ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



Clinton justifies war vote, hits Obama

Posted: Sunday, January 13, 2008 10:31 AM by Domenico Montanaro



From NBC’s Domenico Montanaro
Clinton justified her 2002 Iraq war vote again on Meet the Press, saying that she thought "it was a vote to put inspectors back in” so Saddam Hussein could not go unchecked. She insisted that she was “told by the White House personally” as were others that that’s what the resolution was for and noted that Bush himself said publicly that the resolution was the best chance to avoid a confrontation.

Moderator Tim Russert pointed out that the title of the resolution was the “Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002.”

Clinton responded saying, “We can have this Jesuitical argument about what exactly was meant. But when Chuck Hagel, who helped to draft the resolution said, 'It was not a vote for war,' What I was told directly by the White House in response to my question, 'If you are given this authority, will you put the inspectors in and permit them to finish their job,' I was told that's exactly what we intended to do. ”

Clinton then turned it back to Obama as she had earlier in the show, noting that his anti-Iraq intervention speech was in 2002; by 2003 it was down from his Web site; by 2004, he “was saying he really didn’t disagree with how George Bush was conducting the war;” from 2005 to 2007, he voted for war funding and didn’t go to the floor to condemn the war for 18 months; and  “wasn’t for timelines initially.”

Russert noted that she voted similarly, and Clinton said, "I’m not premising my campaign on something different. I’m not here saying anything different from that. Judgment is not a single snapshot."

She also defended Bill Clinton’s “fairy tale” comment about Obama’s campaign, saying it was taken out of context; that he was, in fact, directly referring to Obama’s stance on the war through the years.

Clinton also attacked Obama for his lobbying reform bill, noting that at the pre-New Hampshire debate, it was pointed out that lobbyists could still buy meals as long as they are standing up. She reiterated that the campaign is the contrast between "rhetoric" and "reality."

“When the cameras are gone and the lights are off, what do you do next?” Clinton said of Obama. She even went on to say, “He does not have a record of producing positive change.”

The Obama campaign responded, saying, “Obama introduced and helped pass the strongest ethics reform since Watergate. It includes a full ban on gifts and meals from lobbyists, an end to subsidized travel for lawmakers on corporate jets, full disclosure on lobbyists’ campaign contributions, and restrictions to close the revolving door that enables former congressmen to become high-paid lobbyists.” The campaign goes on to cite the Washington Post, which called it “the strongest ethics legislation to emerge from Congress yet.”

NOTES:
Clinton also posited on more than one occasion on the show that any political progress in Iraq was "because they see this election, and they don’t have much time.... It is a big factor in pushing the Iraqi govt to push them to do what they should have been doing all along." ... On her emotional moment, she called it a moment of "real emotional connection."


MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

How many times Clintons or her campaign had to come forward so far to apologize, or fire campaign workers or needed to clarify all kinds of negative attacks on Senator Obama? Many times. Senator Obama never had to do it.
How many time Clinton mention being the first women president? Always. How many times Obama talks about first AA president? He does not want to be a president just because he is AA. He wants to because he is the most suitable candidate to work with everybody and lift this country from the mess.

Clintons distort records. Obama always have been against war. He always said this is a wrong war at wrong battle field. This is a war of ideology, not of reason. He said it's rush war, dumb war. No dispute, period. Now since the war has already been waged, 150,000 young americans are risking their lives in a war zone, it's his obligtation to support the troops until Iraq stabilizes. He has been consistent: against this war but committed to the troops. So what's the fairy tale here, Mr Clinton?

Clinton's campaign has been caught to spread e-mail that he is a muslim plant, trying to take over this country. Her NH co-chair implied he could be a drug dealer in the past. With MLK, Senator said MLK'ss dreams were dream and would not have realized without a president (LBJ). So where this come from? What does it mean? A black man can only be a civil rights activist or can dream or talk about equality and fairness. That's all Obama can do as well as she implies. But ultimately we need a white President (LBJ and future Clinton) to make sure right things happen. The fact is again, Obama is not running as a Black candidate to promote black issue at national level. He recognizes the problems the country faces are color blind. It hurts some demographic little more than others but these are issues of all americans. Poor economy, lack of healthcare, a wrong war, global warming have nothing to do with black or white or hispanic or asian. These are american problems.

