Iraq, Trustworthiness, and the FBI Investigation Make Bernie Sanders More Qualified Than Hillary Clinton

PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA - APRIL 07: Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) speaks during the AFL-CIO Convention at the Downtown Sheraton Philadelphia on April 7, 2016 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania primaries will be held on April 26. (Photo by William Thomas Cain/Getty Images)

PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA – APRIL 07: Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) speaks during the AFL-CIO Convention at the Downtown Sheraton Philadelphia on April 7, 2016 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania primaries will be held on April 26. (Photo by William Thomas Cain/Getty Images)

imagesizer

Bernie is going to the Vatican to give a speech 4 days prior to the most important primary so far, NY. Bernie is not receiving $225,000 for his speech and a transcript will be available.

04/08/2016 09:40 am ET | Updated Apr 08, 2016

Before addressing the differences in their Iraq votes and favorability ratings, Democrats should take a trip down memory lane and revisit the 2008 Democratic Primary. Now that Bill Clinton has displayed his true feelings towards Black Lives Matter, months after Southern states helped Hillary take an early lead, it’s important to remember that the Clintons utilized racism against Obama. In 2008, Bob Herbert wrote a New York Times piece titled Of Hope and Politics documenting Hillary Clinton’s use of race and Islamophobia:

I could also sense how hard the Clinton camp was working to undermine Senator Obama’s main theme, that a campaign based on hope and healing could unify, rather than further polarize, the country.

So there was the former president chastising the press for the way it was covering the Obama campaign and saying of Mr. Obama’s effort: “The whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen.”

And there was Mrs. Clinton telling the country we don’t need “false hopes,” and taking cheap shots at, of all people, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

We’d already seen Clinton surrogates trying to implant the false idea that Mr. Obama might be a Muslim, and perhaps a drug dealer to boot.

…He was drawing young people into the process and exciting people across party lines.
The big deal was that Senator Obama, defying every stereotype, was making it easier for people, frustrated by the status quo, to dare to hope and believe in the country again.

…Pride, the nuns told me in grammar school, goeth before a fall. It may not be fair that the Clintons seem to be forgiven every sin while Mr. Obama’s margin of error is tiny at best.

Indeed, Bernie’s “margin of error” this year is tiny, while Hillary Clinton expects to win the White House alongside a year-long FBI investigation.

Not long ago, as Mr. Herbert pointed out, Clinton even took “cheap shots” at Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr; another forgotten fact of her 2008 campaign. The former New York Senator did everything possible to portray Barack Obama as unrealistic, a closet Muslim (utilizing Fox News Islamophobia), and undermine Obama’s theme of hope and change.

Sound familiar?

Who’s drawing young people this election, offering hope and change, and appealing to the ideals of the average American?

It’s certainly not the person under FBI investigation. I explain in the following appearance on CNN New Day with Victor Blackwell that Hillary Clinton is able to get away with this style of politics, in part because of white privilege.

In terms of trying to crush hopes, dreams, and any genuine attempt at altering the status quo, Hillary Clinton is doing to Bernie Sanders what she and Bill tried to do against Barack Obama. The same complaints about tone (CNN reported “Bill Clinton complains about Obama’s attacks”) and attempts at vilifying Obama in 2008 are today being witnessed by Bernie Sanders. Ultimately, aside from the racism and Islamophobia, Hillary Clinton has used the same playbook against Bernie Sanders in 2016.

Hillary Clinton has always tried to embody pragmatism, despite the fact most Americans (67% of Americans, 30% of Democrats, 74% of Independents, and 64% of women according to Quinnipiac) find her “not honest and trustworthy.”

Hillary Clinton has negative favorability ratings nationally, with negative ratings in every major national poll, and this is before potential indictments from the Department of Justice.

In contrast, Quinnipiac writes “Sanders has the highest favorability rating of any candidate and the highest scores for honesty and integrity, for caring about voters’ needs and problems and for sharing voters’ values.”

