Advertisement
On February 11th, the corporate media woke up to the fact that many Democrats have a big problem with Senator Clinton. That was the day after some New Hampshire Democrats criticized her continued denial of her worst failure as a US senator - voting to allow Bush to have his war.
The topic continues with corporate media either missing the point or compliantly repeating Clinton's Fifth Amendment defense - ”I'd rather not talk about it.”
CBSnews.com, ever following the conventional wisdom, or perhaps creating it, published “Why Should Hillary Apologize for Iraq?” on February 22nd. It was an opinion piece written by Senior Political Editor Vaughn Ververs which was disguised as a story under the Politics header. It scolded Democratic activists to stop insisting on “purity” in the candidates and worry more about appearing “strong” on national security. The really absurd part was his suggestion that when Democrats say the war was a mistake they lose the respect of middle America. Like they have a lot already.
Mr. Ververs might consider me an “activist”. I support the party locally and I write political opinion. I generally support Democrats except when act like opportunistic career politicians whose personal ambitions harm my country. Then, I get really angry.
Mr. Ververs' title was a rhetorical question which implied that Senator Clinton should not apologize. I agree with him. She should not apologize because it would not matter.
I don't know if there are enough of us angry activists in the Democratic party to sink a Hillary Clinton campaign, but we will be trying. We are known as a vocal minority. It is true, but what is often overlooked is that, minority though we are, we never shut up.
Our agenda concerning Senator Clinton has nothing to do with apologies and nothing to do with mistakes. The vote to allow George W. Bush to attack, invade and conquer a nation that had done nothing to threaten us was not a mistake. It was a choice.
Everyone knows why Senator Clinton voted to start this war. It was a purely political ploy to strengthen her standing among conservatives and build a reputation as a “tough” woman. Simple as that and as empty of integrity. It says something about Senator Clinton. It says that when her country needed a wise and thoughtful decision, she choose what looked like a safe path politically. She failed us and she displayed a stunning lack of judgment which, in my opinion, disqualifies her from higher office. That she was among so many others only illuminates the vast ethical wasteland that is the United States Congress.
No one was fooled, no one was misled, no one gets a free pass. It was a choice to make a war where none had existed. It was the same choice Saddam Hussein made in 1980 when he invaded Iran and wasted the lives of over a million. It was the same choice he made in 1991 when he invaded Kuwait and roused the international response that threw him out of there. It was the same choice Bush and Clinton made in 2002 when they started the war that has wasted 3000 American lives, maimed 30,000 more of our soldiers, killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and cost us half a trillion dollars in national treasure.
There is a good philosophy about war that would have served us well in 2002. “If you don't have to start a war, then don't.” It was clear to me then. It would have been clear to Senator Clinton if she had cared enough to make a moral choice and not a political one.
Apologies we don't need in order to feel better. All we need is acknowledgment of the truth: this war was never justified and waging it was morally wrong. That truth will not go away however long Senator Clinton thinks she can ignore it. It is a truth that we “activists” will not be silent about because the illumination of that truth, time and again, without compromise and without regard to the comfort and ambitions of career politicians, is the only thing that may prevent us from making that same horrible, wasteful and so easy choice again.
---
Tim Copeland is a computer specialist living in Biddeford, Maine, who writes an almost weekly oped in the Journal Tribune of Biddeford. He is a member of the York County Democratic Party's Communications Committee, a radical liberal writer and a retired Air Force pilot.
The topic continues with corporate media either missing the point or compliantly repeating Clinton's Fifth Amendment defense - ”I'd rather not talk about it.”
CBSnews.com, ever following the conventional wisdom, or perhaps creating it, published “Why Should Hillary Apologize for Iraq?” on February 22nd. It was an opinion piece written by Senior Political Editor Vaughn Ververs which was disguised as a story under the Politics header. It scolded Democratic activists to stop insisting on “purity” in the candidates and worry more about appearing “strong” on national security. The really absurd part was his suggestion that when Democrats say the war was a mistake they lose the respect of middle America. Like they have a lot already.
Mr. Ververs might consider me an “activist”. I support the party locally and I write political opinion. I generally support Democrats except when act like opportunistic career politicians whose personal ambitions harm my country. Then, I get really angry.
Mr. Ververs' title was a rhetorical question which implied that Senator Clinton should not apologize. I agree with him. She should not apologize because it would not matter.
I don't know if there are enough of us angry activists in the Democratic party to sink a Hillary Clinton campaign, but we will be trying. We are known as a vocal minority. It is true, but what is often overlooked is that, minority though we are, we never shut up.
Our agenda concerning Senator Clinton has nothing to do with apologies and nothing to do with mistakes. The vote to allow George W. Bush to attack, invade and conquer a nation that had done nothing to threaten us was not a mistake. It was a choice.
Everyone knows why Senator Clinton voted to start this war. It was a purely political ploy to strengthen her standing among conservatives and build a reputation as a “tough” woman. Simple as that and as empty of integrity. It says something about Senator Clinton. It says that when her country needed a wise and thoughtful decision, she choose what looked like a safe path politically. She failed us and she displayed a stunning lack of judgment which, in my opinion, disqualifies her from higher office. That she was among so many others only illuminates the vast ethical wasteland that is the United States Congress.
No one was fooled, no one was misled, no one gets a free pass. It was a choice to make a war where none had existed. It was the same choice Saddam Hussein made in 1980 when he invaded Iran and wasted the lives of over a million. It was the same choice he made in 1991 when he invaded Kuwait and roused the international response that threw him out of there. It was the same choice Bush and Clinton made in 2002 when they started the war that has wasted 3000 American lives, maimed 30,000 more of our soldiers, killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and cost us half a trillion dollars in national treasure.
There is a good philosophy about war that would have served us well in 2002. “If you don't have to start a war, then don't.” It was clear to me then. It would have been clear to Senator Clinton if she had cared enough to make a moral choice and not a political one.
Apologies we don't need in order to feel better. All we need is acknowledgment of the truth: this war was never justified and waging it was morally wrong. That truth will not go away however long Senator Clinton thinks she can ignore it. It is a truth that we “activists” will not be silent about because the illumination of that truth, time and again, without compromise and without regard to the comfort and ambitions of career politicians, is the only thing that may prevent us from making that same horrible, wasteful and so easy choice again.
---
Tim Copeland is a computer specialist living in Biddeford, Maine, who writes an almost weekly oped in the Journal Tribune of Biddeford. He is a member of the York County Democratic Party's Communications Committee, a radical liberal writer and a retired Air Force pilot.