Clinton Defends Iraq Vote: Says “I’m Willing to Be Held Accountable”
(CBS)
MISSOULA, MONT. -- During a campaign rally in northwest Montana, Hillary Clinton defended her vote for the war in Iraq saying “I’m very comfortable that I made a sincere vote based on my best assessment at the time, and I am more than willing to be held accountable for it.”
Clinton, who spoke before a crowd of about 1,500 supporters at an airport hangar in Missoula, was asked about her war vote during the question and answer session. It's the second time in two days that Clinton has been asked to explain her decision.
“I have said on many occasions that if I had known then what I know now, I never would have voted that way.” Clinton said stopping short of saying that her vote was a mistake, something that anti-war critics continue to hold against her.
“It seems very self-evident today, all these years later that everybody should have known what wasn’t there, but even the Iraqis, their generals and their officials did not know what wasn’t there,” Clinton said.
Clinton’s response to her vote has been the most comprehensive she’s had at a rally in quite some time. She went through a laundry list of reasons why she made her decision. Perhaps the most interesting was that Clinton said she took into account Saddam Hussein’s fragile state of mind saying that “he was a megalomaniac” and went on to say that Hussein would feel pressured to “do something” given Osama bin Laden's ascent in the world of terrorism.
“We knew that psychologically, the idea that Osama bin Laden would now be given the top spot, so to speak, among extremists would be very hard for Saddam to take and would probably encourage him to do something.”
Clinton urged voters to consider both her record and the record of her opponent, Barack Obama. Clinton said, “I had to make a decision. I had to cast a vote. I give credit to my opponent for making a speech, but a speech is not a decision and I had to make a decision.”
“You are judged by your actions and actions are a legitimate basis by which to make that decision moving forward,” Clinton added.
She also took a swipe at President Bush, virtually accusing him of selling voters a bill of goods during his 2000 presidential campaign.
“President Bush campaigned back in 2000 as a compassionate conservative. People loved it, nobody knew what that meant but people loved it. It was something new; it sounded real good. Compassion is good, being conservative on some things is good. So heck, lets take a chance, compassionate conservative? Ok, let’s roll the dice. He was neither. And we have been living with the consequences ever since,” she said.
Later, Clinton joked about being the only female presidential candidate, asking the audience, "Do you realize how much longer it takes me to get ready than my two opponents?"
"I think I should get points for working hard as I do plus having to spend so much time to get ready," Clinton quipped.
The secrets of tennis legend 
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 33 Commentshttp://www.youtube.com/result
s?search_query=Hillary+Mad as Hell&search_type=
(You can also type in "Hillary mad as hell" in the youtube search field to retrieve this video.)
Hillary did make a floor speech the day she voted for the Iraq war. She went on and on about her reasoning but the gist of it was she was relying on the stance her husband had taken in his administration rather than reading the new NIE rpeort AND that she cast the vote *with conviction*.
There were 22 other Senators that voted against the war and spoke just as eloquently as Hillary on the floor at the time. They exercised far better judgment and were actually prophetic in their estimation of what would happen by casting a vote for war.
Then there''s the pesky idea that Hillary voted AGAINST the Levin amendment to that war vote which would have actually accomplished the continued inspectors role as Hillary so loves to site now as her reasoning for voting for war.
THEN she adds insult to injury by voting for war with IRAN...the same sort of authorization that this administration used to invade Iraq.
There is NO excuse or explaining away Hillary''s stance on these votes. She is either a complete hawk OR she was voting simply to position herself for a Presidential run...
Either is unconscionable as she was playing with the lives of our young people...some of the best and brightest this nation has to offer and she''s using them as ploys in her power grab game.
That is not leadership, that alone disqualifies her from holding the highest office in the land.
But Hillary Clinton, yes. A New York Senator who actually has a record to examine, and welcomes the American public to hold her accountable for it, including the so-called "war vote."
Hillary Clinton has said that vote was one of the toughest decisions she''s had to make. To understand that, read the speech from the Senate floor that she made before casting her vote: http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html
The speech goes into detail about what she thought the priorities were then, and why she cast her vote as she did. She faced an awesome responsibility with courage and thoughtfulness.
