Reasons to "hate" Hillary...

[JackRiddler]

I don't hate HRC. Being against her is equated with "hating" her in a rather transparent rhetorical move that tells us her supporters don't have much else to respond with.

HRC is largely running on the record of the Clinton presidency. Its most important legacy is that Clinton let the first Bush regime off the hook for its crimes, enabling the rise of the current Bush regime. Robert Parry writes:

http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

“I wanted the country to be more united, not more divided,” Clinton explained in his 2004 memoir, My Life. “President Bush had given decades of service to our country, and I thought we should allow him to retire in peace, leaving the (Iran-Contra) matter between him and his conscience.”

Unexpected Results

Clinton’s generosity to George H.W. Bush and the Republicans, of course, didn’t turn out as he had hoped. Instead of bipartisanship and reciprocity, he was confronted with eight years of unrelenting GOP hostility, attacks on both his programs and his personal reputation. Later, as tensions grew in the Middle East, the American people and even U.S. policymakers were flying partially blind, denied anything close to the full truth about the history of clandestine relationships between the Reagan-Bush team and hostile nations in the Middle East.

Clinton’s failure to expose that real history also led indirectly to the restoration of Bush Family control of the White House in 2001. Despite George W. Bush’s inexperience as a national leader, he drew support from many Americans who remembered his father’s presidency fondly. If the full story of George H.W. Bush’s role in secret deals with Iraq and Iran had ever been made public, the Bush Family’s reputation would have been damaged to such a degree that George W. Bush’s candidacy would not have been conceivable.

Not only did Clinton inadvertently clear the way for the Bush restoration, but the Right’s political ascendancy wiped away much of the Clinton legacy, including a balanced federal budget and progress on income inequality. A poorly informed American public also was easily misled on what to do about U.S. relations with Iraq and Iran.

(...)

Though sometimes the truth can hurt, Clinton and the Democrats should understand that covering up the truth can hurt even more. As Clinton’s folly with the Reagan-Bush scandals should have taught, the Democrats may hurt themselves worst of all when helping the Republicans cover up the truth.

---

HRC's record as a Senator (I voted for her in 2000) continues in the same vein: yes votes for USA PATRIOT, Homeland Security and the Iraq war resolution; unstinting support for the 9/11 cover-up, the "global war on terror," and more recently the bellicose posturing toward Iran.

These are the facts that HRC supporters falsely want to hide when they try to characterize opposition to HRC as a function of "hatred."

[BOSSHOG]

1. Consider me neutral on this subject

I haven't engaged in any of the primary squabbles here. I will be happy with the nomiee and I do pledge my support and money to whomever the dems nominate. However, I've peaked at a few Hillary posts and there seems to be a rather sharpness in the opposition to her; and from my perception it seems almost personal. I prefer to direct my negative animosity where it belongs, towards anyone with an (R) after their name.

[ronnykmarshall]

2. You go Boss!

:yourock:

[MH1]

7. Actually...

in my case it *IS* personal, and I'll admit it. But I think I've been fairly restrained in my posts about it.

However, I would say the majority of posts I see that put down Hillary, seem to differ with her on substantive policy issues. And even in my own case, it is because the incident that turned me against her (note, I used to advocate not bashing her at all), in my analysis also shows that there is a real policy danger in electing her...because it seems that she is completely unprincipled, and will do whatever it takes to protect Hillary and advance the cause of Hillary, which may not always be what advances the progressive cause. So, is that a personal attack? Because I look at her recent actions and think that's the kind of person those actions reveal?

:shrug:

And I agree with you at directing our animosity towards R's - but with exceptions for those "Democrats" that attack other, GOOD Democrats. That means Lieberman and Hillary, currently. Others have crossed into that territory, but mostly they've redeemed themselves. I'm waiting for Hillary to take some redeeming action so I can reconsider my assessment of her...but I am most definitely not holding my breath.

[Captain Hilts]

9. Yeah, what BOSSHOG said. nt

[Virginia Dare]

12. 100% agreed BOSSHOG..n/t

[JackRiddler]

13. The "sharpness" applies to two concrete things...

- the Clinton administration, which she is proud to lay claim to

- her support for the war at the only time when it counted; and her continuing support for it in the guise of "responsible" opposition.

