Clinton Calls for (UN) Sanctions Against Iran (faults Bush admin. for "downplaying" the threat)

AP on Yahoo ^ | 1/18/06 | Geoff Mulvihill - ap

[Dolphy]

Sen. Hillary Clinton called for United Nations sanctions against Iran as it resumes its nuclear program and faulted the Bush administration for "downplaying" the threat.

I still remember Albright complaining early on in the Bush administration that they were too tough on Iran. Of course under Clinton they had absolutely no idea what was going on beyond the progress Albright reported.

Hillary's beyond shameless. Her husband left Iraq, North Korea, Afghanistan and Iran all untouched. How she dares rise to criticize would be beyond belief if I thought she had a shred of human decency...since she doesn't it's only par for the course of her entire life.

[Prost1]

Well, I guess that settles that...

Since the ex-copresident has come out for sanctions and immediate UNILATERAL action against Iran, we have not choice but to go forward with her program...

[blam]

"Do they really believe America will fall for her?"

Commander in chief, Hillary?

Not a chance, I wouldn't trust her with my dogs.

[jakerobins]

Oh I pray she runs for the Presidency in 2008 against Condoleezza Rice, the debates against a numbskull like Hitlery would be hillarious!! Condolezza making well thought out points on important issues, against Hitlery's shrill worn out liberal playbook. Just sit back and pop some pop-corn, better than the movies or most of what's on TV.(Almost worth all the pre-empted programs)

[winner3000]

(Now I`m confused, Bush was wrong in Iraq because he didn`t get the support of our "allies" and Bush was wrong with Iran because he worked with the EU.
I don`t understand,think I need help or, maybe another adult beverage)

It's actually pretty simple. Democrats will propose the opposite of what the Bush policy is every single time, regardless of logic. It's getting to be laughable.

[AZLiberty]

Now I'm confused, Bush was wrong in Iraq because he didn`t get the support of our "allies" and Bush was wrong with Iran because he worked with the EU. I don`t understand ,think I need help or, maybe another adult beverage.

Unfortunately, Hillary is being consistent here. She hasn't disavowed her vote to go to war, only Bush's "incompetence" at executing it. She's making an effort to run to the right of the Republicans on national defense, since there's no way a female we-loathe-the-military Clinton could get into the White House.

[oceanview]

we said the same thing with Dean - that he was going to run away with the nomination. the media can steer the Dem base any way it wants, when the DNC power structure realized Dean would lose in a blowout, Kerry suddenly emerged, and was "closing the gap quickly in our recent polls". and Kerry was not blown out electorally.

[stylin19a]

"I believe that we lost critical time in dealing with Iran because the White House chose to downplay the threats and chose to outsource the negotiations," Clinton said.,

huh ? identifying Iran as a member of the "axis of evil" a long time ago is downplaying the threat ?

[nj26]

"she has 40-42% of the popular vote just for showing up"

Agreed. There are many Dim voters who will "vote the name they know" without asking too many questions.

[nj26]

"In 1992 Perot took 19% of the votes. There will be no Perot type people in 2008 so 43% will not cut for her and the democrats."

You don't think Bill and Hillary can find another billionaire with an axe to grind? Ross Perot was a set-up, and they will do it again.

[gov_bean_ counter]

The Democrat Party will most likely be in shambles before the primaries even get started. Alabama Democrats are talking about getting their primary moved up. A spokesperson for them said the other day something to the effect that they are tired of the Northeast and Iowa forcing unelectable Liberals on the party.

[Howlin]

"I believe that we lost critical time in dealing with Iran because the White House chose to downplay the threats and chose to outsource the negotiations," Clinton said.

Help me out here: didn't North Korea help Iran out with their nuclear program?

And can anybody remember who "helped" North Korea with their program?

[FlyVet]

I could have sworn Hillary! backed John Kerry for President, the guy who wanted to "test" Iran by helping them with their nuclear energy program. If they used the help to build weapons then by gosh we'd know we couldn't trust them; the same policy Hillary! and Bubba used with North Korea, and that worked out just peachy, didn't it? And now she's playing the "Yeah me too" card with Bush foreign policy?

These Dims are all a bunch of nut cases!

[jveritas]

You are way overrating Bill and Hill and their power over the country. If your stupid conspiracy theory is correct, why did not Hillary Clinton run in 2004 and create this supposed billionaire to run as an independent and take got votes from President Bush? Just stop this silly knee jerk reaction and your insane conspiracy theories.

[zarf]

Another tough gutsy decision by Hillary!.

[MNJohnnie]

we said the same thing with Dean

Um NO, I do not remember anyone saying that. Most of us were worried John Edwards would turn out to be the new Bill Clinton. A soft spoken Southerner with "moderate" credentials. Thankfully he turned out to be an intellectual light weight. What I am saying is it is NOT a sure thing Hilly will win the nomination. Just like we have our 100%ers, so do the Demos. If she wins the nomination, YES she will get the 40% of the vote that automatically votes Democrat However, there is NO guarantee she will win.

[leakinInTheBlueSea]

uh huh... she sure has legs to stand on here ;)

from the transcript of a 2004 CNN interview (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0408/29/le.00.html)...

...
BLITZER: We only have a little time left. I want to get through a couple points: Iran, one of the axis-of-evil countries based on what president said a couple of years ago.

How worried are you that the Iranians are developing a nuclear bomb? And what, if anything, should the U.S. do about it?

CLINTON: Well, obviously I'm concerned. I mean, the information coming out of Iran is somewhat mixed but, I think, points to a continuing desire to at least have nuclear capacity. And we need to be, you know, as engaged as we possibly can. And we need, this time, to try to bring the rest the world along with us.

BLITZER: Can the U.S. tolerate a nuclear power in Iran?

CLINTON: Well, I hope we never reach that point. I hope we're able, through a different approach than this administration has taken to date, in trying to muster public opinion and working with others as well as the Iranians, to try to reach a point where that's not necessary.

You know, the principle architect of the Iranian nuclear capacity is Russia. And, you know, we have a lot that we should be doing with Russia that we're not.

I just came back from a trip with John McCain to Estonia, the Arctic, and Iceland. And there's a lot of concern about, you know, Russia's actions and motivations.

There's a lot we should be doing. And we are so totally diverted in a way that I don't think leads to a safer, stronger America in the world.
...

[okie01]

This clown is giving the majority of voters every reason why not to vote for her. She is a very bad joke.

Bill's trick was that he told everybody what they wanted to hear -- even if it meant lying thru his teeth.

Hill can't do that trick.

[DougJ]

What a joke to hear Mr. Appeasement himself telling president Bush to get tough. You can bet those mud mullahs are a lot more scared of George W than they ever were of Slick Willie.

I say that as Iraq winds down, maybe in the fall, we go into Tehran in early 2007, then Syria in 2008, and hopefully, for the trifecta, North Korea shortly after that. The whole axis of evil will fall.

[DoNotDivide]

God bless her. She's lost as a moon bat in a blizzard.

I hope America is finally over its sleezy Communist obsession.