Hillary voted to GO TO WAR

[sniffa]

and fund the war, and having learned nothing from 2002, voted to declare part of the Iranian government a terrorist entity.

that's some good experience.

[Fredda Weinberg]

1. Actually, she voted for UN inspectors and Hussein complied. We invaded anyway

How she's responsible for that is beyond me. Her vote was clearly not for immediate invasion.

[Windy]

3. Fredda, read the resolution... please.

Don't make statements based in incorrect assumptions.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html

[Fredda Weinberg]

8. The text is right there ... thanks for the link

The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the President to--

(a) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions applicable to Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and

(b) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions.

Now, show me where HRC voted for invading w/o a UN resolution.

[Windy]

19. read the full text...don't cherry pick.

it also means that she placed her trust in someone who had proven to be untrustworthy.

She to date has failed to acknowledge her mistake.

[Fredda Weinberg]

22. So, you have nothing to contradict me. I re-read the whole thing ... again

And yes, knew what it contained at the time. As for what * did, she is quoted as saying:

the Bush administration's short-circuiting of the U.N. weapons inspection process didn't permit "the inspectors to finish whatever task they could have accomplished to demonstrate one way or the other what was there."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/21/iraq.hillary/

The vote wasn't a mistake, despite the way it turned out.

[SOS]

42. There were NO legally binding conditions whatsoever.

SEC. 2. SUPPORT FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS.

The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the
President to--
(1) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security
Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq
and encourages him in those efforts; and
(2) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security
Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay,
evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies
with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

There were NO CONDITIONS. The Congress merely "supported the efforts" to enforce UNSC resolutions. It's empty, meaningless rhetoric.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) Authorization.--The President is authorized to use the Armed
Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and
appropriate in order to--
(1) defend the national security of the United States
against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq.

Bush is given 100% sole authority to determine whether the non-existent "efforts" had met with success.
Points 1 and 2 are meaningless, since Bush alone decides whether 1 and 2 are met.

(b) Presidential Determination.--In connection with the exercise of
the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President
shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible,
but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make
available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the
President pro tempore of the Senate HIS DETERMINATION that--
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or
other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately
protect the national security of the United States against the
continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to
enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq.

Bush is given authority to attack based only on his determination.
They kindly asked to be informed as to when Bush was starting the war.

Senator Byrd was right. It was a blank check.

[Fredda Weinberg]

55. And the Boland amendment kept us from financing the Contras?

Put in all the emphasis you like, but we're dealing with constitutional issues here - in any case, the claim was that HRC voted for the invasion and that is obviously not true. Your interpretation is certainly your own, but it's not the plain reading.

[SOS]

63. This bill was carefully crafted by the Bush lawyers

There is no interpretation involved. The law says what it says.
Clinton did not "vote for the invasion".
She voted to give Bush the sole authority to invade without any conditions.

[JackORoses]

56. what was the name of the resolution, again? oh right, the IRAQ WAR RESOLUTION

funny how they included WAR in the title of something you claim has nothing to do with WAR.

[harun]

57. Yah they always name them with such accuracy like how

the Patriot Act made us all so patriotic.

:sarcasm:

The names are marketing gimmicks.

[Fredda Weinberg]

61. You're not a simpleton ... the threat was there, but so were conditions n/t

[flvegan]

21. And the Levin Amendment?

IIRC, she voted against that.

[Fredda Weinberg]

24. It is confusing ... and political

http://www.senate.gov/~clinton/news/statements/details.cfm?id=257561

Remarks of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on the Senate Floor on Iraq

"I rise today in support of the Levin Amendment of which I am proud to be an original cosponsor."

And this article explains why she voted as she did

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A0DE3DC1430F930A35755C0A9619C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

[Jai4WKC08]

2. Edwards did too

And Obama keeps voting to fund it.

The only important question is, who is best able to get us out now with minimum loss of life. The answer seems pretty obvious to me. It's not so obvious to you, but I consider the source.

[flvegan]

4. What's Hillary's stance on the Patriot Act?

:popcorn:

[sniffa]

11. that's an interesting question

:popcorn:

[flvegan]

17. And let's not even mention Iran...

:popcorn:

[sniffa]

18. that was a vote for diplomacy

and in her experience, it's worked every time.

:popcorn:

[Laurab]

41. I knew you'd find something better! She DID!

I like this one better and she DID vote to GO TO WAR. I mean, like, didn't she learn anything from the other war she voted for? Oh, wait, that vote wasn't a mistake, I forgot.

I do have to say she looked quite nice for her commercial yesterday.



:popcorn:

[alteredstate]

54. What kind of filter did they use for her face on that ad?

and where can I get one?

[Pastiche423]

59. It's called a soft focus

It blurs the image, as well as wrinkles and jowls.

I can do it digitally.

[Laurab]

66. LOL - I don't know, but I'd like one too! n/t

[Renew Deal]

5. That's the kind of experience you get as first lady.

I'm in awe of her experience.

[Cha]

36. The first lady to bill clinton..

the triangulator..the go along to get along guy. They triangulate but manage, suavely, to leave out the third point.

