English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

flip flop flip flop it all depends which crowd she is talking to .
I think that the American public is smart enough to see through her . I am not talking about the democrats , because they are Anti-American !!!

2007-04-01 09:16:28 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Elections

15 answers

No, Billary voted FOR the War FIRST, THEN BACKSTEPPED with all the other bleeding-heart Liberal Demacracks when it got to be so popular to be AGAINST the war!
We REALLY NEED Her for President, 'cause all the Rag-Head Camel Jockeys would laugh in her FACE, as NONE of them have ANY respect for women, no matter WHOSE country she's from! ! LOL! ! ! !

2007-04-01 09:23:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Hilary Clinton has changed her official position on the war in Iraq once in the last 4 years and that was to go from pro (she voted for the war) to con (she now wants it to end). This has less to do with wooing the public (though it would be silly to say it was completely unconnected) and more to do with the poor manner in which the war has been handled over the past 4 years (longer than the American Civil War) and the steadily declining condition of Iraq.

I greatly prefer the politician who is making the right choice (no matter what route they arrived at) to one who makes one and refuses to change.

2007-04-01 09:21:31 · answer #2 · answered by DonSoze 5 · 2 0

There was a vote to use force in Iraq after the false statements were made about WMD and terrorism in Iraq. He actually said that Iraq had nuclear weapons and showed pictures of mushroom clouds.

After receiving the go-ahead to use force, Bush gave Saddam Hussein two days to step down or be attacked. Bush didn't allow further searches for WMD and they had only a record of one meeting with a terrorist leader that ended in no agreement between them. Hussein jealously guarded his regime and wouldn't share power with outsiders.

I believe Bush should apologize for the errors he made and the fabrication of the reasons for the war, not the Congress.
Is that flip-flopping when you find out your decision was based upon somebody's bad hunch?

There were other ways to take Saddam Hussein out of power politically. This war was totally unnecessary. It was based on the fact that this country had a terrible human rights history, but they were virtually no threat to the U.S. at the point of attack. The war was illegal by international and U.S. standards.

2007-04-01 09:31:46 · answer #3 · answered by BekindtoAnimals22 7 · 1 0

Hillary, like many others, voted for the war when we were told it was because Iraq had WMDs. When she learned that there were no WMDs and that Bush lied to pursue his own agenda, she realized that we never should have invaded Iraq. There is nothing wrong with changing your mind after receiving new information. If we didn't, we'd all still believe the world was flat, for God's sake.
The only reason we're still there is because Bush can't admit he was wrong. Go Hillary!

2007-04-01 09:22:33 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

If you really wish to know the answer to your question, read the following. If your only objective is to flame, don't bother.

http://www.justhillary.com/herwords/iraq...

"Before I voted in 2002, the Administration publicly and privately assured me that they intended to use their authority to build international support in order to get the U.N. weapons inspectors back into Iraq, as articulated by the President in his Cincinnati speech on October 7th, 2002. As I said in my October 2002 floor statement, I took "the President at his word that he will try hard to pass a U.N. resolution and will seek to avoid war, if at all possible."

Instead, the Bush Administration short-circuited the U.N. inspectors - the last line of defense against the possibility that our intelligence was false. The Administration also abandoned securing a larger international coalition, alienating many of those who had joined us in Afghanistan.

From the start of the war, I have been clear that I believed that the Administration did not have an adequate plan for what lay ahead.

I take responsibility for my vote, and I, along with a majority of Americans, expect the President and his Administration to take responsibility for the false assurances, faulty evidence and mismanagement of the war.

In October 2003, I said "In the last year, however, I have been first perplexed, then surprised, then amazed, and even outraged and always frustrated by the implementation of the authority given the President by this Congress" and "Time and time again, the Administration has had the opportunity to level with the American people. Unfortunately, they haven't been willing to do that."

I have continually raised doubts about the President's claims, lack of planning and execution of the war, while standing firmly in support of our troops. I spoke out often at the Armed Services Committee to Administration officials pointing out that the estimates they provided about the war, its length and cost lacked even basic credibility. And I challenged Secretary Rumsfeld more than once that he had no benchmarks to measure actual progress which would lead us to believe we had a strategy that was working."
~~~~~~~~~~~~

She understands that we cannot just pull out of Iraq, she also understands that we need to have an end to our involvement in their government's civil war. That is why in her plan for Iraq she wants to put real pressure on the Iraqi government to get their act together politically, and move our troops to other areas of Iraq and Afghanistan to really fight the War on Terror by engaging Al Queda directly. She knows that we have to leave a permanent base in Iraq to deal with the dangerous situation Bush has gotten us into in which we cannot just leave the country wide open to Iran moving in.

The Republican's use of the term flip-flopper is making them look simple. Seeing a situation has become unworkable and is wrong and seeking to change that situation is a mark of a thinking mind and seems to offend only those who prefer to dismiss critical thinking and favor cheap rhetoric instead.

Even more amazing is that one of the few politicians who actually deserves the term flip-flopper is a Republican - Mitt Romney.

2007-04-01 09:36:20 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

This question reveals more about the asker than it does about the subject of the question. Anyone who knows anything about the legislative process knows it would be impossible for Hilary to vote for the war, then later vote against it. She got only one vote. She voted for it. In the rush to diss Democrats, you have essentially made yourself look pretty stupid.

2007-04-01 09:23:17 · answer #6 · answered by Matthias 1 · 1 0

hillary originally voted in favor of the war and is now trying to save face by opposing it, which just shows how hypocritical she is, as well as her lack of courage to just come out and say she has withdrawn her support. instead, shes trying to deny ever supporting it

2007-04-01 09:20:04 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

I agree! If you watch, that seems to be a requirement to politics...Fence sitting ...flop which ever way you think is winning at the time.

2007-04-01 09:21:55 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

If She Did that, Then She's Definetly Not worth Votin For..

2007-04-01 09:20:10 · answer #9 · answered by babyyocca 5 · 0 1

Hillary knows how to vote?

2007-04-01 09:23:22 · answer #10 · answered by Kevin A 6 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers