JAMES, THE REAL ONE, PHOENIX AZ:

SIMPLER QUESTION: Do you really think that our armed forces were not ALREADY skirmishing with Quds Forces scurrying to the border after attacking them or supporting those who attacked them — BEFORE Kyl-Lieberman?

Keep your ocean-front property and I will sell you some flood insurance when you build there.

Great whenever someone gets proven wrong they get mad and spin my words.

I asked you when was the last time we declared war?

I understand kyl-liberman fully. My point was for the third time that this president is very unpopular. And should he choose to go to war whether he seeks authorization or not…It will be much easier to sell a war against a terrorist organization…and it is irresponsible to give george bush that kind of clout.

I think that that was clear…you are so angry because I am saying something opposed to your beloved clintons.

Emancipate yourself from Hillaryland!

COACH HAUGHTON NH:

Just WHAT IS your point, Coach? If Bush doesn't need Congressional Authorization to take action against a terrorist state, then you should know that Iran has ALREADY been designated a state sponsor of terror. Bush has ALREADY said that those who sponsor terrorism are the same as terrorists. So, according to your "logic," Bush can already initiate a "police action" against Iran as a "terrorist" state.

According to your own argument, he NEVER needed Kyl-Lieberman to attack Iran. Funny then, that Bush hasn't already used this justification to attack Iran. You know what else is funny? Bush said that Saddham Hussein harbored and trained terrorists, but Bush still went to Congress for a use of force authorization.

Incidentally, THAT was the last time that Congress authorized force against another state, REMEMBER? Sen. Clinton voted for the use of force resolution and that's why you think she'd make a terrible president, REMEMBER? I suppose if you can't keep track of your own arguments, it's useless to expect you to drill down on the fine points of Kyl-Lieberman.

Dawn – MD,

Simple question:

Do you REALLY think President Bush (with the Kyl-Lieberman Resolution) will NOT target Iran's elite guard if they run back into Iran??

We've got some ocean-front property here in Phoenix I'd like to sell you!

you miss the point entirely dawn.
tell me the last time we declared war please.
Police action on a terrorist organization is a lot easier sell that this president needs lest he face impeachment with approval ratings like that.
If he attacks forces inside Iran, will you defend hilliar or hold her accountable.

I SERIOUSLY DOUBT CNN WILL POST THIS ONE!

To Meks

You are one of several slaves that I am fighting to emancipate from hillaryland.

I find it amusing that you post things like that and accuse me of "vitriolic hatred".

My comments reflect my analysis of the facts…if my brashness upsets you I think that may be an indication that you are finding it difficult to debate some of the facts that I present.

You are correct in a lot of what you say…but I think you need some additional facts to understand my point.

You are correct the grand ayotulla directs the revolutionary guard. The grand ayotulla also has all the real power in Iran. I don't suggest that hilliar desires war with Iran…I suggest that this president has a proven track record of unjust, rash and wreckless military action…I suggest that hilliar is irresponsible in this vote and has repeated the same mistake she made with her iraq vote.

If you see the above facts straight from the legislation
(the argument you gave me is the same from hilliars website…hmm)
it is clear and apparent that while it may not be his immeadiate intention to do so..George Bush now has the authority and justification to take military action against the Revolutionary Guard. In reality that is war with Iran because their elected government is mostly symbolic because all power lies in the hands of the ayotullas. Economic sanction on the country of Iran would serve to combat the Revolutionary Guard as well. It may not be as effective but at least it wouldn't help draw the ruling force in iran into the presidents " Global War On Terror". You constantly accuse me of not having my facts right when I happen to be dead on. When I give you more facts you get mad and accuse me of vitriolic hatred. The arguement you presented was the same as on hilliars website.

We are similar in that we really look into the issues before drawing conclusions. I think the differece we continue to have is that you love the clintons so much that you adopt their rhetoric as truth. You are not stupid in doing so because they have a very well spun rap. That is the problem I have with the entire party this cycle. My facts are DEAD ON!

Reread the legislation that I suggest. Keep in mind what we know of George Bush's character. And I think a guy as smart as you should be able to concede that this vote was not a good thing.

Also you know that suggesting that she intended to put a prohibition on war with iran into law was an absolute stunt. Not enough votes, veto, constitutional powers.

I don't hate you or anyone else Meks but stop being her pawn for the sake of america.

Obama 2008

JAMES THE REAL ONE:

The President cannot attack Iranian forces in Iran without Congressional approval: Kyl-Lieberman does not give this approval. According to our Constitution, Congress makes declarations of war. (Art. I, Sect. 8:11). Declarations of war are made against states as long as they still possess sovereignty. If simply labeling a country "terrorist," makes them eligible for attack on the president's say-so, President Bush could have attacked Iran, A STATE SPONSOR OF TERROR, long ago. As badly as some in his administration want to go after that country, why haven't they cited Iran's status as a state sponsor of terror as authority for doing so? BECAUSE IT ISN'T.

The President is OF COURSE free, with or without Congress' authorization, to attack any Quds Forces he should happen to find in IRAQ because the United States is the lawful occupying power there.

As for Osama bin Laden: again, I assert, the man was an INDIVIDUAL CRIMINAL. It would be very strange if the President needed a Congressional authorization of force to arrest or kill a criminal. If Osama bin Laden is the only authority for your argument that labeling part of the regular army of a state entitles the president to attack it without Congressional authorization, that's the END OF THE STORY. The cases simply bear no comparison.

If you have some other authority for your novel theory of warfare, I'd be happy to hear it.

COACH HAUGHTON NH:

Yes, Kyl-Lieberman REQUESTS (NOT AUTHORIZES) that the president exert military power against the Quds Force in IRAQ. Do you seriously believe that if Quds Forces shoot at our armed forces in IRAQ, or supply IEDs that kill our armed forces in IRAQ, that the president doesn't ALREADY have authority to exert military power against them?

For your "argument" that simply labeling a part of another state's armed forces "terrorist" gives us authority to "go to war with" them, please see above.

Hill didn't read the 2002 NIE report
before voting for the Occupation!
Therfore if you don't read the
Bin Laden bound to strike the US,
then you shouldn't be President!

We have a fool / king now that failed
do so and sat in a classroom after
the second plane flew into the WTC.

Obama was against the cash kow for the
Military Industrial Complex! Wise UP!

i really hope this lady does not become president.

James, the possibly unreal one, it isn't a video game! Nice idea that the prez could follow our enemies in every country in the world and punish them. Maybe he could wear that Master Chief suit from Halo when he does that. But here in reality we have to live with the aftereffects of our wars.
We haven't declared war on anyone since WWII, in case you thought we had; all our wars have really only been police actions. It's really hard to declare war on someone unless they bomb Pearl Harbor.

This is directly from the Kyl-Liberman amendment that passed.

(3) that it should be the policy of the United States to combat, contain, and roll back the violent activities and destabilizing influence inside Iraq of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, its foreign facilitators such as Lebanese Hezbollah, and its indigenous Iraqi proxies;

(4) to support the prudent and calibrated use of all instruments of United States national power in Iraq, including diplomatic, economic, intelligence, and military instruments, in support of the policy described in

[Page: S11866]paragraph (3) with respect to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and its proxies;
(5) that the United States should designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps as a foreign terrorist organization under section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act and place the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps on the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists, as established under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and initiated under Executive Order 13224; and

I wasn't sure about this so I looked it up on the senate website.

This DOES give the president justification to take military action against the Iranian army. She is playing the word game by saying that it does not give the president the authority to go to war with Iran. It's not an authorization of war, but the president does not need such a vote to take military action against a terrorist organization. That was the point in giving them the label.

To fully understand you need to look up the emergency economic powers act as well.

This is very scary folks. First Iraq…now this?

Calling it like I see it.

Rocco, if we start voting that other countries are terrier states we will have really gone to the dogs.

We call the Revolutionary Guards terrorists, and many others will call our Marines terrorists.

How did the other candidates vote on this?

I had to post this again because the "Freedom of Speech" censors at CNN removed it:

This verbal tussle demonstrates that Hillary does NOT want to answer difficult questions. This is why she refuses to go on the top rated cable news program, "The O'Reilly Factor".
Senator Kerry made that mistake during the 2004 presidential election (he has since admitted that avoiding O'Reilly in 2004 was a huge mistake).

I will not even consider voting for a politician who refuses to answer questions on issues that affect the life of my family and me.

Dawn – MD,

(Before Kyl-Lieberman Resolution):

Iran is a STATE. The military protecting Iran is the (state-sponsored) elite guard. We can't attack a STATE therefore nothing we can do about Iran's military.

(After Kyl-Lieberman Resolution):

Iran's elite guard is now deemed a "terrorist organization". IT IS NO LONGER a STATE issue, rather – it is a TERRORIST issue (a-la Bin Laden). Now we can attack Iran's elite guard.

Holy moley Dawn, can you REALLY not see the difference?

To Coach Haughton:

The big lying dog! We can impose economic sanction on a country without declaring them a terrorist state but we cannot impose economic sanction on a part of government who strategically aid insurgents with IED's to maim our soldiers,(though i believe the war is pointless), without labeling them with something. Revolutionary Guard is not a state but rather an entity within the Iranain government which runs its own government and is not totally ressponsible to the Iranian president. They have stronger powers in some ways since they take directive from the body of mullahs (headed by supreme commander, Khomeini). Get your facts right before evoking your emotions and vitriolic hatred on this blog. All the bill did was to label them terrorist so state department can impose economic sanction on the members of this group and the group itself. Why don't you for once be honest to yourself.

You people are saying she dodged the question. She didn't dodge the question. She answered it. He said why did she give approval to invade Iran. She said she didn't. She gave approval to list them as a terrorist organization so that sanctions can be applied. You people need to know all the facts before you start talking. The question was answered. She satisfied my curiosity.

Wow! She sure gets a response! Over 260 of them to this article alone! I commend her in her response. She was asked the same exact question three time at three different venues and therefore, the temperment of her response is reasonable. As for the specifics of her response, it is as she said – in order to place sanctions on Iran, the Congress had to first declar its armed forces terrorists. How that translates to a resolution giving Bush unfettered authority to invade Iran is beyond me! And he's not ready to invade Iran…he knows he can't with the current state of our military stretched so thin right now.

Let's see:

8 years Bush Sr VP
4 years Bush Sr Pres
8 years Clinton Bill Pres
8 years Bush Jr Pres
8 years Clinton Hill ? Pres
8 years Bush Jeb ? Pres
8 years Clinton Chelsea
8 years Bush Jenna

60 year empire…. (i bet Bush sr will really feel like a dope being the only one who didn't get 8 years as pres… at least he had the 8 as vice, though)

Van, from NY, you are one poor soul!

"Don't listen to these people, most of whom have based their opinions on their biases and haven't even heard the actual exchange."

And what is your "UNBIASED" source ?
"Hillary is 44…" That is really pathetic if that is your supposedly objective source of information. That is a Hillary propaganda site that is operated by people who won't even disclose themselves who they are and won't post any comments from the public.
Basically they are an echo chamber of Hillary propaganda.

I feel for you Van!

James (the real one),

Your statements don't pan out. What I was saying was the truth of the matter. You and others seem to enjoy stating that the Kyl-Liberman Resolution is some grand scheme to start another war in the region. And your pandering of this as such is simply false.

The Iraq War that we are stuck in now, thanks to the current administration had to go through a good many steps to get even the troops on the ground. There was the attempts at getting the U.N. Security Council to impose more than little sanctions. And there was the continuous bombardment of false information from the administration on who had what and when in the arena of WMDs over there. It wasn't until there was enough, I will use the term "proof" loosely here, that a formal Declaration of War was put to Congress. And I am missing the years and years where Iraq tossed out the inspectors and then let them back in, moved a few things around, then kicked them out again. And the no-fly zone, etc. As you can see it ain't as easy as you seem to make it out!

The fact is that we have a country named Iran that has it's Revolutionary Guard Corps in Iraq and they are not there for a picnic. Their ordinance has been found in IEDs and their personnel have been picked up. Now going as far as complaining to Iran and labeling their guard forces as terrorists? I would say that it fits. But declaring a war? Congress has no intention of doing it and the country wouldn't stand for it.

Telling it like I see it,
Wynter

"So haters and Women bashers… keep hating.."

This is what angers me most about Clinton supporters… those of us who do not support her have a variety of reasons, primarily based on her spotty record, authorization of the Iraq war, terrible environmental record, high negatives going into the general election, inability to find common ground and pass health care in the ninetees, etc etc.

And yet people like you claim the reason we don't like her is that she's a woman. I think that's one of the most ignorant and sexist arguments you can put forward.

I think it would be great to have a female president. But I could not in good conscience support Hillary Clinton.

Sen. Clinton answered Mr. Rolph's question and she answered it fully, accurately, and calmly. Mr. Rolph was simply incorrect when he insisted, repeatedly, that Kyl-Lieberman authorizes military action in Iran. First, Kyl-Lieberman doesn't contain a use of force authorization of any kind because it is a non-binding "Sense of the Senate" Resolution. Second, it REQUESTS that the president use military power against Quds Force operatives in IRAQ, not IRAN. (Newsflash: our forces will do that anyway.)
Sen. Clinton was perfectly reasonable with an ill-informed and VERY persistent questioner who would not accept her ACCURATE answer. She wasn't "testy," or "sharp," or "irritable." Nor did she display a "short fuse.
Can we be done with this silly "story" now?

And JAMES (THE REAL ONE):

Elementary international law point. It's not because Osama bin Ladin was a terrorist that President Clinton was able to go after him in Sudan (I believe it was) without Congressional approval. It's because Osama bin Ladin is an individual, NOT A STATE. States don't declare war against individuals (except metaphorically); they declare war AGAINST OTHER STATES. (Sudan is widely perceived as a failed state, meaning it has no sovereignty to violate, which is why attacking it without congressional approval was within the bounds of international and U.S. law. Afghanistan under the Taliban, likewise.)
THINK ABOUT IT: does the President need Congressional approval before he arrests or uses deadly force against every criminal? No matter how many people the criminal has killed?
By all means, be against Sen. Clinton, but PLEASE, use coherent arguments.

Face it people, Hillary Clinton is taking big corporate money by the bushel and she's joined at the hip with Israel. Just like Bill, who was the best republican president we ever had, she will continue pushing the corporate "free trade" agenda that rapes developing countries and is ruining the American middle class. Sure, she'll throw out a few crumbs like health care and maybe a tax on the wealthy in her first term, but the republicrats in both houses will make sure that none of it ever turns into anything meaningful. By the way, Hillary has no intention of ever pulling all U.S. troops out of Iraq. In the global domination play book that her and Bill read to each other every night, that's the next middle east outpost that the dems will inherit, gratis, from George W.. Sure, she'll pull out a lot of troops, but she has no illusions about giving up that beautiful embassy and all those brand new permanent military bases. Don't forget that she voted to let Bush invade Iraq, and continues to vote funding for it at every opportunity. If Bush attacks Iran, no doubt she'll find some very good reasons to fund that too, no matter what she says in town hall meetings. She voted to let Bush suspend habeas corpus in the name of "fighting terror", and she'll
continue to use the terrorist bogeyman to accumulate every ounce of power for the executive that she can in her presidency (god forbid). Meanwhile, the neo cons are giddy and drooling over the prospect of having another shot at her and Bill. Fox news and CNN are no doubt already digging through their archives for footage of Monica, the hearings, and the whole mess. A Clinton nomination for '08 would mean one thing; can you spell "Guliani"?

We all enjoy the fun of catching a candidate without the answer we feel is correct. Let's not forget some of this is serious stuff. If a vote is necessary to legally name Iran a terrior state that is a more important issue. As much as I hate Bush let us not forget this is serious business.

I'm voting for the Democratic candidate in this election, unless it's Hillary. She was one of the few Dems that I didn't vote for in 2006 when she won a 2nd term as my state's senator. Incidents like this one and her $5K baby bond are a prime reason why. I don't understand how so many Democrats flock to this woman and ignore Obama and Edwards, when in all reality, she's the closest of their candidates to being Republican.

Bryan, Rolph was the dog on Muppet Show. Since being cancelled he's gone really right-wing, insisting that Jim Henson was killed by the Clintons and spending a lot of his own money on right-wing candidates. This isn't the first political rally where he's been spotted barking questions at the audience.

For whatever reason Hillary does not field tough questions and prefers to operate in a controlled bubble. It's a shame, because she is certainly capable, but obviously has an agenda she needs to hide from those of us who are anti-war.

This country has become the Lying States of America. None of the politicians ever tell the truth,either on the left or right. They are just like the Lawyers in the judicial system. Truth has nothing to do with the outcome of a trial, it's only which lawyer can B.S. the jury the best. And the more money you have the better B.S.er you get. Bush has B.S.'d this country into believing he is a christian, but christians aren't supposed to lie in order to start a war. Christians aren't supposed to kill. And christians are supposed to give to the poor not millionaires. Wake up and smell the coffee folks, the god of America is money, not Jesus. The military industrial complex loves this war, they are making hundreds of billions of dollars. And that is why it will go on for the next fifty years. And that is why Hillary refuses to have the troops out by the end of 2013. She said they might not be out by the end of her second term.

that's the problem with being the front runner…it opens you up to scrutiny…she is trying desperately to play the centrist role, but she (nor any other candidate) can be all things to all people. I say she ultimately will shoot herself in the foot…the Dems have become very good at this lately

Ron, if the guy flew thousands of miles to be there just to ask her that question, then he was what I would call a plant. That is, he wasn't a local voter with a concern but an outsider playing reporter.

She has a short fuse and she's playing into this whole "we can attack anybody as long as we call them terrorists" idea. I'm affraid of Hillary. And what's up with calling "hillary haters" "women haters"? I would support a female president if she supported the constitution and didn't want to bury us in taxes. It has nothing to do with her gender, she's just a bad choice for president. Ron Paul has my vote. I wish the media would give him some attention.

…Don't tase me, bro!

Wynter –

You wrote, "But to answer some people's questions on this bill labeling Iran's "Revolutionary Guard Corp's" a terrorist organization. First off, it isn't an authorization to go to war. You need a clear "declaration of war" passed by congress for this to occur as stated by the War Powers Resolution(1973). All of the recent wars including the Iraq war has followed this resolution."

It's amusing to watch Clinton Apologists like you, Wynter, attempting to explain away Hillary's vote on the Kyl-Lieberman Resolution. Your emphatic attempt to assure "it's not authorization to start a war".

You're so desperate to support Hillary you can't see the TRUTH: President Bush was hanging by a thread on the current issues (Afghanistan/Iraq) and had NO support doing anything about Iran. This resolution – calling Iran's elite guard a "terrorist organization" GIVES President Bush the support he needed to take action. Of COURSE he's not going to start a "war" – but he will authorize strikes and engage this "terrorist organization". It's all semantics and you can't see it??

Bill Clinton didn't need congressional approval to command air strikes in an attempt to hit Bin Laden (a "terrorist"). Classifying someone or a group as "terrorist" gives the President and the military permission to attack.

Let me end by saying "thank you" to Hillary and you supporters. As a conservative I hope the President continues pursuing our enemies regardless where they hide (including in Iran). When this gets "ugly" – we conservatives can point back to Hillary's vote and say it had bi-partisan support.

Who cares if the person was a "plant". There should be a plant at all these events. None of the candidates like to answer the tough questions but they MUST.
She is a master of the non answer. And she was not all presidential with her temper. Keep asking the tough questions of ALL those who would be our leader.To Jim in Cleveland…are you daef and blind? You said "good for her…tell it like it is". Where did you hear her tell it at all? All she did was loose her temper and duck the question.

Jo in Atlanta –

You said,

The good people of this great country will give you these by voting for Hillary…

- An end to this war as we know it.
- Health care for your kids.
- Affordable health care for you
- Reduced health care payments by the companies you work for
- The Good old days of high paying jobs

——

LOL… thank you for the belly laugh this morning! I feel much better. Sadly, though, I suspect you REALLY believe those things your wrote:

- End to the War (Hillary is going to continue the war and can't promise troops will be home by 2013!)

- Healthcare for your kids (this one is true – Hillary believes in socialism so anyone that believes personal responsibility is dead and is looking for a government handout should be happy)

- Good old days of high paying jobs (maybe you forgot it was Bill Clinton that signed NAFTA into law – which exported thousands of jobs. Or maybe you don't realize the impact of 15+ million illegal immigrants has by effectively lowering wages in our country…and Hillary wants to give them amnesty)

But don't let truth or facts get in the way of your enthusiam. YOU GO GIRL!!

I would have asked her the same question. In fact, I sent a letter to both her and Senator Charles Schumer's offices expressing my disappointment with their yea votes on the Kyl-Lieberman amendment. I wonder what her response to this letter will be?

Furthermore, if I were at a town hall meeting with Barack Obama, I would have asked HIM why he himself abstained from voting on this particular piece of legislation (along with John McCain).

Then again, I wouldn't even bother to attend a town hall with Hillary because I decided I wasn't voting for her way back when she supported the attack on Iraq. I figured that she knew what she was doing, she was a warmonger, and if she didn't know, she was quite dumb.

I think it's a foregone conclusion that she will win the presidency whether she "deserves" to win or not because Bush-Clinton has got it all wrapped up. At least she can construct a coherent sentence, unlike that other "plant," the Bush currently occupying the White House.

Poor Hillary is just so sure that anyone that doesn't agree with her had to have had the question given to them. If she was half as smart as she claims she would realize that the independent portion of the electorate was on the rise and that they don't kneel at either parties alter.

IT would be nice if we could get answers for questions asked..but I guess if they don't like a question they are a plant. Nice going MS Clinton

This guy was obviously a plant if she's been asked the same question three separate places. But then Romney also had a tough time answering a guy with Muscular Dystrophy who asked, "Are you going to send me to jail for using medical marijuana?" Bottom line: All politicians are born slimy.

So there's Hillary, thinking that people can't think for themselves.

i am "kind of" a fan of hillary clinton, but i will not vote for her.

the question is completely valid whether or not she'd heard it 3x before in other places, because chances are….people aren't following her around to each and every town hall meeting and therefore are not hearing her answers to these repeated questions. it would be different if things were televised and then she was hearing repeated questions.

Let's see if I got this straight:

- Guy asks question about Iran.
- Hillary responds.
- Guy doesn't like her response.
- Hillary explains to the man that there were two versions proposed and that the one she voted on did not give Bush the authority to attack Iran.
- Man still insists that she learned nothing from her previous vote on Iraq.
- She offers to have her staff give him the text of the resolution.
_ Man is still not satisfied with her response.

Frankly, I too would have lost my patience with this man. It apears that no answer that she gave him would have satisfied him. I don't know if you can call him a plant, but he does blog regularly at KOS.

To the writer of the article: The first paragraphs refers to "a questioner". The second paragraph refers to "a questioner". The third paragraph refers to "the questioner". The fourth paragraph refers to "the questioner". The fifth paragraph refers to "the question" and "somebody obviously sent it to you". Then the first word in the sixth paragraph is "Rolph". Who the hell is Rolph? From the context, I assume he is the questioner. If "the questioner" had a name, why not tell me that in the first or second paragraph? I don't know how many articles I have read on cnn.com where I think I'm crazy because the article starts talking about someone who hasn't been mentioned before. Then I have to go back and read it again to figure out if I'm losing it or if you all are just bad writers. Also, does "Rolph" have a first/last name or is he a one name wonder like Madonna?

Go on Hillary haters…

Thank God you are part of the percentile that hates her and will never vote for her. The good news is there are people that like her…

So haters and Women bashers… keep hating..

The good people of this great country will give you these by voting for Hillary…

- An end to this war as we know it.
- Health care for your kids.
- Affordable health care for you
- Reduced health care payments by the companies you work for
- The Good old days of high paying jobs

and much more.

GOP knows there is no stopping her if she wins the primaries. That's why they plant this guys in there.

The guy that asked the question does not live in Iowa…so tell me; he travelled that far from Florida to ask her that question??????

Well now; If the Dems lost again in 08 it won't be because of Hillary, it will be because they couldn't see pass the reason why they hated her more than George "da decider" Bush & Dick "shoot a friend in da face" Cheney. My guess is because she sticks by her man and show strenght in the face of adversity instead of weakness and, definately, because of her gender. Or, Properbly, no matter what a lot of people think they know about her, they can't bring themself to agreed that it's what the right wing and the phamarceutical industries spend 50 million to ingrain in their mind — notwithstanding that the 8 yrs of Bill & Hillary is the best in the last 28 yrs counting the Reagan yrs.
And, bytheway, she did answered the question that was asked!.

I can't believe anyone is actually buying that he was a "plant"! Stop eating every word that comes out of Hillary Clinton's mouth. Start to think for yourself! The same guy asks hard questions of ALL the democratic candidates… as EVERYONE should! These people may be our next President. They NEED to be asked the HARD questions. And each candidate needs to ANSWER the hard questions!

The thing is….Hillary voting to see the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization in not really wrong – her response to a potential constituent speaks volumes of how she will "work" with those whos opinions differ…

What I wan to know is – where does she plan on getting the five grand she says she wants to give to every newborn child for college education? Is she going to tax us to death to get it? On top of that she believes in amnesty for illegals! So illegals come here and use social services and now our taxes are paying for their college education!?!?!? You must be out of your mind lady!

Go Dr. Paul! You are the champion of the Constitution! God bless you sir!
http://www.ronpaul2008.com

I've never been a Hillary hater, but…open mouth, insert foot.

"Hi, I'm Hillary Clinton. I'm paranoid, and I think the American public is too uninformed to pose an intelligent question."

Nice one Hillary.

I don't care if the questioner was a "plant" or not – candidates should still be expected to answer questions and not hide behind handlers and stump speeches. As time passes, Hillary will eventually be asked tough questions, and Obama will eventually consent to interviews that aren't "Oprah puff pieces." I just want a questioner to ask, "How will you keep Iran from getting nukes, bombing Tel Aviv, and blocking the Strait of Hormuz to jack up the price of oil to $300 per barrel?"

Hill is right in Iran case; Iran is threat to Middle east and current iranian president is crazy need to watch carefully.
This guy is left wing hypocrite wants to make hill bad. he should know that she has tons of supporter for what she believes.
Hill for president, '08!!!

I once got a chance to ask Hillary about medical marijuana. She said it was a plant.

Then she kicked my wheelchair off the stage . . .

I hope everyone on this comment board is voting in '08 for their favorite republican so this country can get kick in the back end for another 4 years. Wake up people….big bucks for big business doesn't give a sam hell about you working stiffs… DONT BE SO NIEVE!

I find CNN's process for eliminating opinions interesting. In an earlier note, I simply stated:

- I do not think we need any more Bushs or Clintons as I believe they are
both puppet/stooges bought by the same
military/industrial/congressional complex that CONTROLS both parties.

- I strongly feel that this nation desparately needs representation outside of these two parties, for this
very reason.

WHY SHOULD THIS OPINION BE CENSORED????
IS CNN AGAINST FREE SPEECH ???

LOL – what does Hilary think – there is only one person capable of asking a question in search of a viable answer? Please… why is is that no political figure is willing to answer the tough questions? Do they all think that we are stupid? It's time to let them know that we ARE paying attention!!!

What did Obama do to the networks. Does it mean we need black people as producers? I think it is high time!

I just have two words to say: Al Gore.

OF course, Hillary, it absolutely had to be plant, because you cannot possibly comprehend that someone, somewhere in America could possibly take exception to your cnadidacy. Are you that narcissitically naive as to think that you are the perfect answer to all that is wrong with America?! You need to wake up and smell the coffee and realize that it is your proposed policies of social liberalism, big government, and out of control spending on every policy that would extend the already long are of the federal government that are the problem with America today.

I think it's hilarious that the republican party is so afraid of the Clintons. It's also ironic that the steps Dubya and Cheney have taken will make her the most powerful president in history. The republicans are running full tilt afraid, and everyone knows it. They've been a complete failure. Full of corruption and sexual scandals. The party of Lincoln has become the party of corruption.

Wow, she's pure evil, cackles, and doesn't have pretty legs. Sounds exactly like the LAST FOUR PRESIDENTS, doesn't it?

I guess only a really pretty president can save America now. Rudy, get out the face powder again.

Typical Clinton. Like other people in this country cannot have a rational thought. A lot of people I know have the same questions on the Iran issue and whether the president and congress are ramping up the rhetoric for a strike at Iran.

Hillary has already voted to give Bush the power to invade Iran. Read it and weep dems..

YOU GO HILLARY!!!!!

Busted! About damn time someone confronts this power hungry fraud!

I dont like hillary at all, nor would i vote for any of the current dems, but if their are iranian military men, killing american women and men, then why wouldnt they be labled a terrorist organization. They are KILLING OUR TROOPS.

Rolph clearly needs to get a life. I question what he does in his spare time with the sheep on his farm and I'll bet he can't wait to have George Bush's baby.

In typical political fashion, as if it was a seasonal change in the primary, out come the "verbal assassination" attempts by the other candidates and republicans that want to throw their own monkey wrench into the process. Like a primary ever ran smoothly! Hillary was correct to call the questioner exactly what he was. It's a common practice where a person from another candidate's team sends a specifically worded question to someone attending an event in an effort to fumble them up. They sometimes even take a training class in how to do this effectively. After listening to the combative questioner I would have to come to the same conclusion… he recieved the question from another candidate's team.

But to answer some people's questions on this bill labeling Iran's "Revolutionary Guard Corp's" a terrorist organization. First off, it isn't an authorization to go to war. You need a clear "declaration of war" passed by congress for this to occur as stated by the War Powers Resolution(1973). All of the recent wars including the Iraq war has followed this resolution.

Secondly, this bill only defines this organization, which by the way has been shipping and funding the more technically advanced IEDs that have been killing our troops in Iraq, as a terrorist organization. And if you define terrorism as the funding and equiping of an insurgent force in an attempt to kill troops, civilians, etc. without engaging in clear war then the Revolutionary Guard Corp's are clearing doing this.

The Iran Revolutionary Guard Corp's are a mercenary organization within Iran that is not completely under their government's control. Their primary mission is to protect the Islamic "revolution" which occurred back in 1979. Since then they operate extraterritorily to bring about these ends. This includes forming militant groups and arming them as have been seen in Iraq.

Labeling them what they are is hardly difficult. But is a necessary step in approaching sanctions against Iran.

Telling it like I see it,
Wynter

I would ask the same question if I were in a 'town hall mtg' with her. I would think this is a typical question that she should be more & more familiar being out on the presidential campaign & she should not be so defensive in her response. That's a perfectly legitimate standard question. And Believe me, that is not a 'planted question'. Obviously, she's not relating to us common folks to well.

I am a staunch Democrat….think & feel like a true blue Democrat….but I'm not sure who I will be voting for, if I vote in this upcoming presidential election.

Believe me, there's a 1,000 questions I would like to ask her in person.

Why am I not surprised at how she treated this person? And she's supposed to be better than King George? Come on America, wake up before it is too late!

I worked for the Clintons. If, an opponent responded this way, someone like me would develop a strategy to do just that and more to rattle their cage and get them, 'off-their-game.'

Watch and see, if that scenario develops from 'fellow' democrat candidates or in the general.

Craig Livingstone
Former Clinton campaign and WH Staffer

The whole Iraq mess is so confusing nobody knows what's going on or what's the best move. Blame the guys who dove in and couldn't pull out for that, not the opposition party.

All the candidates are pretty crummy this time around. By now America would vote for an actual elephant or donkey if it said it would get us out of Iraq.

Some of these comments are laughable. First of all, many of you say this was an extremely important question. Well, where were you 8 or 4 years ago when many of you voted a complete idiot into the White House? There are many, way more important questions that have never and will never be answered.
Second, the reason she voted for the war was because she had been fed a bunch of total lies. If I was told all these lies I would ahve voted for the war as well. To this day Colin Powell is still sick to his stomach that he believed and helped spread those lies at his famous speech at the UN.
Second, the sentiment at the time was very pro war. If you spoke against it you were labeled "unpatriotic". Hillary knew of course she was going to run for president and didn't want to risk being labeled "unpatriotic". At the time polls showed that 80% of the country wanted the war. Everyone believed the lies. Obama, who I like and respect as well, has the luxury that he never had to vote for or agaiinst the war. With all the lies he may have voted for the war as well, who knows.
HIllary will lead this country and has the experience to do so. I don't want another 8 years of religious crap. I want a president who will lead this country in the iddle. Not too much to the left, not too much to the right. Her husband did that and was a great president. No matter what mistakes he made in his private life, he was a good president. Not an extremist. The reality is that we currently face a religious extremist who had lead our country into the abbyss. Everyone hates us and we are stuck in an unwinnable war. No matter how much you are agaisnt the war, we still need someone who can lead us out of there the right way. Hillary has the ability to do that. As far as the inplant I'm glad she had the guts to speak up iso cower down. Good for you Hillary!

Good Job Hillary!!! Any person who thinks you will lead us to war with Iran is just an idiot who is scrambling for some scare tactics to sway voters. Get real people!!! Hillary is privy to the fact that 70% of us are opposed to this occupation with Iraq and she is not about to ignore that fact, complicate it further and get us into another disastrous mess with Iran.

Hillary is most likely going to be the democratic presidential candidate and ALL democrats need to stand behind her and get her into office. Quit making idiotic threats that if she is the nominee "I'm voting for someone else".

Imagine President Guiliani, Romney, or worst of all, McCain. It's stupid to think the Democrats can't beat these losers in the next election. Any of the Dem. candidates are better choices. We need to band together, no matter who our candidate is.

Just wait until the compassionate conservative christians start running their 'Swift Boat' attack ads on her. She'll be toast for the neocons. Then they can send someone else's kids to Iran to die for oil.

That would be so unlike the Republican Slime Machine to send disruptive plants against their future opponents. They bekieve in truth,justice & the American Way. Hell, they wear American Flag lapels. They(Rove,Inc.) are PATRIOTS!!!

I'll add my vote to the many above:
That simply being we do not need any
more Bush's or Clinton's. They are both
bought out by the same cartel, that chose to cover themselves by placing bets on both sides. That's not to say that most of the other candidates are better….this country desperately needs to rid itself of both parties !!

Both parties are are almost mirror images of one another. No wonder the dems and repubs are deathly afraid of a third part. A third party would cast serious light on how crooked these two parties really are. Four years of Billary will just be a continuation of Bush, et al.

I am a woman and Hillary never got into my mind. I see her a joker more than Obama. I see Obama going all the way. This guy is sharp. Watch how it will play out. Don't forget Obama didn't know many people in the world than Clinton and here is the media campaining for her. I hate to hear she has won all the time the debate is over after a campaign when the debate is on. The same media has supported bush all the way and I wonder whn Americans will ever have their take.

CLINTON ALL THE WAY. WE SEE WHAT YOU REPUBLICANS ARE ATTEMPTING. CLINTON IS VERY DIPLOMATIC FOR HOLDING THESE EVENTS. WHERE ARE THE REPUBLICANS? PLAYING GOLF I BET.

Billary is just like her husband, a BORN LIAR! This woman plays to the crowd. When she's in Harlem, she says what African-Americans want to hear; when she's in rural Ohio, she says what Midwestern whites want to hear. It's sad that the democrats always trot out such tired, passe candidates every four years and it's sad that so many people will vote for this manipulative, deceitful and evasive woman. Four years of Billary could very well be even worse than eight years of GW. People, let's please not make a mistake that will keep this country mired in unnecessary war for another eight years!

It is quite obvious that Hillary will do anything for a vote. I mean come on after she found the stats on Hispanics being the fastest growing minority she immediatley began courting them for votes.She does not answer questions directly …vague at best..and worst of all thinks the American people who pay her salary even as a Senator are too dumb to ask questions about a troubled country and how she intends to repair the damage "if" elected.
Now we ask ourselves do we continue with the same old same old every 4 yr empty promises and hopes or elect someone , Obama , who is not afraid to buck the system and is a man of action instead of empty words.If we as a country want change then we as a country must take a stand and vote for whats in all of our best interests instead of worrying about party .

It looks like Hillary has been using his campaign fund to pay cnn…..Has someone realized Obama is invisible nowadays….I think the media is to blame for Howard Dean fall. They kept people hiped and that is why he bursted! This is no exception to hillary. Let their emotion not run high in january for he. I predict a major depression.

My oh my Hillary Clinton sure has certain political runners,leaders etc. running scared! What's wrong Washington, can't handle someone who knows what they're doing, little alone… A STRONG WOMEN…..you better run because she is our next commander in chief!!!!! YAHOO!

Tammy

It's New Hampton, Iowa – not North Hampton. FYI.

rrrreeeeooooooooowwwwww fffft, ffffft. Hillarious!

Here's what you people can expect for the next 4 years. What a condesending wench. Is she going to cry out like that every time she has an assumption? LET ME FINISH? I love it! I can't wait for her to lose.

At least Clinton did not have the student attacked and arrested as the Republicans (and, sadly, Kerry) would have done.

Remember Bush's "town hall meetings?" Only Bush loyalists were allowed in, and if anyone showed any signs of disagreeing, they were hustled out and/or arrested. That’s Bush’s idea of free speech.

I see that President Ahmadinejad does the same now. Bush and Ahmadinejad—mirror images.

I don't think she's been asked that question enough. If she wants Democrats' support, she needs to be a leader, not a follower.

Hilary,

You have been asked that question 3 times, because people are concerned about where such a distinction might lead. You didn't think it possible that more than one person could share the same conerns? If not, you certainly don't kow the people of this country and I would call your ability to lead this nation into question.

ARE ALL REPUBLICANS FOOL'S? ARE ONLY FOOL'S REPUBLICANS?

Posted By HAWK, TEXAS : October 8, 2007 5:51 pm

Thank you "Hawk" for your usual well thought out and intelligent posting with CAPITAL letters that augment your genius.

Keep up the good work, "Hawk"?.

Those damn Republicans getting her to yell at this guy for having the stupidity to ask the annointed one a tough question with the expectation of an actual "presidential answer".

The reality is that she did not know if he is a plant, but you saw her angry reaction to someone asking her something that wasn't a softball question.

it seems Clinton is going to have other problems now that Mr. Berger might be advising her. But I dont think you will read that on CNN.

Plant or flower – you still should answer the question in a dignified manner Hilary.

Even if he was planted, an "experienced" leader (or so she claims) should just simply answer the question. If she was asked the same question previously, she obviously knows the answer. Quit your moaning and groaning Hillary and answer a real question for once….

I'm also shocked she didn't do her little hyena laugh before her "experienced" answer. Oh, Hillary… where did your inner hyena go?

Go Hillary! Their hate is a measure of your success. We are out here, quietly waiting to vote for you.

If Hillary were a man, I doubt there would be all the fuss. Let's face it – she has a steeper mountain to climb than all of the other candidates, Democrats & Republicans. She has my vote. She's complex & intelligent… you don't get a simple answer from her because she recognizes that most answers aren't simple as most of you would like to believe. She's trying to represent all of Americans – liberals and conservatives. It's the game of politics… did you expect anything else?

Senatro Hillary Clinton is a smart lady and is benefitting from her husband Bill. The Voters need to understand that Hillary is running for herself and not to serve the Amereican people. She is a power hungry, egotistical women seeking to be the most powerful job. If you want to do something for this country than vote for Edwards, Obama or Biden but certainly not Clinton.

Let's see:

8 years Bush Sr VP
4 years Bush Sr Pres
8 years Clinton Bill Pres
8 years Bush Jr Pres
8 years Clinton Hill ? Pres
8 years Bush Jeb ? Pres
44 years

Enough. Wake up America. This is America, is it not?

It is time for frsh leadrship.

I dont like the last 20 years of leadership. And another 8 years of the same 20. If we vote clinton and we get the same po po we had for the last 20 years. Then we have no place to complain !!!!! since we elected the same old leaders agin. So we get what we deserve more failed leadership.

I perfer Joe Biden but Obama ok too.

Come on !!!!!!!is it time for new fresh leadership or the same ole poo poo leadership we had for the last 20 years????

Whats next ??Hill does 8 years then Jeb Bush from flordia does 8 years then 8 years of Clinton daughters then 8 years of Bush daughter. And so on.

Enuf is Enuf. No more corpate republicans and no more Clintons.

Go Biden or Obama !!!!!!!

God help me If Hill gets ELECTED then Jeb Bush runs after 8 years of Hill them Im Moving out of the US. By then we be a country of no hope and live in fear. And the Amercian Dream will be Bankrupt.

YEAH! BRING'EM ON BUSH!! YEEEEAHHHH!!!

Not surprising. She should do what bush does, have her goons make sure there aren't any.