[Forkboy]

3. Can you imagine if Kucinich was the frontrunner?

He takes a lot of hate himself for someone polling in the 2% range.What Hillary is facing now wouldn't be squat compared to that shitstorm of fury.

I don't hate any of the candidates.It's too strong a word for any of them.I hate Cheney,and if I say I hate Hillary too that makes them equal...and brother,there ain't nothing equal about those two.

[blm]

4. I don't HATE Hillary and think she CAN get elected. I just don't want ANY Repub or Dem

to take office who will sit there and CONTINUE to protect BushInc.

I don't understand how ANY Democrat would be satisfied with the continuing coverups for the Bushes and their crimes of office that keep allowing them to resurrect as strong or stronger than ever even when they are NOT in the WH officially.

Those who complain about the Bushes but think it is alright that they are let off the hook, even when it leads to tragic events like 9-11 and this Iraq war, seem to be taking an inconsistent position.

[underseasurveyor]

5. THANK YOU!!!

Well said blm.
Agreed!

[bigtree]

17. I agree with holding folks accountable, but you know the obstacles

and so do these public officials folks are expecting to fix it all.

I think it's easy to make a case outside of the legislature or courts, but much more difficult and complicated to propel these concerns into some due process of law. So many 'Scooters' have substituted for the real perps because of the layers of insulating that you rail against. I just don't think the Clintons are any more able to move the political roadblocks to running over the ruling blocs in our political system than the rest of us. I know you think they are the roadblocks, but I still haven't bought into the notion that they're cover for anything more than someone else couldn't expose and prosecute independently. I see the fires lit, but they're not catching.

I'm also lost on why republicans see her as everything evil, and others in our party insist anyway that she's a kin to republicans.

[blm]

18. Manipulated GOP faithful see her as evil. The establishment powerstructure sees her as Clinton2

and that is good enough for them. ie Rupert Murdoch (BFEE media shill)

And BushInc was at its weakest point in 1993 with all the info coming out about Poppy. I do not buy the idea that Clinton couldn't do anything about it, especially with a Dem congress and senate.

He didn't HAVE to do anything more than get the investigations the documents they had always tried to get hold of, and let a few investigative reporters gain the access they needed to the stories, and let it all HAPPEN without much of a strain on him, at all.

There sure would have been no GOP congress takeover in 1995, if he had done it. And as much as I love you and your writing, I'll side with Parry's analysis of this, as he understands it better than just about anyone on this planet.

;))))

[mmonk]

6. You forgot the flag burning issue.

While I support her on many issues I oppose her on important matters. I don't hate her, but don't see her as a solution to some deep seated problems in this country.

[AZBlue]

8. Ya know, instead of all these threads AGAINST someone, why don't DU'ers spend their energy and time

on threads for the person/people they do support?? What a waste.

[mmonk]

10. I think this thread was addressing

the charge of hating her when one might merely just oppose her on issues.

[JackRiddler]

11. more rhetoric...

This board is here for debate and exchange on the facts. I consider it a highly positive thing to expose facts I consider important. This is not "against" HRC, it is a statement on what I think she clearly stands for: the continuing power of money in politics and of covert agencies within the national security state.

Your rhetorical strategy is analogous to the following: "You know, instead of complaining all the time about Bush, why don't DUers tell us what they are for. What a waste of energy!"

ON EDIT: Why don't you tell us what you support then?

[Laughing Mirror]

14. People have to be informed about bad or defective or dangerous products

Hillary Clinton is a bad and defective product that does not serve the better interests of we the people. She is dangerous in the Senate and as president would not make things better in America but much worse. But, if that's what you want ...

[JackRiddler]

15. Hey, long as it says "Coca-Cola" on the can...

it can't possibly be Pepsi!

[sallyseven]

16. I disagree with you 1000 percent..

I also think you have more problems than just hating Hillary.

[Laughing Mirror]

19. Go ahead and and eat the rat poison if you want

It's your decision. I hear it's not a pleasant death, but we all got to go someday.

[JackRiddler]

20. kick