Hillary Clinton on her Iran vote

Run time: 01:11 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GInILh8jX0   Posted on YouTube: October 08, 2007 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: October 08, 2007 By DU Member: ariesgem Views on DU: 2045

 

"(4) to support the prudent and calibrated use of all instruments of United States national power in Iraq, including diplomatic, economic, intelligence, and military instruments, in support of the policy described in


paragraph (3) with respect to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and its proxies;

that the United States should designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps as a foreign terrorist organization under section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act and place the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps on the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists, as established under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and initiated under Executive Order 13224;"


That right there is what she voted for. To call the Islamic revolutionary guard terrorists, and use "military instruments with respect to Iran." She can say what she want, but her vote matters more.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110asynlB:e0:

The clause you list as (4) was removed from the resolution before Hillary voted for it.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/9/26/142611/801

leading Democrats seem to slam Hillary's position. Jim Webb: "Webb said that amendment's attempt to categorize the Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp as "a foreign terrorist organization" would, for all practical purposes, "mandate" the military option against Iran. "It could be read as tantamount to a declaration of war. What do we do with terrorist organizations? If they are involved against us, we attack them."

Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is an extension of the Iranian government so what does it mean when you declare them a terrorist organization?

only gives Bush the authority to carry out economic sanctions against them.

Are you sure Webb said what he said for the amended version? He might have said it for the first version.

She voted for Patriot act.
She voted for Iraq war.
She voted for Iran (semi-kind-of-may-be-war-is-ok).

x(

So get off their candidates back, we don't speak for everyone you know, some people like the thought of thousands of people losing their lives and thousands of family members lives destroyed because of it. Get over it, if people want to vote to kill more innocent people with Americans tax dollars, so be it! :sarcasm:

say anything to get elected...Hillary

She doesn't seem to have the people skills that her hubby has.

That is something most don't do. I'm primary - voting for Kucinich, so I need more of Hillary to listening to me before I give up on what I want for Our Country.

were saying last night. They claimed she called an audience member a plant and blew up at him.

Hillary was reasonable to assume that the audience member's information had been sent to him. Most of us get our information second hand. I don't think she meant to imply anything other that she thought he probably received the wrong copy of the resolution. The audience member was the one who was testy and easily offended.

The false story about Hillary calling the audience member a plant is all over the media and the net now. Its a shame people aren't wise to the fact that many lies are told about Hillary and its best to wait for all the facts to come out before judging.

I watched the entire exchange on ABC news. She insinuated that that voter was given the question by someone to ask her. The man was very upset by her comment (and rightly so) and said that the question was based on his own research.

Why is it that anyone who disagrees with a position that Hillary Clinton takes is automatically branded with the flame term "hater".

What has happened to democracy? Are we not allowed to have an informed opinion if it goes against what Hillary is saying? Are people that disagree with her position not "good democrats?? Appalling!

the same question 3 times approached in the same way recently. Then she apologized.

I don't see her insinuating that at all. ABC News is as bad as Fox and their spin is right wing agitprop. She was talking about the resolution and assumed it was sent to him. How does that imply he's a plant? Its the old right wing game of twisting what somebody on the left said. Taken in context, all it meant was Hillary believed the audience member was sent the wrong resolution.

I don't see the big relevance of whether the audience member got it on his own or not. So what? Why did the audience member make a big deal about it if he wasn't trying to create a scene?

I don't brand everybody who disagrees with Hillary a hater. I've called a group here Hillary haters because that's what they look like to me. They tell lies about Hillary like this one about the "plant." They say the worst things imaginable about her. If they don't hate her, they certainly dislike her very much.

I've tried using "Hillary slammers." I've asked the group what they'd like to be called and they haven't given me a label they'd accept. I don't wish to pretend they don't exist as a group.

Who said you weren't a good Democrat or not allowed to have an opinion? Can't I disagree with the Hillary slams without being accused of trying to take away somebody's right to their own opinion? I did nothing of the kind.

The electorate will make up their own minds. It was also on MSNBC with David Shuster tonight. He made the same observation. I would hope you wouldn't compare Shuster to Fox anchors. And yes, Hillary supporters automatically jump down your throat if you disagree with her positions, even when they are rationally thought out and based on fact.

You want to give "them" a label? Interesting...and offensive.

I don't know who I'm going to vote for in the primaries yet, but with the attitude and frankly rabid nature of some Hillary Clinton supporters, it clearly makes me wonder what we are getting ourselves into she wins the nomination.

Bush and friends tried to stifle independent thought to create an uninformed populus who would be blind loyalists to Bush and his policies. I sincerely hope that is not what we are going to get with a Hillary campaign and ultimate presidency should she win first the primaries then the general.

If you support her, or anyone who takes her position, and have actually read the amendment, you do possess a neocon ideology.

it as a distraction from the real problem that people who don't want hillary have REAL REASONS.

They think if they spam "hillary haters" enough people will surrender in their psyche OP war and vote for hillary. Sounds crazy..I know.

I only wish the _________ would listen to reason. We have videotape of Hillary calmly addressing a crowd member in Iowa. The _________ said Hillary called the guy a plant and blew up at him. The tapes shows nothing of the kind. Does eyewitness evidence change minds? I don't see any.

I'm trying on another thread to persuade those who think Hillary voted to authorize force against Iran that there the president doesn't have statutory authority to attack groups based solely on a terrorist designation. The president did have authority to attack terrorist groups who took part in 9/11. The ________ are making quite a ruckus about Hillary's vote and I doubt any will change their minds even if I provide the link:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22357.pdf

I'm trying to deal in logic and reason and I keep running into emotion.

_______ = anything you think is appropriate to call the group that__________. Oh my! How can I say it?

if she wants to promote an amendment to the constitution to ban a citizen's right to burn the American flag, then I hate her to the core. I have no problem with you calling me that. :thumbsup:

Why did she vote in favor of such an idiotic measure if not for something more than principle which she clearly abandoned and time is going to show us a much different outcome of that very stupidity and its called backfire. It was pure Joe Lieberman working blatantly for A!PEC and for war with Iran. Stand up all the straw men you want it still boils down to that even if the bill was leveraged down to make it more palatable. It is still shit porridge with rose petals strewn over it to hide the horendous smell of pure murderous waste.

I don't like Hillary will not vote for her in the primary - and was just about resolved to vote for her in the general if she is the nominee - THIS VOTE has put me back where I started. No matter how they amended it - IT SHOULD HAVE NOT COME FOR A VOTE - For the LOVE OF GOD this resolution was brought forward by Joe LIEberman - does anyone doubt he probably got marching orders from the White House or maybe from Cheney to propose this - this is give the freak in chief an inch and he'll take a mile - WHAT FOOLS they were for bringing this forward - Biden and Dodd had the good sense to vote no and unfortunately Obama didn't have the balls to vote at all.....

Hillary is bought and paid for - is a war monger - stands for nothing but election - and I will continue to pray EVERY NIGHT as I have for months that SHE DOES NOT GET THE NOMINATION

keep defending her? What kind of Kool aid is she feeding people... I don't get it. Blind support of a candidate and party is how we are in the mess that we are.

I saw this article this morning in the New York Times about all the Dems which are going to help to re-authorize spying on U.S. Citizens.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/08/washington/09cnd-nsa.html?ei=5065&en=5614405c7a9db3a5&ex=1192507200&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print