It's unfortunate, Clintons look down on people. They insult people. Remember Bill Clinton's remark of voting for Obama is the "roll of a dice" or "this kid". ONLY Clintons have monopoly in wisdom and judgment and qualification to run this country for decades. Clintons are making insensitive, disrespectful comment on TV, people are seeing them for what they are. Some people among Black community are voicing concerns. And somehow, without evidence, she is blaming Obama's campaign.

So they make offenses, they apologize and spin for those offense but again they call foul on the other side. Look at Clintons in NV. The democratic party decided about having a few large precints in Las Vegas to make sure casino/hotel workers can vote without taking off from work. 10 months ago. The people who were part of making that decision are the same people filing law suit to take these precints away just because union of those workers supported Obama. If this is how Clintons will run next 8 years, better think twice before electing Clinton.
Hillary says Obama doesn't have a track record for getting things done. How about Hillary's record? HILLARY FAILED MISERABLY at trying to get healthcare reform through in 1993. That failure set healhcare reform back 15 years and it gave ammo to the Republicans to sweep back into Congress in the 1994 elections.

I'd rather have Obama's vision and leadership over Clinton's track record of failure.
Clinton justified her 2002 Iraq war vote again on Meet the Press, saying that she “thought it was a vote to put inspectors back in” so Saddam Hussein could not go unchecked. She insisted that she was “told by the White House personally” as were others that that’s what the resolution was for and noted that Bush himself said publicly that the resolution was the best chance to avoid a confrontation.

Moderator Tim Russert pointed out that the title of the resolution was the “Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002.”
__________________________________________

Spare me!  If this is the kind of judgement that "experience" gives, I'll roll the dice any day of the week.  I have alot of respect and admiration for Senator Clinton but, not a chance we're buying this weak and lame defense.  Just face it:  you made a mistake; acknowledge it, apologize and move on to your next bitter partisan battle in the long line you have to fight against vehemently anti-Clinton forces.

It won't end...  the status quo will continue if she's nominated and her winning in the general election is highly dubious.  Don't do it...  turn the page; they've had their chance.  The moment is indeed now.

OBAMA 08
Obama tells me change is new, I agree (not knowing every election Presidential politicians talk about change and nothing changes).

Obama tells me to hope so i start hoping.

Obama tells me to change, so I change my parents since they are past and status quo.

My friends (fellow Obama supporters) tell me to repeat Hillary hate posts 100 times a day, so I do it. It's a change from my other work.

Obama tells me to convince my other immature youth friends to cheer for change, I do it.

Obama tells me to ignore experience, so I ignore my parents experience of knowing the world as again, they are past and status quo.

I ignore every old person who was served nationally as they are status quo. Your national service doesnt count in the new world of hatred filled starry eyed fairy tale following youths like me.
Comments lik "obama is a leader" and "Clinton is a follower" are excellent examples of sexism even when the comments are made by women. There are many studies in academia that men are more likely to get hired based on their future promise, whereas women are expected to already have a strong record. In other words, men with weak record are easily forgiven because they can sell the "visionary" thing. Women do not make believable "visionaries" or "leaders;" they have to rely on what they have already done because they do not receive the benefit of the doubt. If you don't believe me just imagine Obama as a woman (reagrdles sof race)? Would anyone believe that a female Obama is qualified for being president? It's a pity that even women buy the sexist bias--they prefer to follow a man than ask the tough questions.
Hillary did incredibly well with Tim. She stood her ground very well. Go Hillary Go!
I asked A lot of black people from Chicago about obama and what has he done  and they said to me (i thought i was going to get my ass whipped) expletive that expletive person.Then i asked about what do you think of hillary then to my surprise  most of them like her( if i whould have said anything bad about her i felt i would get my ass whipped) p.s i am a otr truck driver so i get around alot.
I see that Hillary is still twisting and turning what ever she can to get herself and her husband out of the mess their comments have gotten them into.While they said awhile back that the comments that were being released from their camp was not going to be accepted,well I cannot see any differnce in the rhetoric that is being said now from her and her husband .In fact what they are spewing out is as bad.Hillary is not only flip flopping now she is in to doing the twist.Taking what everyone says that she doesn't agree with  and twisting it around and making it sound like what she precieves it to mean.I think she had better think before she speaks.
"Clinton justified her 2002 Iraq war vote again on Meet the Press, saying that she thought it was a vote to put inspectors back in so Saddam Hussein could not go unchecked."

