Did Hillary Check Her Facts Before Voting For Kyl-Lieberman Iran Resolution?

Hillary Clinton did not bother to read the National Intelligence Estimate before voting to give George Bush authority to go to war in Iraq. The report raised serious doubts about whether Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destructions.

Hillary still won't apologize for her vote, claiming it was "a sincere vote based on the facts and assurances that I had at the time." What "facts"? The claims of Bush and Cheney?

Recently Hillary voted for the Kyl-Lieberman Resolution declaring Iran's Revolutionary Guards, the core of Iran's national army, a terrorist organization. Virginia Democratic Sen. Jim Webb -- former Secretary of the Navy under President Reagan -- called the Resolution "tantamount to a declaration of war."

Hillary justified her support for the Kyl-Lieberman Resolution by stating, "The Revolutionary Guards are deeply involved in Iran's nuclear program." What intelligence was Hillary basing this statement on? The National Intelligence Estimate now states clearly that Iran abandoned its nuclear weapons program in 2003. Was Hillary again willing to place her trust in Bush and Cheney's false assertions?

Will Hillary now apologize for voting for the Kyl-Lieberman Resolution, which was based on factual assertions that have proven to be false?

If not, what does that say about Hillary's much-touted foreign policy experience as first lady and her judgment in matters of war and peace?

Hillary is clearly the most hawkish of the Democratic presidential contenders. Yet her hawkishness, like so many of her policies, seems based more on political calculation than on facts.

Democratic primary/caucus voters -- particularly in Iowa and New Hampshire which will likely determine if Hillary is "the inevitable nominee" -- should take this into account in deciding whether Hillary has the experience and judgment to lead the country in matters of war and peace.

Comments

[altohone]

Yes, Hillary was wrong again.

She trusted Bush again.

She won't apologize.

At some point though, you need to ask if she's triangulating to appear hawkish or if she actually shares Bush's ideology.

Hillary is wrong for America, and Democrats should take a hard look at all the other dems that voted for Kyl-Lieberman too.

When push came to shove, Hillary and all the corporatists voted with Bush and AIPAC and against what is best for the American people.

Not only did they fail to learn their lesson on Iraq, they appear determined to repeat the mistakes still so fresh in our memories.

[brutus948]

umm. No. She doesn't check anything. She votes how AIPAC and the other warmongering NEOCONS want her to vote. Fact checking is not on the agenda.

[hopeless277]

The United States of America is a country in love with war. We watch movies, tv shows, read books, magazines, play games, all based on war. We love our war heros and mourn our war dead. We spend millions erecting monuments to the war dead. Americans LOVE war. We have been conditioned to love war. Hillary knows this and she also knows that without war, her donors would go bankrupt. She can't have that. So, if Hill wins in 08, you can safely buy Halliburton and KBR stock because America will be at war. Somewhere. Against someone. Our economy depends on it. Cheers!

[ATLiberal]

I have been all over the map on Hillary. At first, I couldn't stand the idea of her as our nominee, primarily on an electability concern and a certain feeling of being over the Clintons.

Then I saw that she was doing well and listened to some of her policy positions and debates and thought, what the heck, I could support her.

Lately, I have been increasingly repulsed by her obvious political machinations. I think I am prepared to choose integrity and straightforwardness (Obama/ Edwards/ Kucinich) over experience at this point. Or Biden if experience is going to be a big issue.