On the other hand, Obama was not around when the "war" vote was taken. He''s said himself that he could not say how he would have voted. Yet now his "anti-war" stance is his main platform. He claims he "voted against the war" when he wasn''t even in the Senate yet. That''s just plain dishonest.
When he got to the Senate, he got to be head of a subcommittee on foreign relations in Europe. In two years he didn''t call one meeting. Not one--and he''s said so himself. He did not face his responsibility--he didn''t even show up.
I want a President who can grapple with the tough issues facing our country at home and around the world.
That President is Hillary Clinton.
But Hillary Clinton, yes. A New York Senator who actually has a record to examine, and welcomes the American public to hold her accountable for it, including the so-called "war vote."
Hillary Clinton has said that vote was one of the toughest decisions she''s had to make. To understand that, read the speech from the Senate floor that she made before casting her vote: http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html
The speech goes into detail about what she thought the priorities were then, and why she cast her vote as she did. She faced an awesome responsibility with courage and thoughtfulness.
On the other hand, Obama was not around when the "war" vote was taken. He''s said himself that he could not say how he would have voted. Yet now his "anti-war" stance is his main platform. He claims he "voted against the war" when he wasn''t even in the Senate yet. That''s just plain dishonest.
When he got to the Senate, he got to be head of a subcommittee on foreign relations in Europe. In two years he didn''t call one meeting. Not one--and he''s said so himself. He did not face his responsibility--he didn''t even show up.
I want a President who can grapple with the tough issues facing our country at home and around the world.
That President is Hillary Clinton.
But Hillary Clinton, yes. A New York Senator who actually has a record to examine, and welcomes the American public to hold her accountable for it, including the so-called "war vote."
Hillary Clinton has said that vote was one of the toughest decisions she''s had to make. To understand that, read the speech from the Senate floor that she made before casting her vote: http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html
The speech goes into detail about what she thought the priorities were then, and why she cast her vote as she did. She faced an awesome responsibility with courage and thoughtfulness.
On the other hand, Obama was not around when the "war" vote was taken. He''s said himself that he could not say how he would have voted. Yet now his "anti-war" stance is his main platform. He claims he "voted against the war" when he wasn''t even in the Senate yet. That''s just plain dishonest.
When he got to the Senate, he got to be head of a subcommittee on foreign relations in Europe. In two years he didn''t call one meeting. Not one--and he''s said so himself. He did not face his responsibility--he didn''t even show up.
I want a President who can grapple with the tough issues facing our country at home and around the world.
That President is Hillary Clinton.
But Hillary Clinton, yes. A New York Senator who actually has a record to examine, and welcomes the American public to hold her accountable for it, including the so-called "war vote."
Hillary Clinton has said that vote was one of the toughest decisions she''s had to make. To understand that, read the speech from the Senate floor that she made before casting her vote: http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html
The speech goes into detail about what she thought the priorities were then, and why she cast her vote as she did. She faced an awesome responsibility with courage and thoughtfulness.
On the other hand, Obama was not around when the "war" vote was taken. He''s said himself that he could not say how he would have voted. Yet now his "anti-war" stance is his main platform. He claims he "voted against the war" when he wasn''t even in the Senate yet. That''s just plain dishonest.
When he got to the Senate, he got to be head of a subcommittee on foreign relations in Europe. In two years he didn''t call one meeting. Not one--and he''s said so himself. He did not face his responsibility--he didn''t even show up.
I want a President who can grapple with the tough issues facing our country at home and around the world.
That President is Hillary Clinton.
But Hillary Clinton, yes. A New York Senator who actually has a record to examine, and welcomes the American public to hold her accountable for it, including the so-called "war vote."
Hillary Clinton has said that vote was one of the toughest decisions she''s had to make. To understand that, read the speech from the Senate floor that she made before casting her vote: http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html
The speech goes into detail about what she thought the priorities were then, and why she cast her vote as she did. She faced an awesome responsibility with courage and thoughtfulness.
On the other hand, Obama was not around when the "war" vote was taken. He''s said himself that he could not say how he would have voted. Yet now his "anti-war" stance is his main platform. He claims he "voted against the war" when he wasn''t even in the Senate yet. That''s just plain dishonest.
