For me, the most troubling issue about Hillary Clinton is her inability to come up with a good explanation for her initial vote on the Iraq War resolution.
This reminds me of Kerry’s “I voted for the war before I voted against it.” It is a lame excuse, the opposition keeps hitting you with the issue, and yet you cannot come up with anything better. I came up with better for Kerry. You’d think he would have had his staff working full time on better wording.
Her claim that she had assurances from George Bush that he would not do exactly what he ended up doing are not helping her. When most of the rest of us could see his transparent lies, why was she so easily deceived?
In Clinton’s situation, I can also come up with a better excuse for her vote. She should have said, “At the time of the vote we all thought that Hussein might have WMD. I knew that Bush’s assurances that he would not use the resolution to start a war were lies. I was hoping that Hussein would back down before Bush would go completely bonkers. There were no good options to choose at that time. I had to choose the one that I thought would be least bad. If I had known that Hussein did not have WMD, it would have been easy to choose to put the leash on George Bush instead. It turns out that Barack was correct in figuring out that George Bush was a bigger threat than Sadam Hussein. That does not prove that he will always be able to guess right.”
Had she not recently voted on the similar enabling resolution for Bush on Iran, the case above would be easier to believe.
If she cannot come up with an excellent answer that explains her votes with all the time she has had to prepare, how is she going to handle this issue in the general election’s more hostile environment?