Look! Over there, its a plant. No!! Don't read it again!!!

Clinton's recent Senate vote calling on President Bush to formally call the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization confers Bush with the ability to invade the country.

Go Hillary! Politics is tough business, full of negotiation, compromise, and balancing of multiple issues. Those of you who are so vehemently opposed to Hillary are pretty simple minded thinking "your way is the right way". That sort of thinking is just like Bush. What you call lying is compromise and negotiation – that's politics – get real! I like Hillary because she's trying to bring a moderate balanced point of view – Republicans are voters too and if you don't try and represent their thoughts or consider their thoughts then you are no better than what we already have. Is that what people want? A single minded simple President – we've had 8 years of that. Simple minds breed simple Presidents.

Also I forgot to say, IT'S ABOUT TIME WE GOT A REAL ISSUE. NO GOD IN THIS STORY, YEAH!!!!!!! bACK TO REAL ISSUES OF POLITICS.

I think, finally, people are starting to see through ms. Clinton's thin veil of civility. The metamorphosis of her every-changing campaign. "Advisors" whispering in her ear, trying to shape a "winner". The laugh-track phase was my personal favorite. Disingenuous. I truly pray the American people will come to understand that a disingenuous CANDIDATE will most certainly be a disengenuous president. Do you folks want someone in power that looks upon the American people as a bunch of dunces that can't be trusted with the truth? Personally, I'm sick and tired of that- I am an intelligent citizen of this country- and I've had my fill of half-truths and lies. With Hillary- I can only see more of the same. I have much respect for Sen. Obama- I hope he secures the nomination-

Duh….have something to hide? Worried about something, like maybe voter intelligence…gotta watch that paranoid response!

Once again we see the true attitude and response from Clinton. This is a woman ready to blame someone for entrapping her to answer a question. It's always a conspiracy against her and her husband. She even showed once again that her secret service and other people that has served her that said she was easily angered and defensive was right. That's what we want running the country. I don't think so.

Thank Van Reuter for proving to me that Hillary is every bit as shrill as I've been told. I was leaning Hillary, but after watching the video your supplied I'm voting Obama. I believe Obama, even if he knew the dude was a plant, would have answered his question. Van Reuter, you have done me a great service and I thank you. I'm for Obama now.

SHE DOESN'T HAVE MY VOTE (OR MANY IN THE MILITARY) VOTE AS SHE DOESN'T CARE FOR THE PEOPLE OR THE TROOPS. ASK AN ACTIVE DUTY SOLDIER, SAILOR OR MARINE!
As she stated to my husband in NMF-Iraq when she displaced troops from helocopters when she wanted to 'change' her schedule for her convenience… she stated "It's the troops job [to be in danager]…" her change knowingly by her placed troops in hummers vice their scheduled helos so she could 'change' as she desired. She also didn't want to do any PR time with them and fussed with one of her 'handlers'/ 'manager' when she said "Fine I'll do it" she cut her time short and didn't show her care for the soldiers or sailors present… including my husband (he was so disappointed) We share our testiment with all who will listen as this is a side of Hillary she like to dress up in drag and pass of as a 'caring politician' HOG WASH! GO HOME HILLARY.

Clinton NEVER answers a question straight on. When she's not bashing other candidates, another party, anyone she can to take the focus off of her incompetence, she's tiptoeing around questions.

What is the difference between Clinton and Giuliani? Only fiscal policy. Hillary Clinton will govern like a Republican if elected.

The point isn't whether the questioner was a plant or her arrogance – it's about her answer. She used this very rationale in explaining her previous vote for authorizing the war in Iraq. She has no experience (aside from being the First Housewife) and she's just not very smart. She is, however, underhanded, conniving, unprincipled, and untruthful. I agree completely that it's time we had a woman as President, just not this one. I've never voted for a Republican in my life, but couldn't vote for Clinton in good conscience. She's the only candidate that could lose the presidency for the Democrats.

LOL! I can't believe anyone would ever vote for her or take her seriously! What a joke!

~*~Mitt Romney 2008~*~

She is just like Bush. Sorry Hill, but I’m a lib to the bone and I also want to know why you voted for the Iran bill!!! In fact when I heard about it you dropped off from being my #2 choice to not being a choice at all for me in 2008, and the way you answered that guy’s question. If your not prez I can also say if you run in NY again you will not have my vote. I think it’s safe to say the base of the Dems, and Reps are getting sick of their leaders.

Ray in Pensacola,

Not all of us that comment voted for Bush. I voted against him twice. I don't get the logic of those who vote for him and who support this kind of nonsense-he was so darn successful at creating fear to gain votes and take illegal action. An ignorant public is taking our country down the tubes.

your comment:
You people who comment are all the same ones who put W in office twice. The man invaded a country and let Americans die in battle so his Vice President's company could make billions of dollars. W cares NOTHING about this country. He and the Republicans are about one thing only, MONEY for themselves and there friends.

I agree with this completely. It would do many people good to do some research into PNAC and what was going on just prior to 911. 911 gave W and Cheney an easy catalyst to invade Iraq in the hope to control middle eastern oil. Wake up America, we are not there for any other reason. Cheney made millions off of the war with his involvement with Haliburtan and their no bid contracts giving no other company any input at all. Now it appears we are being primed to invade Iran as well. The media and congress have fallen right back into the same ignorance as before. Hillary scares me just as much as Bush and company. Rudi and many of the Republican candidates are just as ignorant, or worse, money hungry and run by corporate America. We need a candidate that truly cares about American interests, not just his or her own. I support Obama wholeheartedly. I fear though, that our public is too easily influenced, cannot think for themselves and it will be the demise of our country.

Dear TimeforaChange in Raleigh:

You are a neighbor to me in NC…explain exactly how having Hillary as our next president will be a change? We have had 28 years of either a Bush or a Clinton Controlling the White House….so a change would be going from a Bush back to a Clinton? For every fault you can find in Bush, I can find you an equal one that did just as much damage under the Clinton years….if you want a CHANGE, then you need to get away from the "status quo"

I'm alarmed by how many psychos think President Bush needed Clinton’s approval to do anything. Also I think it is pretty self serving to criticize her for voting for something almost everyone thought at the time (especially since their opinion was anonymous). So the big complaint about her here is she doesn't let it slide that her adversaries are playing cheap games. Silly me, I thought she was running for President of the US, not the Rotary Club. I also think the issue of Iran is a serious one, and shouldn't be handled with peace signs and sit ins. I don't see anyone in this race that brings as much experience, savvy, and statesmanship. I take comfort in the fact that people take more interest in posting this junk than they ever do in voting.

RE THIS POST: THANK GOD I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE WHO HAS PICKED UP ON THIS! It is funny how Mrs. Clinton can say "We need to change the direction of this country" Well The only way you can have change is to MAKE A CHANGE…If they have the name BUSH or CLINTON, They will NOT get my vote. 28 years is enough of 2 Families controling this country. She and her husband need to retire, along with the Bush's.

****************

8 years Bush as VP
4 years Bush as President
8 years Clinton as President
8 years of Bush jr as President
28 years of Bush or Clinton.

Isn't that enough years of Clintons/Bushs guiding our country?

Posted By Danny, Virginia Beach, VA : October 8, 2007 4:44 pm

This verbal tussle demonstrates that Hillary does NOT want to answer difficult questions. This is why she refuses to go on the top rated cable news program, "The O'Reilly Factor".

Senator Kerry made that mistake during the 2004 presidential election (he has since admitted that avoiding O'Reilly in 2004 was a huge mistake).

I will not even consider voting for a politician who refuses to answer questions on issues that affect the life of my family and me.

Of course he was a plant! Peole who are belligerent aren't there with an open mind supporting the candidate, they are there trying to knock the candidate down. She handled herself very well. These attacks are pathetic and desperate. Hillary has my vote.

Hillary's been asked the same damn question because it's such an obvious one. The fact that she doesn't GET why this vote was wrong, is exactly WHY she won't be a good president. She's totally out of touch with her own perception with the American people. She's isolated, she lives in an ivory tower, and she is arrogant.

Sound familiar? She really is George Bush light.

No, Ray of Pensacola. I never voted for that *evil* clown.

Every Right Wing, Left Wing, and middle of the road person needs to read the brief article called "Middle East Imperative" – By: Jimmy L. Cash, Brig. Gen. USAF Ret.

It will take you 5 minutes. Read that article, then sit and think about who you are going to support. All, the left wants to do is do everything against what Bush has done. They are not thinking of ways to change the future. However, Bush is a complete knucklehead who has made alot of mistakes.

You can see I am not affiliated with any party. Just read that article, Im dead serious.

Since the campaign season started out so early with a millino debates, they are all tried…exhaustion sets in, I wouldn't be surprised if we hear some strange things fro Giuliani, Romney or Obama….campaigning takes a toll.

The claws come out!

Hillary is as arrogant as Bush, but she might be just a bit smarter. One way or another, she's VERY "establishment" and very dangerous — to our Republic. She's the socialist candidate. She thinks she knows what's best for you because she thinks she knows everything.

Yes. This person may have been "planted"; however, none of the other candidates who were subject to his questions erupted in such an immature way as Hillary. You are NOT presidential material. You are an embarrassment to us all. I can't find the strength to vote for you. I am NOT voting for you.

…So lets measure and weigh how "sparring with a questioner" stacks up against the "crimes" against humanity and the US people that Bush and his administration have committed!

I can see around me far more heinous crimes, many that reach the level of impeachment at least, than "sparring with a questioner."

Of course Ann Coulter and the extreme right can behave as reprihensibly as they chose. When the Dem's start firing back its some other ball game with a whole different set of rules!

CNN…two factions in Iraq have just signed a peace treaty…I have yet to find anything about that in your reporting. For those of us who possess intelect and reasoning, please report on the more important issues of the day. You have two posts about this issue with Hillary and the questioner. That is not, in my opinion the most noteworthy news of the day. If you don't smarten up (intellectually speaking) I'll get my news elsewhere.

I have exactly the same concerns as the person asking Sen Clinton this question, but I'm not a "plant". Its beginning to look like if you don't limit yourself to the questions Sen. Clinton finds politically convenient to answer, she'll launch an attack on you. Cheap shot.

Perhaps Senator Clinton has been asked the question 3 times prior because she has never provided an adequate answer.

