Skip to main content

View Diary: Clinton sponsors anti-flag burning law (461 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  nope. (none)
    mere difference of opinion.  I have always been against this dumbass war, but that is just my opinion.  not a deal breaker for me.  but, i'm not a religiously anti-war peace freak.

    and, btw, i think, as usual, you people misread the mood of the American people.  As far as I can tell, a majority of Americans DO NOT favor an immediate withdrawal.  I think a reasonable person, Democrat, and folks against the war can oppose immediate withdrawal in good faith.  why does that drive you people off the deep end.  I really just don't get it.  perhaps you can explain?

    Screw you freaks, Hillary Rocks!!!!

    by BRockNYLA on Mon Dec 05, 2005 at 06:33:51 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  your mixing-up (4.00)
      the words "do not support war" with "support immediate withdrawal".

      According to the latest CNN poll 19 % say withdraw now, 33% say within the next 12 months.  That's 52% who support withdrawal in my estimation.
      Let me get the second part of your post straight.. You're saying we are going off the deep end by opposing Hillary because of her stance on the war?

      What's wrong with holding a potential Dem presidential nominee accountable?   To liberal values and to staking out a rational foreign policy?  

      She thinks her hawkish stances makes her look shrewd and tough on foreign policy.  It doesn't.  She just comes off as ignorant and self-serving for supporting short-sighted policy stances that only benefit her political career.

      Is this the kind of person you want running the country?

      •  ummm.... (none)
        I think even Hillary has said we should start bringing the troops home next year.  so, there is no beef and all these whack jobs can shut up already.

        as to the second point, I do not believe it is a mainstream liberal position to be anti-war.  maybe she voted for the war because she thought it was a good idea that has been executed incompetently.  surely there are many Dems who hold that position.  I don't hold that against them.  I simply disagree with their initial logic.  and then people accuse Hillary of "sticking her finger in the wind" blah, blah, blah.  wouldn't that logic suggest she now jump on  the crazy bandwagon and stand with Cindy?!?  see, you can't win with the wacky left.

        her hawkish stance leads me to believe she will not hesitate to utilize America's power to protect American interests.  I applaud her for that.  I'm all for kicking some ass when needed and I want to know that a woman president can pull the trigger and isn't going to be some peace-loving pansy.

        to the contrary, she and I started off on different sides of the war, but I am in total agreement with her now.  we let the elections happen on the 15th and start laying the ground work for getting out.  makes sense to me?

        Screw you freaks, Hillary Rocks!!!!

        by BRockNYLA on Mon Dec 05, 2005 at 07:19:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt... (none)
          but you're an idiot.

          "peace-loving pansy"?  Are you kidding me?

          Get your head out of whatever imagery you think the 60s were about.

          Anti-War (and now pro-troop withdrawal) folks take their positions because it's the rational clear-headed policy to take.

          I guaran-goddamn-tee you that Hillary supported the war not because of policy, but because of politics.  Most foreign policy academics and Middle East experts would have counseled that the war was ill-conceived before we went in.  She obviously wasn't concerned about that.

          My question stands:
          Do you want a president that puts her personal political fortune ahead of the national interest?

          •  ummmm... (none)
            the people around here are hardly rational or clear-headed.  a rational clear-headed person would hope and pray that the Iraq debacle actually worked.  how many people out here do you believe actually want us to succeed in Iraq.  we've just cleared 90+% of the anti-war freaks in these parts.  sorry, but I find that insane.

            that being said.  there are plenty rational clear-headed people who were initially against the war who are now against an immediate withdrawal.

            as for wanting a president who puts her personal fortune ahead of the national interest...well, that's just silly.  i want a president who wants to win above all else.  whatever the cost.  no sense in playing the game if you can't play ball.

            Screw you freaks, Hillary Rocks!!!!

            by BRockNYLA on Mon Dec 05, 2005 at 08:07:30 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  play ball huh? (none)
              Hillary made a politically expedient decision to go to war.  She KNEW (how could she not?) that it was bullshit.

              She didn't give a shit.  All she cared about was the W.H. and she thought that vote would help her get there.

              2000+ dead American troops, $200 billion, countless dead Iraqis, and a destroyed national reputation was the cost.

              You said you were against the war, but evidentally you're willing to pay certain political prices for political gains.

