Bill Clinton: Dems Shouldn't Be Divided By Differences Over Iraq

[im10ashus]

Two things happened in the last few days that could have a lasting effect on the future direction -- and electoral success -- of the Democratic Party. One drew a ton of attention; the other, despite being far more significant, somehow fell through the mainstream media cracks.

The headline grabber was, of course, Joe "Greater Loyalties" Lieberman filing papers to form a new party called Connecticut for Lieberman, just in case this whole letting-Democratic-primary-voters-decide thing doesn't work out in August.

Cue Simon & Garfunkel: "Where have you gone, Joe Lieberman, a Party turns its disgusted eyes to you. Woo woo woo. What's that you say, Mrs. Boxer, Boltin' Joe has left and gone away? Hey, hey, hey."

Lieberman's desperate move only serves to highlight what went underreported: Bill Clinton saying on Friday that Democrats "ought to be whipped if we allow our differences over what to do now over Iraq divide us." Is he serious? He makes it sound as if the debate over the war is petty squabbling on the level of whether one should wear white after Labor Day.

cont'd...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/bill-clinton-dems-should_b_24848.html

[CrispyQ]

1. Excellent commentary.

Can you imagine someone in 1968 telling Bobby Kennedy and Hubert Humphrey that they "ought to be whipped" for fighting over their views on Vietnam?

In the end, Kennedy was assassinated, and Humphrey (backed by the party bosses) prevailed over McCarthy to win the nomination. In the general election campaign against Nixon, Humphrey continued to defend the war, alienating the Democratic base and prompting anti-war protests at almost all of his campaign appearances. Five weeks before the election, trailing Nixon badly in the polls, Humphrey finally made a speech distancing himself from Johnson and calling for an end to the U.S. bombing in Vietnam. The move turned his campaign around -- but not in time to overtake Nixon. There is speculation that if Humphrey had come out against the bombing even one week earlier, he might have prevailed.

So, 40 years later, the question becomes: will Hillary be the Humphrey of 2008?

One thing is certain: papering over Democratic differences on Iraq is no longer possible. Let Democrats fight it out and choose. And, if they want to be a majority party again, let's hope they choose to reject the Hillary-Lieberman-Humphrey war-apologist wing of the party, and take a decisive stand on Iraq.

Emphasis added by me.


k&r

[LaurenG]

2. *sigh*

-snip-

Bill Clinton saying on Friday that Democrats "ought to be whipped if we allow our differences over what to do now over Iraq divide us."

Well who is going to back down? It won't be the anti war movement! Are you going to get the others to step up to the plate and bow out?

Wow things are becoming more strange by the minute.

Of course Bill you're right - whip us, I know it's ONLY a matter of life and death. What were we thinking? :sarcasm:

[Terran1212]

6. When Bill has his kids dying in Iraq maybe he'll understand

It seems now he's trying to pull a Jimmy Carter and be useful post-presidency. Unfortunately that act works better for Gore and Carter than it does for him.

[flpoljunkie]

3. He's deadly serious. That is what is most troubling about his comment.

K & R!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

4. More from the guy who gave us the "not as bad" party.

Should he call himself "Billmentum".

[SOS]

5. What division?

Only 8% of registered Democrats support Bush's War in Iraq.

[in_cog_ni_to]

11. He may be talking about the Dem divide over whether we support HILLARY

in her WH bid? SHE voted for the damn war. SHE refuses to stand up and say it was WRONG and SHE refuses to call for a withdrawal of troops. Bill is concerned about Hill...that's all.:eyes:

TOO BAD. He'll just have to deal with it and so will Hillary. Maybe they need to start worrying about our soldiers who have been sent to Iraq based on LIES? Maybe they need to think about all the soldiers who have lost legs, arms, eyes and a stable mind? Maybe they should start worrying about the 100,000 innocent Iraqi men, women and babies killed and maimed? Maybe they need to start acting like DEMOCRATS and supporting Democratic ideals? Then, perhaps, there wouldn't be a Democratic divided over the Iraqi occupation and more Democrats would support Hillary. I think his remark is a defense of Hillary's behavior. JMCPO, of course.

[im10ashus]

12. That is ALL that was about.

Stumping for his wife whom he knows is being chastised for continued support of the Bush cabal. It's the one thing about her that I can't stand.

[bemildred]

7. Yep, we should all be united in opposition to this stupid, illegal war. nt

[blm]

8. She's wrong about one thing - Clinton's been advising ALL Dems and the DNC

between 2001 and 2005. They just started to realize he's not the greatest political mind in the country the way he's been sold.

I like him for who he can be at times, but the part of him that has benefitted BushInc more than the citizens of this country deserves distrust.

[Totally Committed]

9. "Bill Clinton: Dems Shouldn't Be Divided By Differences Over Iraq"

Translation: Vote for Hillary anyway... can we all agree she and I need to be President, please?

When pigs fly, Bill... when pigs fly.

WAR MATTERS. PEACE MATTERS MORE.


TC

[Totally Committed]

10. "Bill Clinton: Dems Shouldn't Be Divided By Differences Over Iraq"

Translation: Vote for Hillary anyway... can we all agree she and I need to be President, please?

When pigs fly, Bill... when pigs fly.

WAR MATTERS. PEACE MATTERS MORE.


TC