Now that we know Hillary didn't even read the pre-war intelligence, but just trusted the Bush administration and voted for the war, can we really trust her with important decisions? Whether the war was right or wrong, doesn't her failure to avail herself of all the facts constitute reckless disregard?
No need to recount all the reckless disregard on the part of republicans. This question is about Hillary and her failure to perform due diligence.
2007-07-18 07:53:51 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
That's it "Outcrap", it's inconvenient to answer the question, so attack the questioner. Fact is Hillary's gender has nothing to do with it. I have a lot of interesting questions about John Edwards too. I am a true feminist - I believe women can be just as smart as men, and also just as stupid. You on the other hand try to use emotion associated with past oppression to avoid legitimate criticism of a person who happens to be female. Who's the real sexist?
2007-07-18 08:29:31 · update #1
w.b. - She wants to be President. Besides, it's my question. You don't have to answer it if you don't want to.
2007-07-18 08:35:24 · update #2
We cannot trust her. She's a liberal and they all hate the troops.
2007-07-18 07:56:34 · answer #1 · answered by Chuckles 4 · 3⤊ 3⤋
All of the candidates have admitted to NOT reading the docs.
Hillary, being a U S Senator had a team of people read the docs, and relay info.
It's easier to smear people than admit the facts that almost every bill in the Congress is handled in a similar manner by BOTH repubs. and dems
2007-07-18 08:00:12 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
No need to recount all the reckless disregard on the part of republicans. This question is about Hillary and her failure to perform due diligence.
Ummm, can you be a bit more biased? Your misogyny is showing...
2007-07-18 07:57:46 · answer #3 · answered by outcrop 5 · 2⤊ 5⤋
Hillary makes all decisions based on whatever the polls say is popular at the moment.
2007-07-18 07:59:26 · answer #4 · answered by booman17 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Obama had a thorough understanding of the region, did review the intelligence, and did speak out against the war before it started.
Now you know who to vote for.
2007-07-18 07:58:34 · answer #5 · answered by Diminati 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
That is how our whole government works!!! Hell, we should probably ask the emperor of china what to do. Since nothing else seems to get done in our government.
2007-07-18 08:04:22 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Was going to reply, but Don. C. has my own answer covered already.
2007-07-18 08:04:46 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
why single hillary out?
almost NO member of congress read the patriot act.
they are all irresponsible; period!
2007-07-18 08:06:55 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
You are right, Hillary never should have trusted Bush.
Oh, wait, Bush kept that pre-war intelligence from everyone.
Never mind...
2007-07-18 07:56:51 · answer #9 · answered by Darth Vader 6 · 2⤊ 5⤋
Her handler's are smart. She has a good support group.
This was a calculated response to a trap she had fallen into.
2007-07-18 07:58:49 · answer #10 · answered by Matt 5 · 3⤊ 3⤋
You can not use "Hillary" and "Intelligence" in the same sentence, hillary is a moron
2007-07-18 07:57:44 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