Hillary Clinton Says She Wouldn't Have Voted For Iraq War

[RamboLiberal]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2006/12/hillary_clinton.html

As Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton continues to assess a possible presidential candidacy and the contours of a Democratic nomination fight, she has taken another step away from her 2002 vote authorizing President Bush to attack Iraq by saying that she "wouldn't have voted that way" if she knew everything she knows now.

Clinton has often been asked if she regrets her vote authorizing military action and she usually answers that question with an artful dodge, saying that she accepts responsibility for the vote and suggesting that if the Senate had all the information it has today (no WMD, troubled post-war military planning, etc. . .), there would never have been a vote on the Senate floor.

However, she has never gone as far as some of her potential rivals for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination -- who also voted for the war -- and called her vote a mistake or declared that she would have cast her vote differently with all the facts presently available to her -- until now.

This morning on NBC's "Today" show, Sen. Clinton was asked about her 2002 vote and offered a slightly evolved answer. "Obviously, if we knew then what we know now, there wouldn't have been a vote," she said in her usual refrain before adding, "and I certainly wouldn't have voted that way."

[antiimperialist]

1. Hillary going with the flow once again

Hillary will support any idea that is supported by a majority of Americans at the time.
She's an obsesive poll-watcher.

[last1standing]

18. The majority has been against this war for a year now.

I guess she's an obsessive out of date poll watcher. :eyes:

Seriously, she's not my preferred candidate, either, but at least criticize her on the substance, not some spur of the moment, made up slander.

[barb162]

42. what's wrong with that.

When I vote for someone, I want them doing what I want, not what they want

[Stuckinthebush]

47. Perhaps it is a sign that she is not really a leader but a follower

and a late follower at that.

Yes, it is wonderful to have people in power who listen to constituents, but in Sen. Clinton's case it seems as though she makes decisions based not on conviction but on political expediency.

The little jury inside my head is still out on the good Senator, but I must confess that her actions don't make me want to run out and campaign for her. I'll happily vote for her if she gets the nomination (assuming she runs), but she doesn't inspire me to fight for her in the primaries.

[theoldman]

2. Anyone in our government should have known better,

I am neither a Senator or Representative and I knew better. These people has access to a lot more information than I did. Not knowing is not a good excuse for Senator Clinton or anyone else in her position.

[laconicsax]

4. Exactly! nt.

[Kelvin Mace]

13. There are only two possible explanation for the vote

1) She agreed with the neocons.

2) She believed what Bush said.

If #1, she is scum and we should never vote for her.

If #2, she is an idiot and we should never vote for her.

[Kahuna]

14. Bzzzt. Like Kerry and Edwards she knew that she planned an

eventual run for the WH, and didn't want to be branded, 'weak on defense.'

[still_one]

17. either way it was an act of cowardice for anyone who voted for it

[barb162]

43. that's my recollection

Most Democrats were afraid of that

[Hell Hath No Fury]

50. And that makes her vote even more vile.

Allowing Americans and Iraqis to die because of Presidential ambitions is the lowest form of politics. I held my nose and voted for Kerry last time despite his shitty IWR vote, but I will not be doing that again. I am done with selling my political soul.

[tblue37]

27. No--there is a third explanation--the one

that explains almost all of the Democratic votes: They were afraid of being labeled soft on terror and weak on national security. They knew the media and the American public would not hear reason, but would consider them "surrender monkeys," so they did what they thought best for their own political future, not what was best for the country.

[PassingFair]

36. "almost all of the Democratic votes"

*ullshit!

The MAJORITY of Democrats in the house voted NO.

These Senators voted NO:
Akaka (D-HI)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Chafee (R-RI)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Graham (D-FL)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Reed (D-RI)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wellstone (D-MN)
Wyden (D-OR)



"Almost All" is total crap.

[tblue37]

39. I mean it explains almost all the Dem votes FOR the IRW.

It explains John's. John's, Hilary's, etc. I am only referring to the Dems who voted FOR the IRW, not to the ones who voted against it.

[antiimperialist]

3. April 2004: Hillary Clinton: No regret on Iraq vote

What does Hillary know now that she did not know in April 2004?

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

[RamboLiberal]

5. That Barack Obama is gaining in the polls

and passing her by saying he wouldn't have voted for the war. That's what she knows that she didn't know in 2004.

[theoldman]

7. Hard to argue with that point.

[antiimperialist]

9. Well, to be fair, he's only gaining in one poll

A poll commissioned by a Republican.

[RamboLiberal]

Well let's say he's got all the buzz

and not much of it is negative at this point. Not to say the media isn't setting him up to shoot him down like they did to Dean.