The Repooplican slime machine knows nothing of courtesy or class. Of course they send in "plants" with loaded questions hoping for a video sound-bite that they can then use in their ads. They're looking for a "gotcha! moment. Does anyone think it is pure chance that sequential "questioners" of Senator Clinton seem to ask the exact same question(s) that are phrased virtually identically? Hah!

If you listen to the exchange, you'll find that Hillary is really not abrasive or even tremendoudly ruffled– but is firm and tenacious. If this had been McCain or Guiliani setting sombody straight, people would be applauding. Frankly, I'd rather have a president who doesn't just roll over when continually hammered with an aggressive question.

When we go to the negotiating table with Iran, N. Korea, Russia, china, whoever– I want Hillary there, with as much "attitude" as she can muster, to drive the a bargain for America.

So did she close it out with a light-hearted cackle? It's obvious that she thinks she's above these people who she's asking to vote for her. Why would anyone support her, except that they've bought the MSM's claim of inevitability?

I hope someone in the media is doing there job here. They should be running down those other three times she was asked the question. I believe it is likely a lie on her part, but no one holds her feet to the fire. She can say anything wether an opinion, truth, or lie. However, if someone has a different opinion or thought, they are a "plant" or radical evangelical.

You think by now that the Democrats would understand that the voting public don't want war with iraq, and really don't want war with iran.
Hillary isn't going to get votes by being hawkish on iran, I wonder who the heck is advising her on this.

Asked the same question in other places? Maybe because more than one person has the brain cells to realize just how ridiculously bad an idea that vote was. If you're going to vote to call a unit of another country's military a terrorist organization, you better be prepared to take more steps than just sanctions.

If she's not prepared to go to war with Iran, she shouldn't be supporting that vote.

And well, if she is prepared to go to war with Iran, she certainly isn't getting my vote.

I still just can't believe how many people support her, no matter what. And I really believe most of her supporters aren't supporting her, they just have fond memories of BillClinton, and can't separate the two.

People need to understand that Bill Clinton is not running for president. Bill Clinton is barred from being president again. Period. This candidate is Hillary Clinton. Bill will just be her "house husband."

This guy "Rolph" was a plant, and there will be more such losers as the election moves forward. The Republican Dirty Tricks Committee is alive and well. If Senator Clinton was a war hero, they would be dragging out the Swift Boat lairs. Hillary will win by a landslide, and it will be the Women that put her in the White House. The Group that hates her is very small, but very vocal, and will lose in the end.

You know ya all lived well,in the clinton years who didn't,well see them again in the white house,she will be the Next president,I want to buy extra things for my grandson and college.I dont want him paying for this damn lied war,they desreve to live good and prosperous, like we did in the clinton years'she is the only choice to get get us out of a totally messed up Country,it is messed,and so the guy if he was plant or a gop,its broken,you wont ever get it back for 22 years,or even more.if our generation can't pay for it,Presidents or Canidates shall not make a hugh deficit,then there has to be something done before they leave office, for the republicans in there,id make the party bankrupt payback for it every year millions towards this huged deficit.It shouldnt be us or our grandchildren and there children,shows ya republicans have no fiscal responsibilty.Get the big spenders out.Tired of hearing about the war tired of hearing about kids dying and troops dying.terroist coming after us,its crazy,and I know Mrs. Clinton with her husband can fight for us back to reality/OUR COUNTRY and let us travel,there has to be peace throughout the world. again someday

She can't even take the pressure of a bona fide question without resorting to a dictatrial response. Bush-Lite is what she offers.

I think she was just surprised a common man could have delved into the intricasies of Washington.

We're not all dumb Hilary!

http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=277#comments

That video linked above that the guy keeps posting has obviously been tampered with…Nice try.

Irregardless if the guy was a plant or complete moron who just stumbled into the debate. HRC's behavior was unacceptable. Do you really want someone in office who flys off the handle like that. We've had 8 yrs of that kind of nonsense.

I can't wait for a woman President,you men are so lost,ya cant run a country like the old timers could of,so the reigns will turn over to the best loyal person, your not going to be heard,you had your chance,so it's Hillary's turn.

So if your going to an event for Hillary,Watch OUT~~~~she can tell if your and Iowa one.or a NEW Hampshire one,she can tell if your fake to,she's freaking smart.I will vote for you Hillary Keep the news a coming,keepin on there toes.IF you can get 30 million to read that is progress,he did his own research,what is that research ~~~reading~~~ He read it in the NEWS. BTW she is a senator,and a CANDIATE FOR PRESIDENT the only one who stands up to this Bush who likes to watch wars, who gives Americans nightmares.

Ray: How can you Possibly think that electing Hillary will bring significant change to our country? She is just another entrenched, out-of-touch politician. How can we possibly think that electing another person from the Clinton/Bush era is a good thing for our country? You think our current situation has been built in just last two presidential terms?! That is naivete at it's best–and exactly what Hillary is counting on.

WAKE UP people–it's time for a change!!!

Isn't it safe to say all politicians act like this in some way, shape or form? I really don't understand why we have to treat politics so theatrically. Our society as a whole really needs to be looked at and truly evaluated I believe.

She answered and she stood her ground by god! the others would have turn there nose the other way with ummm hmmms and ugh"she faced him face to face.i would have not appologized ,she is smart she figured it out. who's who"Keep tough hillary,get em in there spin zone chair.the crowd look at him we dont know you.so remember that people because ya got strong hillary supporters watching to who's who.they gave her applause.Btw it was all over the news but the news and the man didnt know there were two versions. and obama missed that vote again awol.

Ah yes, Hillary the Artful Dodger, the weaver and bobber, is at it again. Does she have a clue about what she believes about anything at all? What a hollow person she is.

I am a Democrat and if I were at one of these, I would be asking the same thing. It disgusted me to think she didn't learn anything from the first stupid, not thought out vote that got us involved in Iraq. Not all of the Democratic party thinks she is peachy! I see her as taking us right down the path we are heading already. When I watch her debate, she can never answer a question straight. The hard ones set her off. We need someone with more integrity, honesty and decision making skills in office. Hillary just isn't the candidate for me.

Deucebollards i sincerely agree with u.
This woman thinks she is running a campaign for the Clinton's-Bush empire.
These are questions of fundamental interest and deserves valid answers than selling after the market, Bush was wrong to invade Iraq but it wouldn't have been possible without the heip of people like HIllary with no sense of judgement or appreciation of the job of the men and women fighting these wars of choices.
PLease Hillary why do think is problematic for u to give a humble explanation for your egocentric voting records just for the sake to appear tough for the general. Do u sincerely think is the sole solution to start another front with Iran. By naming the Iranian national guard terrorist organization gives president Bush all rights to extend his belligerency. U now claim this guy was sent likewise TIM RUSSERT.
THE MEDIA IS GIVEN THIS WOMAN A FREE PASS BECOS OF SOME NOLSTAGIA FOR BILL BUT U SHOULD NOT FORGET THE FUTURE OF EVERYONE IS AT STAKE. WAR SHOULD BE AT THE LAST RESORT WHEN ALL DIPLOMACY HAS BEEN EXTINCT.
" A WORD TO A WISE IS SUFFICIENT"
OBAMA 2008

In their rush to discredit Mrs. Clinton, all the haters have overlooked an obvious point: Iran's revolutionary guard IS a terrorist organization.

The idea that Bush would attack Iran is a red herring. He doesn't have the troop numbers, the political clout, or the money to do so due to his debacle in Iraq.

Hillary's vote was absolutely correct.

I saw her reaction. I was a little suprised. Anyone see "Godfather".

Never let them know what you thinking. Even if she thought it was a plant, why mention it?? Just deal with like a pro, thats what politics is.

Anyway she is still a sharp person I would vote for her or Barak.

Maam, are you a doctor? No, but my husband is. Vote Hillary, the experienced candidate. I seriously don't understand how she does so well in the polls. Since when did being married to someone give you experience in what that person does?

Hillary was concerned that the question posed has been asked three times before. Does that mean she is not interested in answering questions about important mainstream topics?

Right On…
The guy was a plant. He blogs for a local version of KOS, and was in the NYT on Oct.5th. Google him and you'll find his extreme left writings and photo in the NYT.
The sad, angry, and vocal fringe minority of Hillary haters will latch on to anything, no matter how trivial, to reinforce their bias and soothe their tortured souls.

The crowd cheered Clinton.

Posted By VanReuter NY NY : October 8, 2007 4:54 pm

Obviously a plant, so what!!! Like the dems don't do it too. The thing I find funny is you people who whine about how horrible she is and how she doesn't answer the hard questions. That strikes a funny bone knowing most of you probably supported GWB who never sat in front of any crowd that wasn't hand picked. I guess he always answered the hard question eh? You guys kill me with the hypocricy.

Hillary is a war-monger that is really not much different from Bush. But the right hates her so she doesn't get any benefits. I don't understand why she goes against her "base" so much.

I'm afraid if she gets the nomination, we will have another Republican in the White House. I guess this would be true if she won too (as she is pretty much a Republican- she was even President of the Republican club at college).

Get to know Dennis Kucinich- Strength through Peace~

Another post had it right: She is a joke!

The fact that she is even a canidate after everything that's happened is last 7 years is mind blowing!

Any other democratic canidate would be better than her…

Hillary keeps stating she wants to be the first female president of the United States. Why then doesnt she dress like a female instead of wearing pants all the time. when was the last time you saw Hillary in a skirt of dress. She could take a lesson or two from Nancy Pelosi who dresses like a classy woman.

Posted By Ted Kwapien, Everett, Wa

Maybe the reason she was asked the same question "in three other places" is because MANY people are asking for an explanation to a questionable stance!

Whether this guy was a plant or not, she still can't account for her vote on this. She tried to make up for it by supporting the Webb bill on tour limits, but Webb himself said that wasn't good enough, that she never should have voted for Kyl-Lieberman. How many times will she make the same mistakes?

Very disappointing.

what a jerk.

What the hell is Bill Clinton doing participating in this campaign? Are you people stupid or just brain dead? No-one is complaining that Wild Bill is taking over this campaign? What's wrong with you Democrats? Brainwashing! It must be brainwashing. No intelligent person would stand for that.

Where is the copy editor here? Who is Rolph? Is that a first name or last name. Annoying. Do better.

