Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

For those who missed the NPR debate today: Hillary called out on her Iran vote

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-04-07 08:49 PM
Original message
For those who missed the NPR debate today: Hillary called out on her Iran vote
DES MOINES, Iowa - Democratic rivals assailed front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton Tuesday for a vote against Iran that they portrayed as
misguided and dangerous in light of a new intelligence report that says the Iranians stopped pursuing a nuclear weapon years ago.

One month before Iowa's leadoff caucuses — in a debate broadcast only on radio — the presidential candidates stood together in welcoming the
report's assessment and criticizing President Bush's assertion that "nothing's changed" because of it. They divided on the three-month-old Senate
vote to designate Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization — a resolution that only Clinton supported among the Democratic candidates.
She said her vote was meant to encourage diplomacy, but several of her foes were having none of that and John Edwards said it sounded like war...
Edwards did confront Clinton on her characterization of her September Iran vote.

"Declaring a military group sponsored by the state of Iran a terrorist organization, that's supposed to be diplomacy?" Edwards interjected. "This has
to be considered in the context that Senator Clinton has said she agrees with George Bush terminology that we're in a global war on terror, then she
voted to declare a military group in Iran a terrorist organization. What possible conclusion can you reach other than we are at war?"

Clinton objected. "You know I understand politics and I understand making outlandish political charges, but this really goes way too far," said the
New York senator. She is locked in a tight three-way race with Edwards, a former senator from North Carolina, and Obama, a senator from Illinois,
in this first-voting state.

"None of us is advocating a rush to war," Clinton said.

Joe Biden, a senator from Delaware who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, didn't let that pass, telling Clinton that "terminology matters."

"It's not about not advocating a rush to war," he said. "I'm advocating no war."

Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd said he and others voted against the resolution because they felt it "specifically eliminated any option except the military
one."

"Those critical moments come periodically, but it demonstrates leadership on a critical issue such as this one," Dodd said... "Among the Democratic candidates," Edwards reminded listeners, "there's only one that voted for this resolution. And this is exactly what Bush and Cheney wanted."

<snip>

Clinton said it's clear that pressure on Iran has had an effect — a point disputed by Biden.

"With all due respect with anybody who thinks that pressure brought this about, let's get this straight. In 2003, they stopped their program," Biden said.


In the category of pandering to Iowans, Dodd took home the blue ribbon:

On China, none of the candidates was willing to raise import taxes to make higher-priced U.S. products more competitive with Chinese products. Edwards pledged that none of his children's Christmas toys would come from China, and Dodd interjected to up the ante.

"My toys are coming from Iowa," Dodd said in an appeal to the race's first voters.


Link to entire article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071205/ap_on_el_pr/democrats_debate;_ylt=Av.2sXdWS_kUnmE1xqen0QCyFz4D
Link to NPR report and audio of the debate (2 hours): http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16843353
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BobRossi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-04-07 09:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. Lil' Shrub.
Hillarious is an enabler, abusers can't abuse without enablers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-04-07 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Ouch.. sad but true. Never thought about it that way before. Good analogy. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-04-07 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Hillary will have to fight John McCain for that title.
Great nickname. Fits them both well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Triana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 01:56 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. wow...
...I'm just going to get on the flame suit and say:

BINGO!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rageneau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 12:48 AM
Response to Original message
4. Hillary's slip was showing on this one.
She did not need to assist Bush in any way regarding foreign policy. It was sabre-rattling to threaten Iran -- pointless sabre-rattling, as it turns out.

The other candidates were smart enough to do NOTHING that looked like capitulation to Bush's bellicosity. Hill didn't.

IMHO, a big mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 01:30 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Good analysis.
So much for her "experience" meme.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annie1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. the frightening thing about it is that no dem could talk her out of it...
it just shows me that she does not listen to reason. Even if she was going to almost have made the mistake, she listened to the advice of her campaign people and republicans over her democratic colleagues. She does some crazy-ass s--t sometimes. I'm having trouble understanding even why she thought it was a good idea. Even if she thought it would make her look tough and help her in the general election, did she really have so little faith in the ability of any democrat to win? surely she knew it would piss off people she needs in the future. I am baffled by her decision. Her colleagues seem disgusted with her over it. Baaaaaad move hil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annie1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 01:46 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. but then again, something like 28 other dems voted for it too...
so i dunno.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viva_La_Revolution Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 02:03 AM
Response to Reply #7
10. more than 13...
Edited on Wed Dec-05-07 02:05 AM by Viva_La_Revolution
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 02:08 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. But if she had led against it
How many of those votes would have been no. And how could a former President not have CIA contacts to tell him the truth on this NIE. There's just no explanation for her vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
killbotfactory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 01:58 AM
Response to Reply #4
9. She was assisting AIPAC, not Bush exactly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 02:13 AM
Response to Original message
12. Yes, and rightly so I might add
She really deserves a beating on this one. She can't say that she was deceived as she already used that one so she's stuck justifying a really, really stupid vote. This one might cost her the nomination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 02:31 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. "This one might cost her the nomination."
Too bad the debate wasn't televised. Another YouTube clip of these criticisms from the rest of the Democratic might have finished her off early.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beacool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-05-07 03:37 AM
Response to Original message
14. Why should she apologize?
There were 75 senators who voted on the Iran resolution. If she thinks that her vote was correct, then I prefer that she stand her ground and not capitulate to the left of the party. I rather have someone who stands by her convictions, even when I don't agree 100% with them. It would have been much easier for her to vote no or skip the vote altogether.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC