Why I won't vote for Hillary

Will a Democratic President from the neocon Democratic Leadership Conference be that much different than the Bush presidency? Over at Media Matters Eric Boehlert points out that the majority of Democrats don't hold Hillary's Iraq vote against her or even expect her to apologize. Well I don't either and that's not the reason I won't vote for her. The reason is I suspect we would see imperialistic misadventures similar to those we have seen over the last six years and in fact we had hints of such misadventures before George W. Bush took office. As I pointed out almost a year ago Hillary gives every indication that she is a Hawk if not an out right neocon. Scott Ritter goes even farther in
It Doesn't Matter If Hillary Apologizes for Her Iraq War Vote

Let there be no doubt that Hillary Clinton is about as slippery a species of politician that exists, one who has demonstrated an ability to morph facts into a nebulous blob which blurs the record and distorts the truth. While she has demonstrated this less than flattering ability on a number of issues, nowhere is it so blatant as when dealing with the issue of the ongoing war in Iraq and Hillary Clinton's vote in favor of this war.

This issue won't be resolved even if Hillary Clinton apologizes for her Iraq vote, as other politicians have done, blaming their decision on faulty intelligence on Iraq's WMD capabilities. This is because, like many other Washington politicians at the time, including those now running for president, she had been witness to lies about Iraq's weapons programs to justify attacks on that country by her husband President Bill Clinton and his administration.

That's right. Ritter claims that Hillary knew there was no WMD. As you read the rest of Ritter's piece you have to wonder if Bill Clinton wouldn't have beat GWB to the punch in Iraq if it hadn't been for Monica.