Skip to main content

View Diary: Susan Rice Vocally Supported the Iraq War, and Every Mid-East War Since (153 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Obama fell into a trap set by GOP (6+ / 0-)

    by sending her into talk to all those Senators. What the hell did he think they would say about her? Of course, they are going to oppose her. President Obama needs to cut her loose and move on. He should not spend one shred of political capital on her. She is not worth it.

    •  Yeah, I didn't understand that at all. (5+ / 0-)

      Why send her on a suicide mission that only dignifies their stupid objections?

      You know, I sometimes think if I could see, I'd be kicking a lot of ass. -Stevie Wonder at the Glastonbury Festival, 2010

      by Rich in PA on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 12:03:39 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  She held the same position on Iraq (19+ / 0-)

      as our current Secretary of State. Did everyone suddenly forget Hillary Clinton voted for the war in Iraq and Susan Rice had worked for the Clinton administration. My guess is that this was generally accepted (wrong) idea within the Clinton administration and likely among Bill and Hillary.

      So if that is the criteria for supporting a candidate....
      Sorry, but he cannot get into a position of allowing republicans to dictate who he chooses for his Cabinet. She is more than qualified and quite capable.

      It's the Central Limit Theorem, Stupid!

      by smartdemmg on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 12:35:57 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And that stand (11+ / 0-)

        is why I won't be voting for Hillary for president if she runs.

        You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment.-- Francis Urqhart

        by Johnny Q on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 12:42:57 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't know why we keep hearing her name (7+ / 0-)

          on this site for 2016.

          Are we all neocons now since Obama led us to a brave new future that looks.....  just like the past?

          •  pretty much does, or at least way too much (7+ / 0-)
            brave new future that looks.....  just like the past?
            I don't care to hear Hilary Clinton's name for 2016, nor Jeb Bush.

            What kind of a country are we that we can only run a Bush or a Clinton?

            I am not voting for another Clinton, not even if Chelsea.

            At least the Clintons only had one child, the Bushs have a busload of children and grandchildren, who we can only hope will stay away from public service.

            "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand? David Crosby.

            by allenjo on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 01:42:58 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  agree. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              leveymg

              Don't people realize that Clinton took us to the right, thereby staking out the ground that Repugnantcons previously held?

              Repugnantcons didn't get to the right all by themselves.

              I've never heard Hillary admit any error in promoting Iraq or voting for it.

              I have enormous respect for Bill, especially after seeing some of his interviews after leaving office with Peter Jennings and Fox, don't remember which one, probably Chris Wallace.  He took them to the woodshed for their treatment of him while he was prez.  He is miles above any repugnantcon I've seen in my lifetime.  But I think a Clinton is not moving forward.  It would be back to the past.

              I keep hearing the villagers talk about people sitting it out if she runs, boy I hope not.  We need to turn the ship of state back to the left after the trauma of 8 years of W, and 4 more years of W lite.

        •  Now now (0+ / 0-)

          then your position is either staying home which means,effectively voting for a Republican, last I saw the Republicans are no doves, or you make sure that you look at the totality of the candidate before making any decissisons.

          •  aren't you forgetting something? (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Rusty Pipes, divineorder, George3

            primaries?  Hillary didn't get past the primary before, there's no guarantee she will a second time, nor that she'll even run.

          •  that's what primaries are for. (0+ / 0-)

            We should have primaried Obama, but we didn't so I voted against Romney, not for Obama.

            I voted for Obama the first time, based on 1 issue:  Iraq.

            My whole family did too, and I never asked the brothers, but it was probably mostly war.  BTW we are all over 50 now.  I for one am one very angry white male, but Lindsey Graham was wrong, they are generating lots of angry white males, a lot of us are Democrats though because of our anger.

            Also, my Mom who was 72 (in 2008) and an ardent feminist voted for Obama both times.  I was afraid to ask her during the 2008 primaries, avoided the subject like the plague.  My brother got brave and asked her if she supported Hillary, I held my breath and she said no.  Why?  Because of Iraq.  I let my breath out.

            I never would have considered myself a single issue voter although never voted republican until 2008.

            My view is that if you give up the moral high ground on the most important issue:  life and death, you give up the moral high ground on everything of lesser import.  And up until very recently the dems have allowed themselves to be rolled on practically everything.  It almost seems like an unspoken moral code of governing by Dems and Pugs.  They didn't really get upset when it mattered, so now they can hardly find anything bad to say about repugnantcon policies that don't rise to the level of immorality that issues of life and death do.

            After observing the political arena towards the end of the 8 year W debacle up until now, I feel that the Democrats having allowed Butcher to not only have his wars, but not impeach or prosecute proves my point.  The dems have legitimized the criminal behavior of the pugs, which allows them to continue acting like they have a shred of credibility.  I think that explains the crazy.  They thought they could do whatever they wanted after W and have the red carpet rolled out the way W had the red carpet rolled out not only by the Media but also by dems not opposing him.  And they started getting crazy angry that they had to start justifying and defending their policies and run for elections instead of just being annointed.

            A little long, sorry.  I think the most important issue flows on down to the less important ones.  Which is why I'll never vote repugnantcon.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site