When he got to the Senate, he got to be head of a subcommittee on foreign relations in Europe. In two years he didn''t call one meeting. Not one--and he''s said so himself. He did not face his responsibility--he didn''t even show up.
I want a President who can grapple with the tough issues facing our country at home and around the world.
That President is Hillary Clinton.
It was the biggest vote of her career and she blew it.
That wasn''t enough though...she went on to vote against the Levin amendment that really would have insisted on more inspections, AND then she added insult to injury with her support of the Kyl-Liebermann let''s go to war with Iran vote.
Face it...she was positioning herself to run for Prez in a country who''s mood she greatly misread. She will likely lose her chance to win because of that sort of posturing.
It was the biggest vote of her career and she blew it.
That wasn''t enough though...she went on to vote against the Levin amendment that really would have insisted on more inspections, AND then she added insult to injury with her support of the Kyl-Liebermann let''s go to war with Iran vote.
Face it...she was positioning herself to run for Prez in a country who''s mood she greatly misread. She will likely lose her chance to win because of that sort of posturing.
It was the biggest vote of her career and she blew it.
That wasn''t enough though...she went on to vote against the Levin amendment that really would have insisted on more inspections, AND then she added insult to injury with her support of the Kyl-Liebermann let''s go to war with Iran vote.
Face it...she was positioning herself to run for Prez in a country who''s mood she greatly misread. She will likely lose her chance to win because of that sort of posturing.
I''m impressed with the sanity of your remarks. Making decisions are the difficult part of everybodys job.
Why don''t people understand such a simple concept?
Obama''s Negatives have grown since he began this campaign. The nature of his disingenuous character is growing by the day. His backers and handlers are trying desperately to protect this messiah type persona they have invented. But such glaring negatives such as his board membership with fellow Board member William Ayers(Weatherunderground founder and terrorist who bombed U.S. Government buildings in 1971)at Woods Fund in 2001(9/11)and approving $40,000.00 for the Arab American Action Network. Google Woods Fund; its all there under their organisational rendering. Look under allocations for 2001. There you will find Ayers and Obama''s names on the board of directors. Looking further in dispersements at top of the list is Arab American Action Network. This is not privy infomation. It is on the web for all to see.
Obama''s paranoia about his associations with Rezko are open news. He has place one of his campaign staff members at Federal court to warn him[Obama] of any occuring negative implications. Probably has his passport and airline tickets at the ready.
This fraud says what the audience wants to hear to get them like fools behind him and behind their backs he stands for the opposite.
Vote for me on what i say and not on what i do or will do.
All those americans who have so far supported him will look like fools when the final outcome is known. All those americans who are yet to vote, exercise your sound judgement and not let wonderful speeches mislead you into supporting a liar, a deceiver, a divider and a crook.
I didn''t hear ANY controversial remarks at Wright''s church......Ok, I did hear some controversial statements in Wright''s church.
Don''t worry Canada-we just say that in our campaign speech-we don''t really mean it.
President Kennedy is responsible for my father coming to this country.....what do you mean that is impossible?
Obama''s Oil Spill
March 31, 2008
Obama says he doesn''t take money from oil companies. We say that''s a little too slick.
Summary
In a new ad, Obama says, "I don%u2019t take money from oil companies."
Technically, that''s true, since a law that has been on the books for more than a century prohibits corporations from giving money directly to any federal candidate. But that doesn%u2019t distinguish Obama from his rivals in the race.
We find the statement misleading:
* Obama has accepted more than $213,000 from individuals who work for companies in the oil and gas industry and their spouses.
* Two of Obama''s bundlers are top executives at oil companies and are listed on his Web site as raising between $50,000 and $100,000 for the presidential hopeful.
were precarious. We were worried about sniper fire and were prepared to
rush off the tarmac when we landed.
In their single-minded focus on the landing in Tuzla, reporters and
commentators have omitted any discussion of what Mrs. Clinton
accomplished on her trip. In addition to showing support for our troops
and for the peace accords in Bosnia, Mrs. Clinton met with Bosnian
religious leaders, women and community activists and, when she returned
to Washington, was able to give administration officials her firsthand
assessment of the nascent reconstruction effort.
