Bush "How do you know his life would have been good?"

By: Mary MacElveen

A while ago, I had discussions with a number of people through emails where they have suggested that I back down in my criticisms of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton since she voted for the war and perhaps will be the Democratic candidate come 2008. But, if I want to remain truthful with my readers and have credibility, I simply have to stay the course. As an American that has been against this war from the start, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s vote for this war was wrong as well as any other Democrat. That opinion goes equally towards any Republican that voted yes to this war.

One woman’s opinion to me was this: “I think it is worthwhile to write to any Democrats with whom you are disappointed and express to them your anger and disappointment, but I think when we go public with our barbs, we should focus on Bush and other Republicans” So, does she only want me to write faxes which never get answered to those within the Democratic Party such as Hillary Clinton or John Kerry who voted for this war and keep them private? As a journalist, I simply cannot if the purpose I serve is to get the truth out to my readers.

She then went onto say to me: “Your explanations for bashing Hillary and some other Democrats is that they have not lived up to your hopes. But that is exactly what I heard from the Ralph Nader supporters in the 2000 election - and nothing would dissuade them from bashing Democrats then either.” It has nothing to do with my hopes, but the truth. It also has everything to do with saving lives. This war in Iraq where people are dying is more important than saving any politician’s political career. If they are as worried as to how they are perceived by the public, then my opinion is always go with the truth instead of political posturing.

As I was reading an article written by Arianna Huffington 2008: Will Al Gore Be the Anti-Hillary? This paragraph caught my attention where Ms. Huffington writes: “One major party donor, who is supporting Hillary even though he is against the war, told me that Clinton had assured him that she, too, was “against the war” but believed that there was no way a woman could ever be elected president while being against the war. “She is convinced,” the donor told me, “that she’d be attacked as soft on defense and unable to deal with national security and the war on terror. And I think she’s right. I’d rather she be anti-war, but I can’t argue with her reasoning.” So, if we are to believe this is true, was her vote for this war made for purely political reasons? If that is the case, then Sen. Clinton owes these military families an explanation especially when many are coming out against this war and where their loved ones are no longer with them.

According to another source from a fellow Democrat this was emailed to me: “Hillary would have no chance in hell had she voted the way we had wanted her to.” What this person’s shows me is that she had to vote yes in order to run for a possible presidential run and I feel that is the reason why John Kerry voted yes to it as well. This same source also wrote to me stating this: “I think she has been doing what she knows she has had to do to get into the White House. Once there, she can afford to act out of her conscience and turn things around” So, she voted for a war of lies to get into the White House? Whatever happened to the truth? Whatever happened to standing up for one’s beliefs? If she does become the Democratic candidate and wins: Wouldn’t it be a little late to turn things around? What about the thousands of lives lost by our soldiers and innocent Iraqis?

The reason that I am coming down hard on these Democrats who voted for the war and wish to run and have run for the presidency is after reading yet another article and it turned my stomach.

Upon reading Jeff Norman’s article: Another Amazing Disgrace I was sickened beyond belief where a mother of a fallen soldier whose name is, Dolores Kesterson was told this by Pres. Bush “How do you know his life would have been good?” I was also amazed at where he stated this according to Mrs. Kesterson: “We won’t know in our lifetime whether or not Iraq was a success.” So, based upon that statement made by Pres. Bush: How can these Democrats vote for this war? In fact, how can any elected official for that matter if he does not know whether or not the war in Iraq will be a success? Our soldiers deserved better from the very commander in chief that sent many off to die untimely deaths. They deserved better from every single elected official who voted for this godless war.

Now the latter source stated to me: “Give her the benefit of the doubt. She’s just been playing her cards right to get into the White House. Had she played any other way, she wouldn’t stand a chance.” I just cannot go along with that way of thinking. There is no benefit of any doubt when this war has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be based on lies and there is no doubt that human lives have been lost forever. Is voting yes to a war a card game where they wish to rise to the ultimate power? That sort of thinking should shock everyone who has and is vehemently against this war.

While I am a Democrat, I am first and foremost an American who is searching for truthful leaders to lead this nation. I am an American first and foremost seeking leaders who truly honor our soldiers and do not use them for any political game or gain. I am also a journalist who has to ask the tough questions if I am to be seen as a credible writer.

It will not be anything that I have written to that will give the Republicans ammunition to hit Democrats or vice versa, it will be their voting records and whether or not what they are telling us passes the smell test.

http://www.teambio.org/2006/01/bush...