Bernie’s interview with Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks highlights exactly why Sanders has the highest scores for honesty and integrity in 2016.

Experience, without trust, is worthless.

A resume, listing an ongoing FBI investigation, wouldn’t get you a job at McDonalds.

In terms of Iraq, Bernie Sanders voted against the Iraq War, using the same intelligence that Hillary Clinton used to vote for the tragic invasion. Also, her view of Iraq in 2004 speaks volumes. A CNN piece in 2004 titled Hillary Clinton: No regret on Iraq vote highlights her thoughts of Saddam and weapons of mass destruction:

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said she is not sorry she voted for a resolution authorizing President Bush to take military action in Iraq despite the recent problems there…

“Obviously, I’ve thought about that a lot in the months since,” she said. “No, I don’t regret giving the president authority because at the time it was in the context of weapons of mass destruction, grave threats to the United States, and clearly, Saddam Hussein had been a real problem for the international community for more than a decade.”

“The consensus was the same, from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration,” she said. “It was the same intelligence belief that our allies and friends around the world shared.

Interestingly, Bernie Sanders vehemently opposed the Iraq War, even though “the consensus was the same, from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration.”

To all the revisionists who’d vote for Clinton, knowing that Bush’s neoconservatives might advise her if she wins, Clinton stated “No, I don’t regret giving the president authority because at the time it was in the context of weapons of mass destruction.”

Clinton, like Dick Cheney, utilized the weapons of mass destruction defense.

In fact, Hillary Clinton used the same myths perpetuated by the Bush administration to justify her vote. A 2007 New York Times piece titled Hillary’s War explains how Clinton helped perpetuate the myth of Saddam Hussein being linked to Al Qaeda:

…Clinton continued, accusing Iraq’s leader of giving ‘’aid, comfort and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members.’’ This statement fit squarely within the ominous warning she issued the day after Sept. 11.

Clinton’s linking of Iraq’s leader and Al Qaeda, however, was unsupported by the conclusions of the N.I.E. and other secret intelligence reports that were available to senators before the vote…

Nevertheless, on the sensitive issue of collaboration between Al Qaeda and Iraq, Senator Clinton found herself adopting the same argument that was being aggressively pushed by the administration…

Yes, Hillary Clinton adopted Bush’s talking point and continued to perpetuate this myth.

As stated in the 2007 New York Times piece, “Senator Clinton found herself adopting the same argument that was being aggressively pushed by the administration.”

Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, voted against the Iraq War, and possessed enough wisdom and foreign policy knowledge to foreshadow every deadly consequence of the invasion.

Experience must correlate to wisdom and good judgement, if qualifications warrant becoming the most powerful person on the planet.

Wisdom and judgement certainly aren’t the hallmarks of Hillary Clinton’s email controversy. The ongoing FBI investigation is highlight by The Hill in a piece titled Report: FBI moves to interview Clinton over emails :

Hillary Clinton and her top aides might be questioned by FBI officials about her private email server within the next few days, according to a new report from Al Jazeera America.

The news outlet reported that the FBI has concluded its examination of Clinton’s email server and is in a “critical stage” of its investigation into concerns that the former secretary of State or her top aides mishandled classified information.

Since when was it ever a good idea to vote for a candidate being interviewed by the FBI?

I explain in this appearance on CNN International that Hillary Clinton faces the risk of indictment by the FBI. Also, I highlight in this YouTube segment why basic logic dictates Clinton “knowingly” sent and received classified intelligence from her private server. Thus, Bernie Sanders is infinitely more qualified to become president than Hillary Clinton, primarily because he voted against Iraq and isn’t linked to any FBI investigations. Most importantly, the American people trust Bernie Sanders, and he’s earned this trust while his opponent relies solely on the aura of political power to justify her candidacy.

Remember, Bernie Sanders beats Trump by a much wider margin than Clinton, and that’s all that counts in 2016.

Follow H. A. Goodman on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/HAGOODMANAUTHOR

Posted by Ainhoa Aristizabal — Unruly Hearts editor

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s