During the final democratic debate CNN tool Wolf Blitzer was just about booed off the stage for asking Hillary Clinton if she thought she was na’ve for voting to give President Bush authorization to invade Iraq. But of course she doesn’t consider herself na’ve; she was merely misled by the concrete evidence that was presented to her by the trustworthy super geniuses.

Of course she was na’ve for giving that authorization. She claims she didn’t think that he would actually use that authorization to go to war when the resolution was titled ’Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002.’ That’s the definition of na’ve. What did she think was going to happen? Bush barely has the foresight to put one foot in front of the other to make himself walk forward, let alone the knowledge to realize the backlash from invading Iraq. And his main advisors at the time were Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, not exactly the thinking man’s advisors.

So if she didn’t realize the inevitability of what was happening then she would not only be na’ve but completely incompetent. The truth is that she’s not incompetent, she’s an appeaser. She voted while being fully aware of the possibility of what would happen, but the fact is that she’ll say and do anything to satisfy the situation.

She doesn’t regret her vote because as she says, she, like many others, was lied to about the supposed weapons of mass destruction. Maybe my vision is clouded or I am somehow having difficulty connecting the dots, but I don’t see Saddam Hussein having weapons and us going to war as a proper equation. I don’t remember speaking to a single rational person at the time who thought ’hey, Iraq might have weapons, let’s start a war.’ That’s because invading Iraq would have been a bad idea even if they did have WMDs.

So if she happens to win the democratic nomination, what option does that leave for any progressive rational thinking person? Voting Republican just isn’t an option. You’ve got Mitt Romney who might be the most inauthentic candidate I’ve ever seen. He’s the guy who claims to be a great leader because he was a great CEO, which is exactly what we need after Enron and Halliburton. He also says we should salute President Bush for keeping us safe since Sep. 11. I always wondered what he did with those vacation days in Crawford; now I know he was saving my life. Gee, thanks Bush.

Then you have John McCain who said that it might be necessary to stay in Iraq for another 100 years. That should automatically categorize him with fools and lunatics. Maybe Chuck Norris was right, maybe McCain is too old to be president. Anyone who says things like that has to be out of touch with reality.

There are people who I consider to be politically brilliant supporting Hillary because there are legitimate reasons to vote for her. But I just don’t think another Clinton in the White House can be considered progression. We’ve spent 20 years under Bush and Clinton rule and it’s time to move on, and there’s just something about saying the words President Obama that makes me smile.