruling My Ladyparts Insisting I Vote For Hillary
Women's Support of Hillary Clinton From 8 Years Ago A Flip-Flop?
If you're a newsjunkie like I am, then you are well aware of the feminist war between 'voting with your vagina' dissidents and Hillary loyalists who want to send those dissidents to hell for not supporting a woman because of her anatomy. The argument for being able to think for yourself, despite your gender, is one that is mysteriously overruled by the Vaginistas as they believe a woman's duty is to blindly support other women. Kind of ironic for people who call themselves feminists.
Having been an Obama supporter from Day One when he announced in January '07, I volunteered for two years along with the most remarkable grassroots organization - grown from seed - and amazing people who dedicated all their free time volunteering to elect Barack Obama. In our group, Obamawood(!), we spent every single primary election together, cheering and crying with joy when our candidate won and spent election night together getting seriously drunk with happiness.
The women volunteering for Obama were perhaps not all Hillary Haters but were squarely opposed to her candidacy because of all the reasons people are opposed to her now: untrustworthy, truth-bending, flip-flopping, elitism, 'inevitableness', hawkishness and not being in sync with her policies. I know first-hand. I was in the trenches with these women. We discussed why we wouldn't vote for Hillary. So, where along the way did those women suddenly switch-up and become fierce Hillary defenders? Did they just forget what they thought of her eight years ago? Did Hillary change that much that now all those shifty character traits have reversed course? Some say they've gotten worse. But what explains this change in perspective? Have those supporters values changed so much that they now think all those negatives, they so strongly believed in eight years ago, are acceptable? This totally baffles me.
I understand the power of personality. Obama was then, and now, an incredibly compelling, charismatic force of nature. He is irresistible and that could explain some of his support but that still doesn't clarify the 180 degree turn to now admiring Hillary, a woman these women previously scorned. It's true, "It's a women's prerogative to change her mind." and so it may be as simple as that. In this case, quite disheartening.
Here is a post of mine from the past...like 2009...about how the women I was volunteering with felt about Hillary: From Naïve to Nobel
Once again, please tell me how women who couldn't stand Hillary when she ran for President now practically worship her. Ack, I'll leave it at that. Women. Sometimes I just don't understand them.
If you're a newsjunkie like I am, then you are well aware of the feminist war between 'voting with your vagina' dissidents and Hillary loyalists who want to send those dissidents to hell for not supporting a woman because of her anatomy. The argument for being able to think for yourself, despite your gender, is one that is mysteriously overruled by the Vaginistas as they believe a woman's duty is to blindly support other women. Kind of ironic for people who call themselves feminists.
Having been an Obama supporter from Day One when he announced in January '07, I volunteered for two years along with the most remarkable grassroots organization - grown from seed - and amazing people who dedicated all their free time volunteering to elect Barack Obama. In our group, Obamawood(!), we spent every single primary election together, cheering and crying with joy when our candidate won and spent election night together getting seriously drunk with happiness.
The women volunteering for Obama were perhaps not all Hillary Haters but were squarely opposed to her candidacy because of all the reasons people are opposed to her now: untrustworthy, truth-bending, flip-flopping, elitism, 'inevitableness', hawkishness and not being in sync with her policies. I know first-hand. I was in the trenches with these women. We discussed why we wouldn't vote for Hillary. So, where along the way did those women suddenly switch-up and become fierce Hillary defenders? Did they just forget what they thought of her eight years ago? Did Hillary change that much that now all those shifty character traits have reversed course? Some say they've gotten worse. But what explains this change in perspective? Have those supporters values changed so much that they now think all those negatives, they so strongly believed in eight years ago, are acceptable? This totally baffles me.
I understand the power of personality. Obama was then, and now, an incredibly compelling, charismatic force of nature. He is irresistible and that could explain some of his support but that still doesn't clarify the 180 degree turn to now admiring Hillary, a woman these women previously scorned. It's true, "It's a women's prerogative to change her mind." and so it may be as simple as that. In this case, quite disheartening.
Here is a post of mine from the past...like 2009...about how the women I was volunteering with felt about Hillary: From Naïve to Nobel
Once again, please tell me how women who couldn't stand Hillary when she ran for President now practically worship her. Ack, I'll leave it at that. Women. Sometimes I just don't understand them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