"Russert pointed out that the title of the resolution was the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002."


Are you serious? Who is suppose to hear ANYONE say that and trust ANYTHING that they say?

Hillary Micheal Vick funded a dog fighting ring. Her response would be ..."Does that mean he will have doghouse built to stop dogs from fighting each other"

Is it just me? Did she really mean what she said or it was a side joke...let us in on it Hillary.

I watched to hear more about her but she talked about Obama so much I know more about him than her. For someone so inexperience she had alot to say about him.

Wow...the Republican party is looking better and better the more they air this stuff from Dems...maybe Obama need to switch parties before he starts talking like that...

Wow...

P.S.
Don't Vote on anything else Hillary since you don't understand...If the title of the book is about Cats please expect that when you open the book it will be "about cats"
"King Kamehameha Beotch!"
Paul Miller:
The reason Hillary HAD TO talk about Obama so much was because most of Russert's questions were ABOUT Obama. For those of you who did not think Hillary answered the tough questions, just how ignorant can you be? She answered EVERY question in detail, but you're so blinded by hatred you would rather sing the praises of your rock star candidate rather than actually address any real issues. Obama is the "New Elvis" and you people are lining up to scream, cry, and faint over your new Messiah, but what does he actually represent? Why is he playing the "race card" if he's such a strong candidate on the merits alone? It is completely dishonest to claim that your campaign is NOT about your race, but use it to your advantage at every turn, and then when things don't appear to be going your way or you need votes in SC, you pull out the racism and dicrimination tactics that have clearly been up your sleeve all along. How can the Obama cult not see this? Hypocrisy is alive and well in the Obama camp, along with dirty tricks and using racism to get votes, even though he's really a half white elitist who has NOTHING in common with real hardworking people in the black community. Hillary for President! (Not Hypocrisy)
Mr. Russert, you are an equal opportunity interviewer and I enjoy watching you refuse to let politicians, no matter what their party, jive their way out of statements and actions.
What was the hell was Clinton thinking about when she agreed to appear on MTP? What was that nonsense about her war vote? Why would she not acknowledge that a couple of shady cards are being played in her primary campaign against Obama? I believe she did further damage to an already fatally wounded campaign, and I still hold out hope that she, Romney, and Giuliani will be out of the picture shortly. And I still want to know how she parlays 8 years as first lady and 1+ terms as a senator as 35 years of experience!
Sen. Clinton denigrated leadership through what she seems to think is valid criticism of Sen. Barack.  She, in the relevant statements on MTP this morning, appeared not even to understand what being a leader is.
I THINK AMERICANS SHOULD REALLY LOOK AT THE PROBLEMS BEFORE THEM AND MAKE A GOOD JUGDEMENT ON WHO TO PICK AS THE NEXT PRESIDENT, A MISTAKE NOW WILL MEAN DOOM FOR THE COUNTRY. YES EXPERINCE IS GOOD, BUT IN WHAT.
OBAMA, IS A CHRISTIAN AND A GOOD ONE FOR THAT MATTER, LISTEN TO HIM ANSWERING QUESTIONS THEN YOU WOULD SEE A SINCER MAN, WHO TELLS YOU WHAT HE BELIVES.
AMERICANS SHOULD BE CAREFULL OF BELIVING TWISTED TRUTHS FROM THOSE WHOS ONLY INTENTIONS IS TO GET TO THE WHITE HOUSE AND MAKE FAME OR RECORD. CHEERS
Oh, my. Poor, poor Hillary. This was a very bad performance. No way to spin this one.
Hillary on meet the press was an hour of attacking obama and other forms of spin, i was very disappointed by the way she performed and twisted things around on meet the press, its just unfortunate that's all, i was initially an obama supporter and this only reinforces that, if she cant talk straight for an hour what are we gonna hear for the next four years, i have had no problems with her until i saw this, maybe obama lacks experience but hillary has made many mistakes and claims to have 35 years of experience when she has only been a senator for a couple terms, i dont follow that math, it would take to long to untwist some of that spin i saw, i dont want to be too hard because i dont think badly of sen clinton but i was just disappointed by this
Hillary was attacked for the full hour and didn't get caught. All the repubs did. She is right about the authorization for war. Also, Russert didn't show the full clips. Bill was referring Obama being painted as a victim. Bill brought up how he started it with that indian email. Why was Russert asking about 1998?
Why didn't he ask why Obama bought a 2 million dollar house for 1.6 million from Tony Rezko on the same day he sold the adjorning lot to his own wife. The same Tony Rezko on trial for Political Corruption.
Yes, Obama appeared 2 times on MTP. On the hour long appearance, he spoke of HIS positions for the hour and did not attempt to characterize Clinton's positions.  Clinton spent her time completely lying about Obama's record.  Tell me why I should vote for YOU.  I am so sick of the Clintons NEVER taking ownership of their mistakes.  You chose not to read the National Intelligence Estimate prior to giving Bush the right to go to war Senator Clinton.  That is the judgment all your "experience" has amounted to?  Democrats are asking to lose the House, Senate, and the White House by voting her.  I can only hope that the person who wins 2008 will have some ounce of integrity for a change.
If Obama was a female with so less experience and no specifics, may be I wouldnt follow her. But as a youth voter, I have been told to follow Obama because he is hip, he is cool and thats all I have wanted all my life.

And yes, he said he will bring change. (I dont know though that in all elections, politicians talk about change since democracy started).
I don't know what "Meet the Press" you folks watched but I thought Hillary tamed Tim Russet masterfully.  She didn't shy away from any question.  She responded well to all of his "old" questions and he seemed unwilling to discuss the current events such as the economy.  She laid down timetables and numbers for troop withdrawal from Iraq.  She responded to the Dr. Martin King / Lyndon Johnson issue as well as the “fairy tale campaign”comment while give props to Senator Obama. Also, I think she brilliantly handled Tim's last question referring to her painful public display of her marriage trouble. Go Hillary!!!!!
For sen. Clinton: As a leading candidate she is running a highly controversial campaign strategy by playing gender card in many times, her broken down in tears which followed by remark "I don't want to see the country is falling backward, she claimed to be the most experienced by being first lady in WH and in Governor mansion, she stole "change slogan from rival candidate when it becomes famous, she played fear tactics before N.H.primary  like republicans, she ignites the race card by raising a controversial comments on MLK and lately her endorser in Nevada teacher union is suing the voting authu.to remove the precincts inside the casino-hotel area so union workers can not vote easily. All this indicate that she is playing a very destructive strategy which will eventually cause a huge wound to the Democratic Party. How she response?
I understand the emotions is ok but she is crying not for the feelings for others but because she was loosing so badly. She thoughts her name will give her free ride to washington.She can not lift up the world nor this country because she has the most backing from the biggest lobyist.She took the most money from them and she will have the same war mentality like Bush. If we elect her we will repeat the 8 yrs of Bush. She practices the same fear tactics like the republicans which she did before the N.H. primary. And also she proves that she will break down easy if she faces any difficulties down the road, That tears is not her softness that her weakness in the face of tough work.
People should understand that we must needed a different domestic and foreign policy that will bring this country more united within rich and poor and all class and at the same time we need to bring a peaceful world in order to see our kids and grand kids live in peace and harmony year to come. If we really want this, Hillary Clinton can not bring this kind of change because she is too occupied to carry foreign and domestic lobbyist agendas other than our own agendas. She will never be the peoples’ president. A president can not do the job by himself, He needs partners of common interest and reaching to all the parties and to all who also carry different views and by this definitions, she won't be able to unite the country and form and a vast majority of collation partnership which will be included a boarder base bi partisanship.
I was excited about Obama and planing to support him, but now that he and his campaign is playing the race card, I cannot vote for him. His strategy of playing the race card will only divide the country and not unite it. I now find it hard to believe that he really wants to unite the country. This was bad strategy for Obama and his campaign. Any critical thinking person can see that the Clintons made no racial remarks. But if this is what we will get by electing an African American president...then no thanks.
Hillary explained her positions vry well and had Tim Russert Backing down, now as we go after Chris Matthews, MSNBC will begin losing viewers if he doesn't apoloize on the air to Hillary, and admit his hatred and bias of the Clintons
American politics needs to grow up. We are electing a president in 2008 and still bickering about Iraq vote and speech in 2002. This was Bush war and no speech or vote by any democrat would have made any difference. What has Obama done since 2002 to change the course of war in Iraq? Giving a speech in 2002 and doing nothing since is not leadership?
AT THE LAST DEBATE WHEN CLINTON WAS SAYING THAT “BARACK DID VOTE FOR THE FUND FOR THE TROOPS WHEN HE OPPOSED THE WAR, THIS IS NOT CHANGE.” WE NEED STRONG ANSWER THAT YES,EVEN CLINTON AUTHORIZE THE WAR AT THE EXPENSE OF LIVES OF OUR BRAVE GENERATIONS, BUT IT IS EVERONE MORAL DUTY TO SUPPORT THE TROOPS AT WAR, THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY POLITICS WITH THE FUNDING TO TROOPS BECAUSE WE MUST NEED TO STAY BEHIND OUR TROOPS.
I was so proud of Senator Clinton today.  I really hated to see her go on the Meet The Press show as I just knew Tim Russert would tear her to shreds as it is obvious that he just does not like her.  She answered all his questions and he really didn't get to talk nearly as much as she did.  Thank gosh.  She doesn't hesitate in her answers as obama does.  He hums and haws around while trying to think of the correct answer.  Senator Clinton did not let Russert get the best of her and stayed poised and cool throughout he program.  She will answer any and all questions on the campaign  trail and will win like she did in New Hampshire.  Now lets see Tim Russert have obama back on and try to discredit him as he has tried to discredit Hillary.No one questions him like they do Senator Clinton...He wants CHANGE (Bill Clintons words and hope, also Bill Clintons words) but he doesn't say what his change will be, just we want change.  The people need specifics like Senator Clinton gives.    HILLARY FOR PRESIDENT, doesn't this resonate well.
She said she will bring change. How come she will bring change when she works with the lobbyist and takes money from them? When I see her talking I feel the same notions that we are going to see the same war, proverty, recession and disrespect to the rest of the world and the same attitude.
Please be aggressive on her issues to open it up to the American people so they can see the real Hillary and understand  her double talk on issues.
This morning I was watching Former sec. Albright talking on C-span and she was talking same George Bush strategy that we should be more offensive on foreign policy other than constructive dialogue.
We can not afford to let her win this nomination to loose to the Republicans.
We must be more aggressive and be precise on our dialogue with the American people
To me the Iraq War is the issue.