              So is that price worth it?  IS that the price we pay to get Hillary in the whitehouse?

              Evidentally, she thinks it's worth it.

              I understand the 'game', dude-- but you don't sacrifice blood for political gain.

              •  Brock is obviously a Repub (none)
                so you're wasting your time.

                As am I in writing my responses to him.

                It's funny how all the Hillary supporters in this thread have all the earmarks of republicans.  Even with the bad spelling.  

                •  you're right (none)
                  only a Repub would be this obsessed with Hillary.
                •  Dream candidate (none)
                  Hillary is the GOP's dream candidate.  

                  I used to support her - thought she did have principles.  I didn't figure a woman would get elected as president but VP was a real possibility, or some significant position, cabinet or whatever.  But I've just lost faith in her completely.  It's a shame - she seems to have lost her bearings.  Just another in a long line of disappointments of the left.

                  "Let him that would move the world first move himself." --Socrates

                  by joanneleon on Mon Dec 05, 2005 at 09:12:06 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Definitely (none)
                    I've intuited that since the mainstream media started shoving her down our throats right after the november 2004 election.

                    That raised my hackles right there.

                    This is good, we now know who the Republicans want us to run.  :)

            •  Let me introduce you to President Kerry (none)
              who was nominated because he was electable. As for "anti-war freaks" you're talking about most of America since polls show that most people think the war isn't worth it and want to bring the troops home.

              But let's stick with a position on Iraq that makes no sense (we're for it, but against how Bush is doing it) since it worked so well last time.

    •  wow, you're a real piece of work (none)
      So you equate those who think that conducting an illegal war based on lies is a CRIME with "religiously anti-war peace freaks."

      Wow ... I don't even know what to say ....

      The only people I know who equate those two are Republicans and pretty right-wing ones at that.

      Fact of the matter:  Being against the crime of the Iraq war has absolutely no fucking thing to do with whether or not you're pro-war or anti-war in general.

      Common sense dictates that there are times when war is necessary.

      This was not one of them.  And it was based on lies.  Therefore it's a crime not only against the Iraq people and the world, but against EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN.

      And as far as misreading the American people, that has noting to do with it either.  The people were lied to, their most basic fears were exploited, and they were shamelessly manipulated into supporting this crime.  They are only now starting to wake up, and you say we're "misreading" them?

      Man, I don't even know what to say without simply insuting the hell out of you.   So I'll stop there.

      •  blah, blah, blah (none)
        it all sounds like a crying baby to me.  look, I am against the frickin'  war.  I know the American people were fooled.  Tell me something I don't know.  It does not follow, however, that we should get out immediately, or that those who support the effort are evil or contemptible.  i mean, really!  take a vacation.  calm down.  elect Democrats and then we will get somewhere.  all this beating up on Hillary and Biden, etc is beyond stupid and annoying and not helpful.  I think  you people have totally lost your marbles and fallen in to a Rove trap.  split the base.  nominate an anti-war pansy to satisfy the radicalized base. Repugs win in November.

        I just don't believe an anti-war Democrat has a chance of winning the country.  and, really, all i really care about is winning back the White House.  Yes, by any means necessary.  And, yes, I think most of the anti-war freaks are freaks and will be the death of the party.

        Screw you freaks, Hillary Rocks!!!!

        by BRockNYLA on Mon Dec 05, 2005 at 07:47:07 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Hawk =ignorant of foreign policy/devoid of ethics (4.00)
          So if you think that Americans will only vote for a PRO-WAR candidate, what does that say about your opinion of Americans?

          Are we all blood-thirsty warmongers?  WE just love war.  Any opportunity to throw billions of dollars into destroying another country and killing people-- we are there!

          What's wrong with you??

          War is not the foreign policy option of choice.  Most Americans  know that (if they are not threatened with lies).

          Why don't you?

        •  Like I said (none)
          you're a real piece of work and I'm really surprised to find you here at dailykos and furthermore I find it difficult to believe you're a Democrat.

          You might want to find some other blog where you won't make such a fool of yourself.

        •  So most people thing the war was a bad idea (4.00)
          but they won't vote for a candidate who didn't support it. So what happened to Kerry? I guess we should run someone else whose position is completely incoherent. So tell me: is Hillary for or against the war? Yes or no, no buts. Kerry tried the "buts" and made an ass of himself.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site