Flashback to Sen. Hillary Clinton’s October 10, 2002, speech to the Senate explaining her vote in favor of the War in Iraq. Shockingly, it is still posted on her senate website. But that doesn’t mean Hillary and the Leftist media want us to remember it. Quite the opposite. There never any mention of it unless she’s trying to cover for herself.
Now, I believe the facts that have brought us to this fateful vote are not in doubt. Saddam Hussein is a tyrant who has tortured and killed his own people, even his own family members, to maintain his iron grip on power. He used chemical weapons on Iraqi Kurds and on Iranians, killing over 20 thousand people. Unfortunately, during the 1980’s, while he engaged in such horrific activity, he enjoyed the support of the American government, because he had oil and was seen as a counterweight to the Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran.
So, we’ve got weapons of mass destruction. Check.
In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.
Involvment with terrorists, namely, al-Qaeda. Check.
Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely, and therefore, war less likely, and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause.
Ahem, that is unless Democrats take control of the Senate in 2006. At which point Harry Reid can simply call the war lost. And then enjoy extremely high approval ratings…snicker 🙂
This is a very difficult vote. This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make — any vote that may lead to war should be hard — but I cast it with conviction.
And perhaps my decision is influenced by my eight years of experience on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue in the White House watching my husband deal with serious challenges to our nation. I want this President, or any future President, to be in the strongest possible position to lead our country in the United Nations or in war. Secondly, I want to insure that Saddam Hussein makes no mistake about our national unity and for our support for the President’s efforts to wage America’s war against terrorists and weapons of mass destruction. And thirdly, I want the men and women in our Armed Forces to know that if they should be called upon to act against Iraq, our country will stand resolutely behind them.
Unity? That singing together on Capitol Hill was just for show. Support for the President? Stabbed him in the back along with with ever solider that served in the War.
My vote is not, however, a vote for any new doctrine of pre-emption, or for uni-lateralism, or for the arrogance of American power or purpose — all of which carry grave dangers for our nation, for the rule of international law and for the peace and security of people throughout the world.
Doctrine of pre-emption? Don’t worry, Mrs. Clinton, Saddam didn’t disarm.
So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation. A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President and we say to him – use these powers wisely and as a last resort. And it is a vote that says clearly to Saddam Hussein – this is your last chance – disarm or be disarmed.
Best interests of our nation? I agree. It certainly wasn’t a vote to rush to war then, but it is now? Incredible! Anyone can look back in hindsight with their “Woulda,” / “Coulda,” / “Shoulda’s.” A person of integrity will take responsibility for their actions (votes in your case, Mrs. Clinton).
So, why look at this speech now? Because, Hillary wants a do-over. This is absolutely laughable.
Sen. Hillary Clinton is asking her fellow senators to sign on to her and Sen. Robert Byrd’s plan for an Iraq war vote do-over.
In a letter to all 98 other senators provided Sunday to the New York Daily News, Clinton, D-N.Y., and Byrd, D-W.Va., say Congress should haul President Bush back for a new war vote when the Senate debates the 2008 military spending bill in the next few weeks.
The letter, sent Friday, argues that the 2002 vote for the war, which Clinton backed, is hopelessly out of date.
Arguing that a vote to use force is “out of date” is a pathetic excuse to cover her efforts to pander to her base while, gasp, she happens to be running for president.
If Clinton truly believed her own words, both then and now, and wasn’t simply playing politics, she would recognize where the “updated” threat of violence is coming from today. And she’d be speaking out about doing something about it instead of acting like just another far leftist Democrat. Then again, can we expect that from anyone with the last name of Clinton?
A vote cast with conviction? No, Mrs. Clinton, this is a vote laced with excuses.