[90-percent]

6. don't buy it

If little old me, as an average internet user with average research skills, could figure out it was a crock back in Jan 2003 when I went down to DC for the mass protests for the first time in my life, then surely a Senator with the resources a Senator should have, would have known the facts I knew during the run up to this illegal stupid War.

Any Senator that voted for it is a political coward, in my opinion. The times in 2003 were so different then. The whipped up patriotic-fear-froth was seductive to those with little backbone or principles or basic knowledge of the Constitution and the history of the United States.

-85% Jimmy

[RamboLiberal]

8. And Hillary had the advantage that she could ask Bill Clinton

who had seen the highest intelligence reports when he was in the WH.

[theoldman]

11. The last person a wife listens to is her husband.

Why should Hillary be different. OK ladies, flame away.

[Nite Owl]

10. The polls are clear about how

people feel now so it's safe to say this. No leadership Hillary, she never takes the chance of actually leading on anything, it may turn out to be wrong.

[saigon68]

41. A yellow streak a mile wide down her back

Too bad she didn't visit us here in 2003 (when I started being an asshole here)

She would have seen that this forum had the Pukes wired and pointed out it would be another Iraq-Nam

LOL she is the worst this party has to offer.

She reminds me of Humpty Dumpty Humphrey.

No back bone, all bullshit. A tool of Richard Daly and the corporate boys and ultimately a LOSER

[Kelvin Mace]

12. Too little, too late

I am so fed up with politicians who can't take an ethical stand because their consultants control everything they say.

[AndyTiedye]

15. No Thanks, I Won't Have Another Helping of Albatross Today

[still_one]

16. Sorry Hilary the Senate DID HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION

That is why Boxer, Feingold, Byrd, and others voted against it. Not only because the war was based on a lie, but most of all because it was a violation of the Constitution to give the executive branch power that was only granted to Congress

[ryanmuegge]

29. Yep. They all knew it was a load of bullshit.

Only a few decided to choose moral (and practical) principles over the "be tough on national security" political sentiment that was so popular at the time. The whole "we were misled and didn't have all of the information" excuse is a typical whiney, dishonest Clintocrat excuse. It wouldn't surprise me if, in fact, the Democrats did see the doctored intelligence from Cheney. Regardless, any idiot could tell you that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and that millitary was totally decimated after the first adventure in the Gulf.

[harun]

49. CORRECT

most of all because it was a violation of the Constitution to give the executive branch power that was only granted to Congress

All righteous men and woman of the Senate should have boycotted that vote due to it violating the constitution. They should have had a vote for WAR, not a vote for giving the power to the president.

The Senate wanted to not be held accountable for any possible reprecussions of a bad war by being able to blame it on the president and the president (the current one) just wanted the power because he thinks he is the emperor of Earth.

[Deb]

19. If only she had listened to the Conscience of the Senate

or her constituents.


In 2000 and 2006 her campaign sign was in my yard, it will not be there again until 2012.

[NeoConsSuck]

20. Truly amazing

the majority of posters at DU knew the WMD was a crock of shit (along with a majority of the world population), yet a senator, with all the info they have at their disposal, was fooled.

You'll never get my vote.

[Barrett808]

21. You had to WANT to be fooled by that lame-ass "secret briefing"

I mean, really: Saddam launches model airplanes filled with nerve gas from offshore barges? That story doesn't work in a Batman movie.

[Contrite]

22. Flip flop!

Hand this woman a pair of them.

[Turbineguy]

23. That's just a crock.

The way to deal with it is to say "I was wrong" and leave it at that. Everybody knew Bush was lying. And even if he hadn't lied about the WMD's it was still obvious they had no plan.

She had to have known that Bush appointees were cooking the facts to suit Bush's desire to attack.

She must have gotten plenty of letters from constituents explaining this.

To try and weasel out of the responsibility is so.... Republican.

[MilesColtrane]

48. Some people are just incapable of saying "I was wrong."

One of them runs the country now.

I don't want another one.

[pinto]

24. Well, that was quick.

She's a Democratic Senator from the 3rd most populous state in the country, re-elected with 67% of the vote in 2006. That says something.

I understand constructive criticism, but truth be told, sometimes I just don't get the vitriol leveled at Sen. Clinton, from both Republicans and fellow Democrats.

If she wants to run in 2008, more power to her, in my book. It looks to be an interesting Democratic primary season...we'll see what happens then.