After leaving Bosnia, she met with leaders of Turkey and Greece and in
those countries promoted efforts on behalf of international development
and democracy. In Istanbul, five years before 9/11, Mrs. Clinton
presciently convened representatives of some of the world?s major
religions to advance a dialogue about religious reconciliation and ways
to counter religious extremism.
The video of her arrival on the tarmac in Bosnia may be great theater
and easy fodder for commentators, but it shouldn?t be allowed to obscure
what else was happening on this important trip when the cameras weren?t
rolling.
Tuzla and were told the tarmac ceremony might be canceled or curtailed
due to sniper fire from the surrounding hillsides. The first lady and
Chelsea Clinton were moved to the armored cockpit for the landing.
Armored vehicles were placed around the tarmac, and Apache helicopters
hovered overhead.
In a recent e-mail message to a British blogger, Ejup Ganic, who was the
acting president of Bosnia during Mrs. Clinton?s visit, wrote: ?I
remember that visit quite well. Although the NATO troops were in Tuzla,
we still believed that some positions on the hills were occupied by
radical Serbs, so I was worried about the overall safety.? The planned
welcoming ceremony was shortened, he said, but it still lasted a bit
longer than expected because a nongovernment group brought along a
little girl to sing to the first lady.
Later, Mrs. Clinton flew from Tuzla to two military outposts by
helicopter, escorted by Apache gunships.
As has been reported, Mrs. Clinton?s trip to Bosnia included a U.S.O.
component with the comedian Sinbad and the singer Sheryl Crow. The
helicopters that carried them to performances at American base camps
zigzagged just above the trees to avoid potential ground fire, according
to Carey Cavanaugh, who was then a State Department official traveling
with Sinbad, and helicopters flew alongside to deal with the threat of
anti-aircraft fire or snipers. These facts explain why many of us,
including the first lady,
By LISSA MUSCATINE and MELANNE VERVEER
Published: April 1, 2008
Washington
AS staff members who traveled with the first lady, Hillary Rodham
Clinton, to Bosnia in March 1996, we have followed with more than
passing interest the extensive news coverage of her landing in Tuzla.
Video footage clearly shows that Mrs. Clinton?s assertions that she
landed ?under fire? and that the arrival ceremony was canceled were
wrong. She said so herself last week.
Yet even since she acknowledged her mistake, the commentary has
continued unabated. Reports are now being embellished (to borrow the
term du jour) to suggest that Bosnia was not really a danger zone. Her
visiting American troops on a peacekeeping mission in a hostile
environment is now being treated as if it were a trip to the beach.
During a week of nonstop coverage, few journalists went beyond the
irresistible video footage to ask what else happened on this trip and
how Mrs. Clinton might have erred in the details about the landing in
Tuzla. So here are some facts that provide context:
We flew in a C-17 cargo plane from Germany to Bosnia precisely because
it was capable of steep descents and ascents into and out of areas of
conflict. We were issued flak jackets
If you want to take a lesson from this, perhaps it would be to not vote for someone you don''t know well, who doesn''t have a record. People made the mistake of believing the words of Bush, let''s not make the same mistake again by electing Obama. You might not love Hillary, but you know she will work hard and accomplish her goals of improving the economy, healthcare and ending the war. I don''t feel we can take a chance the state our country is in, I''m voting for the sure, proven, vetted canidate, the most qualified.
He wanted to give a speech after the Wright fiasco.
Speeches are great because you get to answer your own questions, and Obama has used that to his advantage very well. It is true that he didn''t have to make a decision and could afford to be righteous. Almost everyone who was in the position to vote, did vote for the war.
That was because Bush lied and told everyone-yes, he does have weapons of mass destruction. I think when you are trying to protect the citizens of this country and being lied to at the same time, it is an impossible situation.....Obama knows that very well. It is an unfair and disrespectful attack on all of the people who had to actually agonize over that decision. Especially coming from a guy whose records indicate he is a lot more talk than walk.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 33 Comments