I'm even more utterly mystified

[beam me up scottie]

82. Nice try but you don't get to make up your own facts.

Bin Laden was in Afghanistan in 2001 and the US had every reason to believe he was still there when Bernie voted for the AUMF. Where he was finally killed has nothing to do with that vote.

What you don't like is the fact that your candidate tried to frame Saddam for harboring al Qaeda members when she pimped the Iraq war:

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members...

It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well, effects American security.

This is a very difficult vote, this is probably the hardest decision I've ever had to make. Any vote that might lead to war should be hard, but I cast it with conviction."

You can't defend her war vote so you're feigning outrage about the AUMF.

Why do you support a war hawk?