HOME
Hillary balks at Iraq vote question

The love fest for Democratic presidential hopefull Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York that occurred in Hampton at Winnacunnet High School ended abruptly Saturday when a woman from Clinton's home state asked her a pointed question about her 2002 vote to allow armed forces to invade Iraq.

"Did you read the 92-page document?" the woman asked, referring to a declassified CIA document released by Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Bob Graham. Graham, in a speech before the Senate, said his colleagues would have "blood on their hands" if they pursued a course of action that involved an invasion of Iraq.

Clinton responded that she was "thoroughly briefed by my staff" on this document, as well as others available at the time from other sources. When asked directly if she had read the document, Clinton again indicated she had been thoroughly briefed.

Clinton said she had been told by the Bush administration that approving the resolution would simply result in the U.S. sending "advisors" into Iraq. "If I knew then what I know now, I wouldn't have voted for it," Clinton said.

The questioner, hoping for a more protracted discussion with Clinton on this issue, found a spot near the raised stage from which Clinton had been speaking as the Senator finished her program and began shaking hands. Clinton, as she approached the woman, quickly made a U-turn and began shaking hands with members of the audience situated on the other side of the stage.

It appears the issue of vote for the U.S. invasion of Iraq will dog Clinton and another of her Democratic presidential rivals, Sen. John Edwards, where ever they speak.

Comments

I agree with Hillary Clinton that Obama is inexperienced and there is a concern there.

My obversations of Obama: I had started supporting Obama in 2004! in Texas, and did alot to talk him up here and at the University of Texas. I had photographed him 3 times in close quarters, and talked to him directly for a few minutes at one. I had made contributions to him the first 2 quarters of 2007. I was not the only one who put in ALOT of work to help him. Has his campaign found ways to get us involved or showed appreciation for our efforts? NO! His support in Austin has eroded in large areas, and his last rally here was MUCH smaller than the large Feb. 07 rally, that drew 20,000 people. His only contact with those of us, like myself who wanted to support him - has been "give me money" email and "hey come out to my rally!" email.

When I tried to give my concerns to the Obama people repeatedly!! by email and by phone, it was largely disregarded. When my concerns to a phone solicitor hit home at the time, and she gave me the national phone number, that national person's attitude was "hey there are too many people for us to follow up with" and we are focusing on the first 3 states. There was a strong arrogance with the person, as if Obama knows all and doesn't need any input on things from anyone. Is this giving a voice to those who are not lobbyists? Granted, the top person can't hear from everyone (despite Obama's rhetoric), but most campaigns understand that you need levels of leadership in a campaign to fully engage people nationally. This same mechanism is also required as President - since you need more than a podium and TV to truly engage people. While Obama gives lip service to this notion, his action and follow through are horribly lacking afterwards. Obama's is so restricted at the national level, they don't even engage voluntary groups like "Texans for Obama" - despite their efforts to help him.

There is a local young candidate here for city council who was like that, great initial candidate with charm and apparent charisma - but after winning he was largely dismissive of those that supported him. That city councilman has turned out to be one of the worst office holders in Austin. He tried to be friend to everyone, and he has come out to be friend to no one. Why? Inexperience! While Obama wants to have everyone have a voice equal to lobbyists and insiders, he is achieving this by excluding most everyone from input. While he has courted Iowa, NH, and SC closely, do not be mistaken - after you vote you won't hear or have any way to contact or be involved in his campaign, in my opinion - other than repeated "give me money" emails.

Having met all the top D candidates and also McCain on the R side, the two candidates that I think are the most personable when they are not wanting something from you are - Hillary and McCain. I was within the Secret Service bubble with Hillary for 3 hours and she was incredibly gracious and willing to listen to anyone. Obama was a rock star (in a negative way) in a similar position, and pretty much gives a smile, great giving speeches, but far LESS effective one-on-one than Hillary.

McCain also was willing to talk to people honestly, and I think also is someone that has incredible experience - and is not a gamble. I saw McCain get hit with a tough, emotional question from an audience member about health care, and he intently listened, and then gave his answer starting with, "you probably won't like my answer, but here it is ..." While I don't agree with McCain on all issues, he is genuine and capable. For those independents who do not like Hillary, I might suggest strongly giving a second look to McCain.

As an independent moderate, I hope my insight from Texas can help you all in NH better judge these candidates from a different perspective - the back side of their campaigns (the side you all don't see!).

Take care.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


   ADVERTISEMENTS