Opravičilo in kesanje za narejene napake je običajno predpogoj za nov začetek. Ko bosta kaj takega zmogli generaciji, ki sta kakorkoli čustveno vpleteni v dogajanja okrog 2. svetovne vojne, bomo dobili narodno spravo, manj politične polarizacije in več fokusa na probleme razvoja, blaginje in solidarnosti. Ko bodo tega sposobni liderji sedanje opozicije, bodo pridobili zaupanje širše javnosti.
No, kaj se zgodi, kadar politiki takšnih načelnih potez ne zmorejo, opisuje Katrina Vanden Heuvel v The Nation na primeru Hillary Clinton:
“…Clinton made the mistake of running a top-down campaign in a rules-changing year, and acceding to a sexism within her campaign that advised her not to apologize for her disastrous vote supporting Bush’s war resolution. Yes, she was in charge. She could have rejected the guys’ advice. But Clinton appears to have bought into the idea that a Commander-in-Chief has to play by “men’s rules”–and be tougher than the toughest. If she’d been smart and right, not strong and wrong, how in her right mind would she not have said, I made a mistake when I accepted the word of a man who, it is now widely accepted (except in FoxLand), lied us into a war that has gravely undermined the US’s security? John Edwards managed to issue an apology–and he was dueling with a media that had pegged him as “the Breck Girl.” Could it be that macho boys like Mark Penn and Bill Clinton counseled Hillary that if she issued honest regret she wouldn’t be macho enough to be treated as a serious Commander-in-Chief?
If Clinton had listened to alternative voices –if there’d be some “woman- commen-sense” over in her campaign–they might have suggested that she reframe what a commander-in-chief for the 21st century means. That what’s needed to deal with the challenges of this world is not more militarism amd macho swagger, but a commitment to smart, principled use of non-military tools. After all, how does military might address genocidal conflicts? Or the worst pandemic in world history (AIDS)? Or staggering and destabilizing global ineqality? Or, for that matter, the spread of weapons of mass destruction?”
Če bi bi Hillary zmogla opravičilo zaradi podpore iraški vojni, bi bila v očeh javnosti bolj kredibilna kandidatka za bodočega predsednika. Tako pa se ameriška nacija očitno bolj nagiba k podpori bolj “čistemu” Barracku Obami. Etičnost in načelnost štejeta. Pa čeprav se zdi, da le takrat, ko se nekdo poteguje za nek položaj, ko ga zasede, pa počne marsikaj drugega.