Bread and Circus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-14-08 01:22 AM
Original message |
Why did Clinton vote AGAINST the Levin Amendment? |
|
Edited on Mon Jan-14-08 01:25 AM by Bread and Circus
from Clinton wiki:
Clinton voted in favor of the October 2002 Iraq War Resolution, which authorized United States President George W. Bush to use military force against Iraq, should such action be required to enforce a United Nations Security Council Resolution after pursuing with diplomatic efforts.
(However, Clinton voted against the Levin Amendment to the Resolution, which would have required the President to conduct vigorous diplomacy at the U.N., and would have also required a separate Congressional authorization to unilaterally invade Iraq.<191>
She did vote for the Byrd Amendment to the Resolution, which would have limited the Congressional authorization to one year increments, but the only mechanism necessary for the President to renew his mandate without any Congressional oversight was to claim that the Iraq War was vital to national security each year the authorization required renewal.)<191>
_______
I know why she voted for the IWR (Bush was popular and she didn't want to look soft on Terrorism come 2008) but I don't know why she didn't vote for the Levin amendment.
|
Kurt_and_Hunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-14-08 01:23 AM
Response to Original message |
1. She should have voted for it. No doubt. |
Dogmudgeon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-14-08 01:24 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Why is Obama a slumlord? |
|
I also heard that John Edwards farts in public.
--p!
|
Bread and Circus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-14-08 01:26 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. Why do you post something so inane and stupid? |
|
It only makes it look all the more indefensible.
|
killbotfactory
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-14-08 01:26 AM
Response to Original message |
4. She wanted to go to war against Iraq? |
still_one
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-14-08 01:30 AM
Response to Original message |
5. This is what should be talked about, not a watery eye, or other inconsequencial B.S. /nt |
madrchsod
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-14-08 01:57 AM
Response to Original message |
6. we are not to question |
cali
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-14-08 02:01 AM
Response to Original message |
|
that's what all these posts bashing Clinton and Obama are doing to me.
And JE didn't vote for it either and neither voted for the Durbin amendment. You're only posting this to bash Clinton. Why bother?
|
Bread and Circus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-14-08 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
9. Clinton has made her record and "experience" the centerpiece |
|
Edited on Mon Jan-14-08 09:50 AM by Bread and Circus
of her campaign. As such, it's very legitimate to read up on that record and have some discussion about it. If it paints her in bad light, well then maybe she shouldn't tout her record if it doesn't match her rhetoric.
Sorry if this is "getting you down" though. It was uglier last cycle and everyone came together afterwords. However, the discussions were a lot more intelligent then because it was more about issues and records.
I supported Clark last time and though it made me uncomfortable at the time, every instance where someone challenged Clark's record forced me to go back and read more about him and re-assess my support.
And none of this is "bashing".
If I talked about Clinton's appearance or some other thing like that, that would be bashing. There's not one post you could find where I've done anything like this except maybe in regards to her occasional voice issues, which is legitimate considering one of the main focuses of a President is making speeches during big national moments.
And frankly, I read a lot of your posts are no better or worse than mine in regards to inflammation and conflict.
But the question remains why would she vote against the Levin amendment? It seems that all the Clinton supporters that want to talk substance, records, and issues would have a good statement as to why.
/shrug
|
gdaerin
(402 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-14-08 02:09 AM
Response to Original message |
8. She can waffle on national tv as much as she wants |
|
but the fact is, she doesn't make decisions based on beliefs or values, just on strategy. She voted for war and against Levin because she really thought that she'd end up the better for it. If Iraq had turned out better she'd be bragging about it all now. Unfortunately for her it turned out to be a bad gamble.
I honestly feel the country would be better off in the hands of a religious zealot like Huckabee than Hillary.
About Huckabee, I honestly don't care if a president doesn't believe in Evolution, it's kind of funny, but not a deal breaker really. I believe people have the right to their own opinions.
But, I have a huge problem with electing someone who was a Shameless Bush Enabler like Hilary.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 12th 2024, 09:21 PM
Response to Original message |