If Barrack Obama had enough wisdom and judgment to come out so forcefully against the war in 2002 and Hillary did not, that says it all.

Tim showed part of Obama's speech in 2002 where he voiced his opposition to the war and which painted a picture of exactly what turned out to occur. The man had brilliant foresight and courage to go against popular sentiment and stand for his convictions. Hillary had no comeback to that.

I sincerely hope the Democratic Party will nominate Barack Obama.  
It seems clear that the media makes the news. One day after NH Obama was "out", after only a 2 point loss, with Hillary "surging". WHat? America must be used to lies to support Hillary. And the cable news wants to sensationize everyday. It will be her dirty campaigning that will win the nomination.
Unbelievable!! Why  do you need to like a candidate
and why in the world does it matter if a candidate shows a soft side in order for you to support and
elect the most qualified individual for President.
Grow up America!!! I'm done listening to any further
debates presented by the media!!  
This is another defining moment in American political life.
Will the electorate support a campaign built upon division and derision or a campaign built upon unity and integrity.
Only time will tell.
Clinton clearly lied a number of times -- most obviously when asked about her knowledge of Bill's pardons. Her defense of her war vote leaves you to choose between whether she is a liar or is stupid! What a choice, America.
As a regular viewer of MTP, I think Tim may not have been as tough on Ms. Clinton as he has been with other guests. Obviously, he had to be concerned with the perceptions, particulary after the debate in Philly. Frankly, the response on the disparaging remarks made about MLK were emplematic of the misteps her campaign has made an undoubledly she would also make as Commander in Chief. As much as I do not think a Republican is the best choice to run the country, I will certainly vote for McCain or Huggelby (sp?) if she were the nominee.
Once again the Media and big money will determine who gets elected they seem to be campainging for certain individuals...And guess what the canadates get free Pubplicity...This is America and its best....
I am a faithful viewer of Meet the Press and again Tim's personal dislike for Mrs. Clinton showed in his interview.  Mrs. Clinton argued points with pose and intellect.  As a follower of this 2008 campaign, many clips were taken out of context.  She was right on when responding to poll numbers presented.  I would have thought the media learned their lesson about relying on polls from the New Hampshire results. Stop getting egg on your face, remember 2000?  Ease up on the old gal, Tim when she's elected you'll be begging her to guest on the show
My wife has an interesting perspective on Hillary.  Until wednesday she was a Hillary supporter.