Well, Paul from Philly, if she's your idea of "competant" I shalln't be surprised. You claim you worked on "Capital" Hill, huh? At least we now have an idea as to who's being elected to public office.

Sen. Clinton DID answer the question. She said that the version of Kyl-Lieberman that came up for a vote DID NOT contain an authorization to invade Iran. Nor could it be construed to do so. A simple read of the resolution will confirm that this answer was 100% accurate. I wonder how many people who are accusing Sen. Clinton of "dodging," "evading," "lying" to Rolph have actually read the resolution. If you have, please point to the clause(s) that authorizes an invasion of Iran.

i TKINK hILLARY WILL WIN BECAUSE SHES THE FRONT RUNNER ISNT THAT HOW IT HAPPENED FOR HER HUSBAND.

Want more of the dynasty? Ron Paul 2008, evolve…

It's NOT a tough question. Kyl-Lieberman does NOT permit any use of force in IRAN, much less give President Bush the authority to invade that country. Nor does Sen. Clinton sound "heated," "sharp," or out of control in any way in her exchange with Rolph.
Sen. Edwards and much of the "progressive" press have been doing their best to blur the distinction between requesting that the President take action against Quds Force operatives in IRAQ and allowing him to do so in IRAN. A simple read of the resolution makes clear that such blurring is completely disingenuous. And the MSM should not report on the argument without making it clear that this is so. There is a clear answer in this "tussle,": Sen. Clinton is right, Rolph is wrong, and this is not debatable.

"Run out of facts? Here come the personal attacks!!!"

How funny. She knows very well that the public has been researching, and albeit, found that she has a shady past, namely her outside political affiliations which DO affect our domestic and foreign issues. For her to suggest otherwise, which she did, earned her more doubt from the already doubtful and incriminate her more on her personal objectives. Remember that you are debating a robot when they run out of facts, cause then come the…

I agree with Karen in NYC.. Hillary is a liar… she learned well from her husband Bill…oh yeah, a "Past President". Wake Up America! We don't need this woman in the White House! We need a REAL LEADER who can answer the "tough questions" and make the "tough decisions" to run this country and get us back on track!

Hill, New Hampton, Iowa –

And Thanks to you, also.

Get ready for it Hillary. More than 50% of the country are "Plants."

Paul, Philadelphia –

You're my hero, not because I like Hillary Clinton (which I do) but because you gave such a relevant, coherent, non-partisan answer to very partisan streams of thoughts.

Thank you.

Well, at least she answers questions from people who have another point of view. Bush has required that only loyal Bushies have been at his campaign stops.

What a nothing issue. One guy brings up a question. She answers it. He doesn't like the answer. So, was she rude? The poor baby.

I'm not sure who I'll be voting for, but it won't be Hillary Clinton. I think 20 years of "Democratic" rule between Bush & Clinton are enough.
Posted By Sean : October 8, 2007 5:33 pm

Sean, you need to get your facts straight. Bush has been president for eight years. I would think everybody would know by now that he is actually a REPUBLICAN. Are you that daft that your hatred of the Democrats has clouded the facts in your little head? Bush is as much a Republican as was his redneck father, whom took a similar course of action (but at least he wasn't a compulsive liar).

But I'll give you credit as for Clinton. If Clinton cannot respectfully answer a serious question from a potential voter, how in the heck is she gonna negotiate with the major world leaders? Declare war on them and further us down the path of destruction? No, I have never supported Clinton, and certainly won't now.

Indeed, the only way in hell I'll vote for her is if Barack Obama is her running mate. At least he has got his head screwed on tight and his priorities in line.

verbal spat with a Iowa voter.

verbal spat with an Iowa voter…

Please correct.

Obama would have answered that question. If Hillary’s recent Senate vote calling on President Bush to formally call the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. Is not a vote she is proud of, she should not have voted for it. It is a repeat of her vote for authorizing the president to go to war with Iraq. She hates answering questions and blames all of her failures on the vast right winged conspiracy. Remember when she blamed them for the (False) story of Bill having Sex with Monica. As President you cannot say as she did in the debate “ I’m just not going to answer that question” She treats people like she is their mother. Instead of answering attendee’s questions she schools them like her children and tell them those questions should not be asked. Hillary is a good politicain. BUT she is NOT what we need as President now. Can we PLEASE look at these Politicians qualifications this time! And NOT the BS Media Hype!

Obama also attacked Clinton today for voting for that bill making the Iran Guard a terrorist group. Naturally, reports that Obama himself had co-sponsored a similar bill last April did not help his credibility

It would be easier to see the democrats as 'good guys' if they weren't so spineless passing everything Bush wants them to. At this rate I am thinking I will not bother voting in the election at all because there will not be anyone at all who is worth voting for.

I disagree with Senator Clinton on her views on the approach we should take with Iran. I always have.

Well Done Hillary.

Don't let my fellow Americans comments deter you in the slightest.

There are some that are threatened by a woman who can be aggressive, assertive and centrist.

With a nation as polarized as ours, only a centrist will be able to win it.

Everyone, just relax. This woman is brilliant.

Good for you Hillary!

October 8, 2007

Dear American Politicians

Remember… It's the economy stupid!You do not deserve the American Vote! This is the 1st year in 30 that I will not vote and against the Democratic Party!!! I will also advise every one that I know & meet to do the same!!! Yes, this will favor the Republicans who are the flip side of the American Coin!!! Looks like Ralph Nader & Pat Buchannan in Florida or the Crooked Election Machines in Florida and Ohio all over again…

The immigration problem is the dragon you ignore and other 2- side of the American coin that you all seem to be ignoring. Guess its true that the wealth of some families in America, China, India & Mexico have reached the level to buy a US Congressman, Senator or White House Lobbyist… How much does that cost these days?

Where is the Mexican Government in their attempt to address the drugs, rape, murder, robbery coming over the Mexican Border to the tune of some 4,000 Mexicans a day? Where is the Mexican Government who is sending 1 Felony / Criminal in 12 crossing the Border every Month?

Where is the Mexican Government in dumping their prison cells on the Mexican / American border every year? Didn’t Castro do this in the Cuban / Florida Prison Dump? Have we learned nothing?

That's what I thought… No answer, huh? I can only hope America will wake up 1 day and change the Anchor Baby Rule with Los Angeles Executive Order 40 and not vote OUT the clowns who have been purchased by the wealthy families in Mexico, China, Saudi Arabia, India & The United States of America one day.

ANE WHEN WE DO… Our voice will be heard louder than the Illegal Drug Crooks and their American Flunky Clowns who have sold America down the river for a devalued American Dollar…

I don't like Hilary but she is right. What we ought to be concerned with is the law that requires that label for economic sanctions… another legacy of the Bush administration. Hats off to the questioner but Hilary was and is right, at least on this issue.

Hillary did right with that questioner, and looks presidential to me.

Hillary is more and more inevitable to win the nomination and the election!

George Bush already thinks that she will win the Democratic nomination. The Republican candidates, particularly Rudy Giuliani, are positioning themselves as “Hillary-slayers”. And Hillary's Democratic rivals are paying her the ultimate compliment of concentrating their fire on her rather than on each other. More reasons:

First, Hillary is not like Howard Dean of 2004, who was favored first and then lost. The situation today is very different from 2004, when Iowa's unfortunate Democrats were confronted by a left-wing insurgent, the unattractive Howard Dean, and a rabble of second-division candidates.

Second, people put far too much unnecessary emphasis on Iowa. Hillary's narrower margin lead in Iowa is swamped by her strength elsewhere. She is ahead in national opinion polls by about 20 points, a lead she has sustained for months. She is also ahead in New Hampshire and South Carolina, where her nearest rival, Obama, has been losing traction since late summer. Hillary is currently crushing Obama in the political futures markets by as much as 55 points. These poll numbers are built on rock. Hillary is formidably disciplined and knowledgeable. And she has the best political machine in the business—built up over decades and honed by relentless battle with the “vast right-wing conspiracy”. The machine boasts most of the Democratic establishment's mainstream thinkers.

Third, the dem voters want Hillary and Bill back to white house. Most Democrats associate the Clinton years with peace and prosperity rather than stained dresses and disappearing furniture. Bill Clinton left office with a job-approval rating of 66%. Three-quarters of Democrats, and 53% of voters in general, would like him to play an active role in a future Clinton administration. Nearly nine in ten Democratic voters (88%) express a positive view of Hillary's candidacy; 38% express a very positive view.
Democrats are right to be nervous about polarisation: polls show Giuliani is close behind Hillary in a head-to-head race. But Mr Bush has proved that polarisation is far from fatal, provided you can combine it with a ruthlessly disciplined campaign. Hillary does not have to paint America blue; she only has to win one more state than John Kerry. And Giuliani seems less impressive in person than he does in the polls. His speeches are poorly prepared and convoluted, and he is given to silly gimmicks, such as stopping in mid-speech to the NRA to take calls from his wife on his cell-phone.

Moreover, Hillary 2007 is not Hillary 1993. She has shown an impressive ability to learn from her mistakes. She has also moved sharply to the centre: witness her success in winning rural votes in upstate New York in 2006, and her ability to work with former Republican tormentors in the Senate.

Hillary 08.

I like the CNN headline for this blurb:

"Hillary calls Iraq questioner a plant."

It makes it sound like the conversation went like this:

"Hillary, I defy you on Iraq!"

"You're a cactus."

Enough! I've had it with the Karl Rove politics on both sides. This guy is a Republican plant. The people asking Republican candidates about medical marijuana are Democratic plants. It's bad enough that the campaigns feed as crap. Do we have to keep going back pleading, "More gruel, please!"
Politics will be muck as long as we the people tolerate and encourage it.

I guess people will say now say that Hillary is unhinged now that she has responded to a guy who was obviously a plant, someone who had a negative opinion of Sen. Clinton in the first place.

I applaud Sen. Clinton for actually allowing people like this man into the events that she attends. This shows that she is unlike George W. Bush who screens all his guests to make sure they are friendly.

The real problem I have with this is not what actually happened it's the fact that people who don't support the candidates asking questions that are designed to intentionally make them angry. I have a problem with ANYONE DOING THIS to ANY CANDIDATE–Republican or Democrat.

I am also offended that Senator Clinton would accuse someone with enough intelligence to ask such a quality question that they received the question from someone else.

There are tens of millions of voters with enough intellect to ask such a question.

