Clinton
is a rather typical sort of politician, the kind who tells people what
they want to hear if that will get them the votes they want or the
donations they need. And that’s the problem. People start to accept this
as the norm and adopt the values of the cynical politicians they
support. During the Bush era Democratic partisans were constantly
denouncing the Iraq War, calling Bush and Cheney war criminals,
referring to it as the worst American policy decision in decades if not
longer and yet– a few years later, it doesn’t seem to be all that
important to some. It’s “moral purity” to think it matters. It was fine
to use as a club with which to beat Republicans, but who cares about
hundreds of thousands of Iraqi dead if people point to them as a reason
why someone should not be running for the White House?
This isn’t just about Clinton or big name pundits
like Paul Krugman. It’s everyone who thinks it is illegitimate to bring
up the Iraq War during a political campaign. It’s everyone who thinks
Hillary can be excused by claiming she was the innocent victim of Bush
deception. Last I looked, the most popular comment under Krugman’s
column at the NYT was by a self-described former Sanders
supporter who was outraged that Clinton’s credentials were questioned.
Of course she is qualified to be President! Credentials and experience, what you put on your resume - this is everything.
-- Donald Johnson, "
Why Clinton’s Iraq decision matters" (MONDOWEISS).