On getting emotional.

The pile up by the media was highly inapropriate and sexist.  Only God knows if it was real or not and we should give her the benifit of the doubt.

Obama earned some of her respect for not pilling on like most of the MSM.  She thought he was very professional throughout.

What turned her away from Hillary were two factors subsiquent to the emotional reaction to the question.

1)  Both the content of her reaction and her acceptance speech were all about her.  My wife stated she said "me or i" at least a dozen times.  Clearly she is emotional about her plight but not nessesarily the plight of the people.  She saw a contrast to the various speeches by Obama where he talkes about we.

2) She began to do exactly what the media did, exploit the moment.  The media tried to exploit it in a bad way, she is exploiting it in a good way, nonetheless it is still exploitation.

Wy wife is not supporting Obama but does say the Obama campaign is about WE and the Clinton campaign is about HER.

For the record i am an Obama supporter.

Just thought i'd share this.

BTW, the Clinton position on MLK and Fairy Tale will not play well.  They should just apologize for a poor choice of words and get on with it.  Continuing to defend the statement is like arguing over the definition of "IS"
Youth Voter, USA (Sent Sunday, January 13, 2008 11:47 AM)

--------------------

Can you serously JUST GROW UP....If you can't understand the meaning of it all then you still have some learning to do......
Her refusal to admit the error in her judgment on the war vote (where Obama made the correct call!) shows an inability to learn from the past and likelihood to repeat the error (the same reason sometimes why a women who is being cheated on and lied to by her husbands stays with him ... lack of strength to learn from the past and change her behavior).
I read somewhere in the press that what we have here in 2008 is akin to a reality show entitled "Who Wants To Be The Leader Of The Free World."  

This election is, indeed, fascinating and of immeasurable entertainment value.  