[oasis]

6. "..bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the UN more likely

and therefore, war, less likely"--- HRC.

[fightindonkey]

7. No She Didn't. OBAMA VOTED TO FUND THE WAR!

This is after all his bullshit. Hillary DID NOT!

[sniffa]

10. O'Rly?

i didn't know Hillary voted against FUNDING THE WAR.

[Vickers]

9. Not only that...SHE WAS THE WARDEN AT ABU GHRAIB!!!111!!!!

:thumbsup:

[sam sarrha]

12. and she pee'd in the water boarding bucket.... damn her..!!!

[hayu_lol]

13. Sniffa, we are still all waiting for the list of the 76 Senators who voted for the...

proposal by Bush, based on lies, to take the matter to the security council(it was not about going to war)and keep the inspectors on the job.

Quit with the Hillary voted for the war...neither she nor anyone else voted for what Bush did. And, you know that.

One poster was kind enough to print the 'war' resolution out so that you couldn't avoid it. Try reading it. Try to understand how you've been flummoxed and brainwashed.

[sniffa]

15. yet her experience with that

led her to vote for Kyl/Lieberman. :thumbsup:

[MNDemNY]

28. But, Kyl/Lieberman wasn't even important enough for your guy to bother voting. Leadership.

[sniffa]

30. um no. my guy voted against it

:hi:

[yodermon]

31. are you serious?

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) AUTHORIZATION. The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; :wtf: and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION.

In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon there after as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq :wtf: or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq, and

(2) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:

So this resolution asserts that Iraq was a continuing threat to NATIONAL fucking SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES, a statement that was demonstrably false at the time.

This resolution also conflates Iraq with 9/11, right there in black and white, yet a bunch of pansy-ass democrats including hrc and johnny boy voted for this tripe.

This is the worst piece of legislation ever passed by the US congress, yet hrc refuses to acknowledge the mistake.

Excuse me while I :puke:

[Cha]

37. hillary is the one who is brainwashed

and flummoxed not sniffa. And she lies about it. But, she's gotta look tough and fool all you people.

[Windy]

20. When you can't support her record, you just resort to juvenile retort to deflect

wow.

[Cha]

38. It's a pattern..just like

hillary herself.

[Vickers]

47. Wait...you thought I was SERIOUS?

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

You are severely humor-challenged!

[Clark2008]

14. And Edwards co-sponsored it and cheerleaded it so much

so that an editorial he wrote ended up on the White House's press page.

[sniffa]

16. awesome

:thumbsup:

[Sparkly]

23. I'll bet nobody here ever heard that before.

:sarcasm:

[ccpup]

25. and Obama hasn't voted ONCE to fund the war!

oh ... wait ... my bad. :evilgrin:

[sniffa]

26. that's not true

he's just voted to fund the war less times than Hillary. :evilgrin:

[Dawgs]

29. Why is it your bad. He voted to fund the troops fighting the illegal war.

Is that the same thing to you?

[SOS]

43. There is a huge difference

between starting a war and funding the troops once the idiocy has begun.
Can you name one instance in US history where Congress de-funded a war?

(To save you some time, Vietnam was de-funded in 1974, eighteen months after the Paris Peace Accords and a year after US combat forces left).

[Enrique]

27. I can no longer support Hillary

now that I have this shocking new information.

[guruoo]

32. !!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[suston96]

33. Hillary did not vote to go to war no matter what the Rovians here keep repeating...

My vote is not, however, a vote for any new doctrine of pre-emption, or for uni-lateralism, or for the arrogance of American power or purpose -- all of which carry grave dangers for our nation, for the rule of international law and for the peace and security of people throughout the world.

***********

So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation. A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President and we say to him - use these powers wisely and as a last resort. And it is a vote that says clearly to Saddam Hussein - this is your last chance - disarm or be disarmed.

[sniffa]

34. thank goodness all those people aren't dead then

[AtomicKitten]

48. Iraqis were shocked and awed by that vote for "diplomacy."

[sniffa]

49. they were shocked into showering us with exploding flowers and candy

[Laurab]

67. I am shocked to see you "Rovians" do this.

Although, now that I think of it, I think we're still being showered with exploding flowers and candy, and I don't think she's ever really said she regrets that vote, either, in fact, she liked it so much she did it again with Kyl-Lieberman.

I still think she looked pretty awesome in that tv commercial, though. I've got to give her that......

[Pastiche423]

60. Yep

The Iraqis were so shocked and awed by her vote, they fell over dead. Over one million of them.

[SOS]

40. Her speech is not the law.

The AuMF is.

[AntiFascist]

62. Asking Bush Junior to "use these powers wisely"?

wanting to work with Bush Senior to repair our foreign relations? What are these people smoking?!! (and I'm not implying marijuana)

[killbotfactory]

35. Yeah, but it would have been done the right way

if only Bush would have listened to her.

What is the right way to start an illegal and unnecessary war of aggression, you may ask?

Well, you see-- OH SHIT LOOK BEHIND YOU!

