Rivals Denounce Clinton’s Iran Vote

[Omaha Steve]

Source: NY Times

By Christine Hauser and Jeff Zeleny

The Bush administration’s call for sanctions against Tehran on Thursday set off another round of attacks by Hillary Rodham Clinton’s chief rivals, John Edwards and Barack Obama, for her recent Senate vote supporting a measure to designate Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist group.

In a statement released from his headquarters in Chapel Hill, N.C., Mr. Edwards, who is on a campaign swing in Iowa, said that Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have again “rattled their sabres in their march toward military action,” and that Senator Clinton’s actions “undermine the American people’s opposition to war with Iran.”

Mrs. Clinton voted on a measure that asked the Bush administration to declare Iran’s 125,000-member Revolutionary Guard Corps a foreign terrorist organization. She and 75 other senators voted in favor ‘’in order to apply greater diplomatic pressure on Iran,'’ according to a statement she put out after the vote. But Mr. Edwards has said that the measure gives the Bush administration the leeway to go to war against Iran.

“I learned a clear lesson from the lead up to the Iraq War in 2002: if you give this president an inch, he will take a mile — and launch a war,” Mr. Edwards said. “Senator Clinton apparently learned a different lesson. Instead of blocking George Bush’s new march to war, Senator Clinton and others are enabling him once again.

Read more: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/25/rivals-denounce-clintons-iran-vote/

[WCGreen]

1. What the hell is wrong with her....

[OhioChick]

5. Good Question. n/t

[John Q. Citizen]

11. Hillary is a Hawk. She believes in projecting American military might to solve

problems.

[MethuenProgressive]

2. Obama skipped the vote, Edwards quit the Senate

That's real Courage, that is...
:eyes:

[JTFrog]

4. What?

Obama wasn't there because Harry Reid told him that there were "no more votes" scheduled for that day, so it was safe for him to leave DC.

Edwards gave up his senate seat because when he ran for VP. That's dishonorable?

[MethuenProgressive]

6. You buy that story?

That 'Reid told him that there were "no more votes" scheduled for that day'?
So all the other Senators were just 'lucky' enough to be there to vote?
And Edwards should never have surrendered his seat if he really wanted to do all the things he's claiming are important to him. But it's easier to throw rocks from the outside. isn't it?

[JTFrog]

9. For Edwards it was

an either/or situation. Either he ran for re-election to the Senate or he ran for President. He obviously thought the Presidency would be a more powerful position to accomplish what he really wanted. I think it took courage to put it out there on the line. He ended up being the VP candidate (and most likely was robbed of the position). He couldn't do both that November. I'm not primarily an Edwards supporter as I struggle to forgive his co-sponsoring of the IWR. But I do respect his populist stance and I do respect him for admitting his mistake and learning from the experience.

And you're darn right I trust Mr. Obama far more than I could ever trust Mr. Reid. And that was before I even knew that Mr. Reid's son works on HRC's campaign. :shrug:

[MethuenProgressive]

10. All senators who run for President need to resign their Senate seats?

Obama? Kerry? Clinton?

[JTFrog]

14. None of their

terms are/were expiring at the same time as the Presidential election. Edward's was. The others had/have the luxury of not having to give up their seats unless they win.

[John Q. Citizen]

12. It seems you throw rocks, from the outside, very easily.

[hedgehog]

15. Yes, Edwards surrendered his seat several years in advance

just so he wouldn't have to vote on Kyl -Lieberman! It had nothing to do with the fact that he wanted to take care of his wife and set up a presidential campaign!

[emilyg]

7. How convenient.

[superkia]

17. So who do you support then? Not Clinton, Edwards or Obama...

who? I'm not sure if your response was just pointing out the facts to those who haven't made up their mind or just trying to ignore what Clinton has done? Its hard to read people when I keep seeing this type of diversion in discussions, I would suggest you look into Dennis Kucinich, he has been on the right side even before the Iraq war. Thats real courage!

[rodeodance]

3. For someone who did not bother to show up to vote that day, Mr. Obama should

not be throwing stones:

Mr. Obama did not vote on the Iran resolution because he was campaigning in New Hampshire when it was being considered by the Senate. But he has still sought to make the resolution an issue, joining the rest of the Democratic field in criticizing Mrs. Clinton.

[John Q. Citizen]

13. Hillary is pro-war. That's why she supported invading Iraq. Look, maybe she had a point,

maybe it was the right thing to do, and down the road all of America will be thanking her. I don't know. But pretending Hillary isn't a hawk is just that. pretending.

[madrchsod]

8. no one should have shown up...

they all walked into a step-up and they did`t see it ? no wonder the presidents minions laugh at the house and senate leaders....rude pundit is right-they are the "cowards of the country"

[Omaha Steve]

16. 3 different reasons she voted yes

It depends on who she talked with for each reason. She is switching from primary to general election mode. Remember? But why she voted with W after the WMD fiasco, I have no idea.

[pingzing58]

18. Its about how dangerous a war hawk Hillary is and not about Obama and his vote!

We know where Obama and Edwards stand on the issue of a preemtive strike against Iran. Hillary is nothing more than a Bushie at this point.