Besides her infamous apporval of the Iraq War authorization bill, Hillary and the Right have bonded over the Patriot Act, a bill which she authorized not once but twice. And while some voters seem willing to forgive her of her past transgressions (under the baseless assumption that she has miraculously woken up from a 6 year right-wing coma), many do so under the false assumption that her 2003 vote for the War was due to a political abundance of nationalism, jingoism, and absence of credible evidence against the the Bush administration's bull shit claims.
Americans have finally awoken from their post-9/11 bender, and a sober look the in the mirror has revealed the many bruises we've acquired from the fights we would have avoided if only we had been thinking clearly. Our national hangover comes complete with its own dose of memory loss, as more than one person that I've spoken with has defensively claimed the following: "Sure, Hillary voted for the war, but what was she supposed to do? No one knew that Saddam didn't have WMDs, and no one knew how bad the war would go."
When I hear this, I cry. Not on the outside. On the outside, I swing my arm so that my fist makes contact with their temple. But I cry on the inside.
Contrary to what Hillary's amnesiac supporters claim, we did know that there were no WMDS. We knew there was no link to al Qaeda. The facts that showed such were availble to everyone, hidden not in an Alex Jones film, but in places like the New York Times , CNN. , and the New York Times again. And if these articles were too scarce for the Senate to find, then how do the Clintonites explain Senator Feingold's detailed rationale for voting against the war? Or Representative Stark's in the House?
The fact is that they can't, at least not without acknowledging Hillary's pro-war vote for what it was: a shamelessly transparent, calculated maneauver designed to capitalize on the horrendously misabused patriotism of 2003 and remove any traces of a "wimp factor" in the perpetual presidential candidate. If the job of a Senator is to make informed decisions so that she can advise and consent, then any Senator who claims she didn't know the facts is either A) an idiot, B) a liar, or C) the Democratic frontrunner. Hell, I'm going with all of the above.
So why is Hillary so popular when the occupation she helped launch isn't? And why are anti-war Dems forgiving her, instead of throwing their support behind someone who actually voted against Bush's war? Saying "I'm against the war, but I support Hillary," is like saying, "I'm against racism, but I support Kramer." At least Kramer apologized.
Hillary's supporters don their ignorance proudly, emphatically waving "Vote for Hillary" signs that might as well read, "I don't care about history." It's a woeful epidemic, especially considering that it was this same kind of gleeful memory hole-embracing that got us into this mess in the first place. What do her supporters think she means when Hillary quotes Bush by saying that, "No options are off the table," with respect to Iran. Meaningless political drivel? I would have an easier time believing it if I wasn't certain that Hillary would take us into battle only to show that she's no sissified liberal. But unfortunately, I am certain. I've seen her do it.
Hillary talks like Bush, but more importantly, she votes the way Bush wants her to vote. She can say that he's the worst in history, but in everything he's done to earn that title, he's had Hillary Clinton's support, every step of the way. It's enough to make a grown man cry...on the inside.