:shrug:

*only my personal 2 cents here*

[stillcool]

25. I feel like sticking my fingers in my ears...

blah-blah-blah...These people treat the 'truth' like their investments...never go near the principle.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

26. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a Merry Christmas so now many won't..

Regretting a bad critical decision still makes it a critically bad decision and when it destroys 1000's of lives and ends up costing trillions of bucks, it should disqualify you from ever aspiring to be CIC. At this deplorably low level of incompetence, don't even think about asking for a "do over."

[ryanmuegge]

28. You had your fucking chance. Fuck you.

.

[Jacobin]

30. Oh, Now that we've LOST.

ANd I'll guaran Damn Tee you that if we had 'won' (impossible really, but you know) she would have been all for it.

Fuckwit.

ALL the information necessary to know this was a con job was available to her and she was STUPID and had HORRIBLE JUDGMENT> NOT good qualifications for a presidential candidate

[rodeodance]

31. This has been a long time a'coming Hil. Better late than never.

[ckramer]

32. Guys, Hillary is trying to suck you up!

Now please take the shirt off and get yourself comfortable...

[brentspeak]

33. Doesn't matter. She's not going to be the nominee.

Concentrate on your Senate duties, Hillary.

[VegasWolf]

34. I'm guessing she will! She will suck up all of the money like a giant vacuum

cleaner just to further the DLC dream. She needs to be stopped.

[Robbien]

35. Regular as a clock. It is primary time so she's swaying a bit left.

She'll turn hard right again for the General election.

Boring.

[Tellurian]

37. I might agree with all the posts here...

but why add insult to injury?

Why would I let a republican use "me" to turn against my own kind?

The Iraq question asked of Hillary is what is termed a "loaded" question.

Knowing this, she had 2 choices, neither one would produce a positive outcome.

So, ask yourself, did the Republicans achieve their goal?
Target Hillary with a loaded question (like Iraq) and let her own kind eat her up.

Congratulations, Republicans will be waiting to hand you your 4 stars on election night.

[LynnTheDem]

38. I knew then everything she knows now.

Why didn't she?

LIAR.

STUPID.

Which is it? Either is unacceptable in any politician.

[IndianaGreen]

40. Hillary is not stupid

but she certainly is deceitful.

[ShortnFiery]

44. Every swish and sway of her lauded opinions insults the intelligence

of the average American. All the money and pundits in this world will not buy her enough votes to win the Democratic Nomination, much less Presidency. The American People are waking up to this disastrous presidency and paying attention. The WORKING (vice INVESTOR) Classes don't want to be cajoled ... they want results, i.e., decent living-wage jobs. :(

Carville and Begala (her advisor's) need to wake up and smell the disenchantment.

[Solly Mack]

45. I'm sure all the dead, tortured, and maimed appreciate every

member of the US Congress, both House and Senate, who have distanced themselves from their IWR vote in one way or another - for whatever reasons, expedient or otherwise, they had for doing so.

Heaping ashes with the remains of lives forever lost for lies.

[Roland99]

46. With apologies to Dion: "Cuz I'm the panderer. Yeah, the panderer."

Seems I'm using that more and more these days with a variety of poseurs...er...politicians.

[Az_lefty]

51. they were too afraid of being called unpatriotic to call bullshit on this war

:grr:

[nolabels]

52. She is either bat-shit crazy or just a crummy liar

Many or most of us DUers knew it was a bad move and or vote in 2002 and we were not even privy to all the resources a senator has......


Why doesn't she just go jump in lake or something already :shrug:

[Miss Chybil]

53. Sounds like Kerry and Edwards and...

how many others who voted for it before they voted against it? I accept her change of heart. I accept all of their change of hearts - as long as they figure out a way to contain the damage, with a quickness.

[greenman3610]

54. that sucks.

but it might resonate with a lot of the lazy, shit-head public who
were stampeded by mass media and political whores into
supporting this shit.
at least, that's what she's calculating.

those of us who were right all
along will, of course, never be
forgiven.

[Broadslidin]

55. She Stated Clearly In Her Pro-Imperialism Speech: "I Trust The President"

:hide:

[mitchum]

56. And the wind blows this way and the wind blows that way...

[closeupready]

57. I'm not sure what people here want from her.

She's essentially admitted that she made a mistake.

She's not the person I want to see win the primary, but at a minimum, this demonstrates that she's capable of listening to voters and changing direction.

Isn't that - in isolation - a positive trait?

[VegasWolf]

58. Hillary wouldn't have voted for the Iraq war before she would've voted for the war!! nt

[SOS]

59. Nothing new here

Clinton's been using the "if we knew then what we know now" line for a long time.
Her credibility on Iraq is zero.