Rivals rip into Clinton over Iran vote

[Omaha Steve]

Source: Los Angeles Times

By Michael Finnegan

WASHINGTON -- Five years after she voted to authorize the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) is coming under attack from rivals in the presidential race for a recent vote that they say could bring the nation closer to war with Iran.

On Thursday, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) added his voice to the criticism, comparing Clinton's vote on the measure to the "blank check" that he said she gave President Bush to wage war against Iraq.

Last month, Clinton joined a majority of senators in voting for a resolution that labeled the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, a government-sponsored military organization, a terrorist group. Obama said Bush could use the measure to justify a military strike against Iran.

Efforts by Obama and fellow Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards to highlight Clinton's Iran vote come as the two are struggling to break her campaign momentum by reviving questions about her 2002 vote authorizing U.S. force in Iraq. Clinton has refused to call that vote a mistake.

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-iranpol12oct12,1,2981633.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

[Kolesar]

1. Obama's attack on Clinton has legs

This story won't go away. Senator Jim Webb thought the resolution was "Vice President Cheney's dream" (did I get the quote correct?).

[saracat]

3. And not just Obama, Edwards too!

[Seabiscuit]

4. You mean he didn't insert the word "wet"?

[sellitman]

5. This would have real legs if Obama had voted.

He blew it if you ask me.

[progressivebydesign]

10. I totally agree. Obama is a hypocrite to crticize her.

He missed the vote, conveniently, and now feels he can criticize her for voting for it. Only if he'd taken a stand, would I have listened to him on this. But you can't duck the vote then criticize those that voted. Does he have the worst handlers ever?

[saracat]

2. ooo! Time for Hillary to drag out Mark Penn to defend her!

But like everything else she has done this is NOTHING too! Perhaps her media supporters can dish on the other candidates again.After all they are talking bad about "our girl" Wah! Poor Hillary .Listen to these "crybabies" They must be "jealous" cause she is leading in the polls! After all ,her war votes mean NOTHING! :sarcasm:

[The Wizard]

6. It was a claculated vote (which aren't ?)

that serves in the general election. She might lose some primary support, but she has some capital to burn. Who are most of us going to vote for given the choice between Hillary and any of the knuckle dragging repubes? She believes this vote gets her some Republican war monger support. She fails to understand that all the war mongers see in her is a talking fanged vagina that threatens their perceived authority.

[Evergreen Emerald]

7. I think this attack shows Obama's inexperience

It is a simplistic take on the vote. We know that the constitution does not allow Bush to go to war without authorization. This vote is not authorization for war. But, because of the label of terrorist, allows for more intense investigation including taking of assets.

To label this as authorization and the same type of vote--is really a political lie.

It proves that Obama is not in the same league as Clinton and it also shows his willingness to lie to us, make us afraid of more war, for political gain.

[Cass]

8. Obama didn't vote on this.

His criticism would carry more weight if he had voted on this.

[BootinUp]

9. It''ll never fly

People know Obama was never faced with the vote. I can't blame him for trying though.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

11. Don't forget that (some) Democrats want a war!

nothing like a war to keep the public behind you!:sarcasm:

[Zandor]

12. "the two are struggling to break her campaign momentum"

Ya think?