I haven't quite decided on who I will vote for, but I'll vote for who I think is the best candidate, republican or democrat.  Given that there are currently no republican candidates who deserve my vote, if I were to vote today, it would be for Hillary. Let's face facts, Bill Clinton is the most qualified person to be the "Leader of the Free World."    
You guys and gals whine about Hillary and Barack when there just might be a better option out there in John Edwards. Be careful ya'll. You just might get what you're asking for.
Hillary was as slippery as an eel by always going on the attack or asking to look at the full context of the point. The time was a stump speech and her political nature showed throughout.  How can she possibly attack Obama for being political since she defines what a political person looks like.
Do we really want another Bush and Cheney type team in the white house?
I guestion why the independents and Republican are for Obama. Are they seeing what I see, that in truth he is a smart, inspirational man that lacks experience.  Perhaps with the country in the state that it is, he is the only Democratic candidate that gives them a chance to keep the White House!  Once he's nominated the truth will be told.  My basis for this is that I don't buy the change thing when Congress makes and passes the law.  His record in Congress isn't very good with all his "present" votes.  Illinois elected him to be their Senator but he's taken a leave of absence while he runs for President.  Seems he would be paying a little more attention to what is going on in Congress if he wants change from the status quo.  Also I haven't seen where he has been very good with his answers when they haven't been pre-scripted for him.  I hope he isn't the one that decides to bomb Pakistan to get BinLaden and forgets to tell Pakistan. Nuclear war between Pakistan and India isn't very appealing
I'm sick and tired of hearing that vote described as a war vote.  It's a sin to tell a lie, Barack.  I'm also sick and tired of the way they're twisting Bill Clinton's words and hers to play to the African-American community.  I knew exactly what Bill meant, and it's no disrespect to Martin Luther King to say that without Lyndon Johnson the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act would at least have been delayed by years.  Kennedy couldn't get them through Congress, and people forget that they weren't an easy sell at the time.  In fact, Barry Goldwater -- the Republican nominee that year -- voted against BOTH of them.
HRC tries blame Bush for her vote authorizing the war in Iraq, claiming that she was misled by him. Interesting. But it is, unfortunately, a typical misleading post hoc self-justification. Let us recall that 23 Senators (including nearly half the Democrats then in the Senate) and 133 Representatives who voted AGAINST the resolution were not misled. Is this the kind of vision we need in our President? Let us also recall that HRC didn't bother to read the National Intelligence Estimate which Bush used as a justification to authorize military action. Is this the kind of attention to detail relating to vitally important decisions that we must demand in our President? Finally, her unwillingness to acknowledge, even in retrospect, that her vote was a mistake is frighteningly reminiscent of the arrogance of the current President. Is this what we are looking for in our next President? I don't think so.
The response to this mornings Meet The Press clearly illustrates by the e mails the diversity and different interpertations of the interview. If you are a student of body language then you witnessed a sincere and heart felt interview in which HRC showed true emotion and enormous range of facts and articulation. I was duly impressed with the way HRC handled the onslaught of attacks by Russert, (who I felt was unduly critical). I do feel a Presidential candidate has every right to interject, hold on there, lets get the facts right. As so often, a small snipet out of context was put up on the screen. HRS got it right and illustrated more than ever why she is qualified to be President. Do Americans really want to place the fate of our Country, Our Economy and our future in a well spoken but untested and inexperienced young man, who really has no real qualifications except rock star status-to run this troubled country.Every four years we hear the word change, this is nothing new. What we do not hear are politicians who are really willing to tackle the tough issues a President faces. HRC this morning impressed me as a passionate, compassionate well versed candidate who deserves the opportunity to identify her alternatives to the complex issues facing this country. This morning we were exposed to a real look at HRC. A bright, sensitive and electable candidate, who appears to have studied the issues and who also has at least taken a position. Right or Wrong she does have an actionable history from which to measure her skills. This was a truly outstanding morning for an outstanding candidate.
Ron Unger-Sarasota-Florida
Mr. Russert should have asked about her 35 years of experience that she touts because we all know that Wolf Blitzer won't dare to ask her that when CNN has their Dem debate in SC. Obama, to me thus far, seems to hold integrity and you can tell a lot by a person by the way that they react and Hillary is really hurting herself here. She stated that she doesn't like to talk about herself, but we hear a lot of "I"'s. Obama at least inspires people to understand that they can be involved in the government that they pay for with their tax dollars!

Dallas for Obama '08!
Comments lik "obama is a leader" and "Clinton is a follower" are excellent examples of sexism even when the comments are made by women. There are many studies in academia that men are more likely to get hired based on their future promise, whereas women are expected to already have a strong record. In other words, men with weak record are easily forgiven because they can sell the "visionary" thing. Women do not make believable "visionaries" or "leaders;" they have to rely on what they have already done because they do not receive the benefit of the doubt. If you don't believe me just imagine Obama as a woman (reagrdles sof race)? Would anyone believe that a female Obama is qualified for being president? It's a pity that even women buy the sexist bias--they prefer to follow a man than ask the tough questions.
sonia hirt, blacksburg (Sent Sunday, January 13, 2008 11:47 AM)

___________________

Your comments are riduclosu and manipulatives at best...

Name one time when Hillary has stepped out on her own and been against or for something....Each and everytime she voted for something she waited to see what others were going do....

If that's not a follower then I don't know what is...


Hillary Clinton had a great interview on Tim Russert's show today.  She was New York tough - precisely what is needed against the Republicans in November.  Thinking back to the start of the Iraq war, what I was thinking as a citizen at the time matches what Senator Clinton was thinking at the time, and, I think, matches what most Americans were thinking at the time.  We were fed bad information and misled by the Bush administration.  I cannot fault Senator Clinton when I did no better.  And regarding Obama's position she is exactly right - Obama said one thing and did another by repeatedly voting to extend and fund the war.   Hillary Clinton not only handled Russert, but dragged him kicking into a discussion of the economy and her major speech this past week.  In the end, she was in control of the debate.  Hillary Clinton is the candidate who can win in November.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=574097

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google