*runs away*

[SOS]

46. In the words of President Eisenhower:

" In 1953 when his advisors mentioned the concept of pre-emptive war, President Dwight Eisenhower remarked: "All of us have heard this term 'preventive war' since the earliest days of Hitler...I wouldn't even listen to anyone seriously that came in and talked about such a thing."

[BenDavid]

39. I do believe hrc's vote on iraq has been discussed backwards

and forwards and hrc is still not going to apoligize for her vote. You may be happy that edwards apoligized for his vote and after kissing enough ass decided to stand up again, and after he groveled enough for you all then he was again one of ya, but hrc is not going to grovel for ya and that is what pisses you all off....Obama he is like a broken record. always saying he would not have voted for the war but still votes to fund the war. Which is worse?

I believe I know what it is about obama and edwards supporters and their hatred for HRC. Obama and edwards folks know in their hearts that both man if they were to get the nomination would not fight to win. They would be like those that said they would fight in 2000, and 2004, and so we are to believe obama when he says "there will be no more stolen elections" and for that matter edwards has not said a word since he said the same thing in 2004.....and the reason is simple. HRC will fight not only for the nomination but will fight to win the whole damn thing. You all asked for a bear in the election of 08. Well, with obama and edwards you have teddy bears, but with HRC you have a damn GRIZZLEY.....

Ben David

[sniffa]

44. i know in my heart of hearts

that this image of Hillary is a myth.

but if you keep saying it, some people may fall for it.

[Laurab]

68. No, that's not it at all , least I don't think so.

I'm not positive I understood your post - a little punctuation would have helped, but I THINK I got it. Fact is, I don't "hate" Hillary, I just don't want her to be president. She's my senator, and I would miss her way too much if she won.

And then there's the fact that she likes lobbyists and corporations, and a lot of other things which supporters of other candidates have probably learned about - very valid things. I know in my heart that your reasoning is wrong.

She will HAVE to fight to win the GE - a lot harder than probably any other dem, or at least 5 of them, anyway. And after that, she would have to fight for everything she wanted to accomplish, and I'd like to elect someone who is not bought and paid for and who is not polarizing. I don't mind grizzly's, just don't want this particular one as president.

[BenDavid]

71. sorry for the punctuation mistakes and the tense, but I write as

feel the complusion but I do go back and try to correct my spelling.....In the post before yours the opinion was HRC would not fight as hard, but one can only believe since Bill had to fight hard in 92 she will as well....

Do any of you realize that Bill Clinton did not win a single state in the 92 democratic primaries until Georgia.....that is why I say irregardless if hrc comes in second or third in iowa or second in n.h. no obama or edwards people can show me where they can get the 2,181 delegates to get a majority.....I can show you and by the 15th of feb or at least by the end of feb. hrc will have a majority and become the nominee.....

I do thank you for your post and happy you did not have a red pencil. :wow:

Ben David

[rockybelt]

45. I don't know why people cannot admit

that Hillary is just not credible. She makes statements aimed to dissolve her of any responsibility for the votes that she has cast. It is just the typical amoral politician tactic of placing blame elsewhere for their actions. She will tell you she made the wrong vote but for good reasons. Bull-shit. She made the wrong vote because she simply could not bother herself to read the goddamned bills that she voted for. Only one man that I know of did that and he voted correctly every time. Dennis Kucinich. She, and other politicians, vote with the wind, not with their conscience.

[rodeodance]

50. get your story straight. She voted for more Inspections.

[killbotfactory]

51. Oh yeah? How did that turn out?

[hayu_lol]

52. To listen to all you nay-sayers vis-a-vis HRC, one would think that she...

actually lead the troops herself into Iraq.

You all seem to have forgotten who started the war: George W Bush and the bad crowd he hangs with(or should hang with).

I also note that the nay-sayers seem to have a problem with complete sentences and coherent paragraphs.

Had Hillary become president instead of the Dead End Kid, would we have a war on our hands?

[killbotfactory]

53. And why was Bush allowed to start a war?

Because the IWR gave Bush the authority to go to war whenever he felt like it, supposedly to scare Saddam into complying with inspections. Good compromise! Bravo!

[SOS]

64. Interesting.

Since the word "inspection" is not mentioned once in the law.
Where is this mysterious demand for inspections to be found?

[sniffa]

70. didn't you hear the double speak?

isn't that good enough?

[LanternWaste]

58. I place blame where blame is relevant-- on the Republicans.

I place the blame of the Iraqi Occupation where blame is due-- on the Republicans.

There's an old auto industry trick-- when your own product won't sell on its own merits, simply yell as loud as you can how badly the other guys' products sucks. Hence, the current state of the U.S. auto industry.

But I imagine you're young... I'm sure you'll learn one day.

[Skittles]

65. well I am 50 and I think HRC has blood on her hands and LOTS OF IT

it makes me sick that ANY Democrat voted for IWR - it was bad judmement in the EXTREME

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AntiFascist]

72. Really its the neocons who are to blame, not all Republicans...

and there are neocon-enablers in the Democratic camp - the DLCers. Blaming the Republicans will be an excellent strategy after the primaries, but right now we need to pick the right Democrat.