I see this as another example of the Democratic candidate's elitism and air of intellectual superiority.

She simply engaged herself in a dialogue, she didn't lose any temper. She handles meetings with uncensored questions and she answers them in a logic and stylish way. Many of you have a problem admitting that she is a smart woman.

And for the guys who asked about why is she wearing pants… because its comfortable, you misogynists! Stupid comments like that show what is really your problem: Hillary is a woman, and a smart one. You just cannot accept this.

Iran will quickly become a huge issue in this campaign. Hillary will be walking another fine line between needing to appear hawkish for the general but firmly antiwar to solidify the primaries.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

It was only a matter of time before the "real Hillary" crawled out of her facade.

Compare Mrs. Clinton's answer to the one given by Barack Obama at a similar event last week – also in Iowa – by a man from Denver. The questioner at the Obama event was a pro-life "plant".

Despite this Mr. Obama gave a long, elequent response as to why he is pro-choice.

Who sounded more presidential? Who sounds like they actually have a chance to unite the Country? Come on Dem's, pay attention. Don't let the press anoint her as the nominee. She doesn't answer questions, she doesn't take responsability and she doesn't stand for anything except herself becoming president.

Is it me or my computer but when I played the video all I heard was puuuuk, puuuuuuk,puuuuukeeet, cackle, cackle, squaaaaaawk, quack, quack, screeeech.

"childrens can learn"

As a New Yorker and American, I witnessed this country dramatically and deplorably become compelled to economic change and world respect again. Throughout the years, our leaders have been a disappointment, sometimes a disgrace. Men have become barbarous role models.

From the beginning of time, women have held an unfair position in society. A subject that I can, at another time, elaborate further. While Hillary may not be the greatest candidate, she is competent and the best candidate that is being offered.

Personally, I would not measure her spouse. Although, I have heard many believe that he was the best President ever. It's possible that she was the reason. I thought he was fun. Further, his presence, his office in Manhattan was a positive one. One that created successful results in an area of Manhattan that needed positive change. In an area no one else was willing to go. However, I view Hillary as an individual. Acutely focused on healthcare. Her move to New York was a strategic move, one that inspired a force for the state's capital.

Rudy merely did his job. How lazy have we become to reward one for simply doing their job? Mayor Ed Koch did an amazing job during his tenure. Do we elect him? Rudy did deal with an incredible disaster. Rudy was mayor at the time. A time when mayors preceding him worked hard for the city and so much had already been in place when Rudy became mayor. Rudy dealt with it. He did his job and that reason alone should not be the reason that we grant him presidency.

Yes, its time that we have a woman president for so many reasons its long overdue. It is not easy nor should it be taken for granted that we have Hillary as a candidate at this time. She is a very capable person. She's experienced, not only in the White House, but in the complete global political realm. She is healthy, well educated and the strong symbol that America needs. Let us finally give her the platform for intellectual freedom. It is a historic bonus that she's a woman.

It's obvious to me that Hillary Clinton will not make a substantially good president b/c she's not decisive enough and she definately does not have a real plan on running the U.S. accordingly so … SHE DOES … AND IF ELECTED … WILL NOT HAVE MY VOTE!!!! Maybe all you other right-wing liberals and conservative republican/ democratic voters out there can vote for another incompetant U.S. president but I WILL NOT VOTE (NOR HAVE I EVER VOTED FOR) ANOTHER LOONEY NO-GOOD, PSYCHOPATHIC, WHITE, and MANIPULATIVE PRESIDENTIAL TYRANT or DICTATOR!!! I'D RATHER PUT IN A RENUNCIATION OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP!!! AND SAY TO HELL WITH THE U.S.!!! BEFORE THAT HAPPENS!!!

Please, Let Edwards or Obama be the nominee. I don't feel like losing.

Can you imagine what she was really thinking when this guy was busting her chops?

Bet she was just fantasizing about all the myriad ways she could have him killed.

Knew it was just a matter of time before the real Hill came out.

I see lots of republicans, supporters of obama and edwards here. With respect, sirs, you guys are wrong, and are a minority in terms of people supporting Hillary.

Without doubt, she is the best presidential candidate, dem or rep. She has the votes of my family of 6.

Hillary 08.

Ray from Pensacola,

You wrote:

"You people who comment are all the same ones who put W in office twice."

We're not. I know Hillary wants you to believe that. Sorry. I'm a liberal and I would never have voted for Bush, nor would I ever, ever vote for Hillary.

What's so sad is that half of her supporters defend her by criticizing Bush and the republicans, while the other half trumpet her campaign slogans "strength" and "experience."

Attention Clinton supporters:

Let's dispell some myths:

1) Bush is not running for a third term.
2) We don't dislike her because she is a Democrat – we dislike her because she hasn't an ounce of personal integrity.
3) Republicans are not the only ones who hate Hillary – many democrats do as well, ranging from liberals to moderates. In fact, hatred of Hillary is becoming sufficiently bi-partisan to override a veto imposed by the MSM against anyone who dares to say that she is not "inevitable."

If you can't take the heat get the heck out of the kitchen, or in this case, don't run for President if ya can't handle the questions. What a never ending saga!!

2nd time:
"My crystal ball says if Hillary is the nominee, it will be like 1984 and the republican candidate will carry 49 states….including Hillary's home state of Illinois, Arkansas and I guess NY.
Posted By Matt, austin : October 8, 2007 5:54 pm"

That ball must be cracked…

I'll bet you the deed to your house that you are wrong. Post the floor plan asap, so I can start to pick out furniture…

Right on, Hillary! You talked presidential to me.

It would not surprise me that guy is supporter of Edwards, Obama or republicans.

Hillary is clearly diverting attention from the issue to the non-issue. Lieberman's resolution attempts to classify Iran and Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps' Quds force as terrorists. That is a viewpoint lobbied for intently by Israel. The fact are widely disputed even in the American military and intelligence community. The aledged IED that Joe says come from Iran may not be. Sophisticated IED factories have been discovered in Iraq and raw materials may have come from Syria or Palestine.

The problem is there is no trust within America of the executive branch or the legislative branch. Just because Joe or Hillary say it does not make it so and in fact may make it not so. Credibility is zero with 70+% of Americans so if you are going to make a statement about what a resolution does or doesn't permit you better bring the proof and not dump some lousy sound bite and then move on. WE, THE PEOPLE, DON'T BELIEVE YOU ANY MORE.

I sure wish we had a reliable liar's hat they could wear so we could ferret out the truth from the lie.

It must be so hard for some of the libs to think that some people may actually feel this way towards Sillary. Well Godiva, let that horse take you back where you came from.

If she can't handle tough questions from the people what in the world makes her think she can handle the responsibilities of the Oval Office, AND be held accountable for decisions made?

If you listen to the video it's clear that she provided a rational, well-reasoned response to a question.

Some of the people who post on this board are really out-of-touch. One person said "she's the most polarizing person on earth". Give me a break — clearly some of these anti-Hillary people don't get out too much.

Tabitha, Des Moines, Iowa:

You quotes old poll poll stat of May 20, 2007 showing Obama was ahead of Hillary! Be honest, show more recent polls. You cherry pick to cheat the readers to disguise your support of obama.

Where you have been in the last few months when Hillary has overtaken Obama?

Number one – it was New Hampton, Iowa not North Hampton and this was not a person from that community. How do I know – I am from New Hampton, Iowa and was there.

Posted By Hill, New Hampton, Iowa : October 8, 2007 4:40 pm

I dont care if he was from Alaska! your missing the point of this hole situation. The fact is that she refuses to answer questions based on her "gaffes" she's voting on ammo that will lead us into another wrongfull war AGAIN!!!

EVEN IF THE GUY WAS A PLANT. . . .

the question is a good one, and deserves an answer!

lol…..you Americans with your politics and your rock and roll! Just kidding, Hill may win it guys.

"the premise of the question is wrong," and argued the measure calls for the terrorist label so that sanctions can be imposed. The sanctions, she also said, will in turn "send a clear message to the leadership" and lead to stronger diplomatic efforts.

BALONEY! You don't need a "terrorist label" for "sanctions" but the label is used to justify military action and every body knows it of course except Hillary who wants to fool us for the second time (Like she voted to let Bush go to the UN not to war!) and then TRIANGULATES by joining Webb to be on both sides of the issue. Any body who can't see this and supports her is either in denial or simply closed minded.

The other issue that the media has not picked upon is TEMPERAMENT.

Whenever she is pressed to explain difficult issues she either blames the VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY or as in this case lashes out on the questioner implying the question was planted or simply CACKLE it off.

The question is, Does she have the TEMPERAMENT to be an effective leader?

Can we TRUST a word she (or husband for that matter) says without careful scrutiny?

Are we ready to go through this painful process every day if she gets elected?

I think Hillary will make a fantastic presidentrix. The U.S. comptroller ( you know, the nations accountant? ) is saying we'll be broke in 30 years, barely able to pay INTEREST on the mounting debt. Hillary will lump on more financial obligations and entitlements, while failing to end the Iraq war, at least she claims, before the end of her first term. She has already redoubled our national commitment to Israel, so HELLO Iran war. I'm tired of the USA being manipulated by special interests and used as a bludgeoning stick for foreign interests; can't I just fast-forward to 2012? Do we really have to wait for the baby-boomers to retire and the federal government to bankrupt before we figure out that BOTH parties are running the country into the ground?

I now respect Hillary Clinton even more. The fact that she was stern and forceful towards the ignorant questioner shows that she is fit for the position of Commander in Chief! She never backed down, and this signifies power. We need a powerful leader to run this country, already in trouble from all aspects.

I love how she won't take that questioner's BS. She was right in her actions and it shows the difference between her and the other candidates who most likely would have played it off, let it slide or just not say what they think.

Posted By Mhm : October 8, 2007 4:30 pm

Are you serious? And its like the HillBill machine is BushChenney lite all the way. She has no answer for again doing the same thing she did before the Iraq war. And you followers cant justify what she's doing! Come on she has the nerve to talk about "The Sith" but to me she's going to the dark side. She's being influenced by the dark side to rule the world! lol please Hillary is a joke!

Hilliary is pure evil, and good at it. Even if it was a plant, she still didn't answer the question

How pathetic that her diachronic victimization "plea for excuses" places here in the front runner status. Blaming others as a political virute. That's a new one. Were a man to do that, we would call him–as we should– a sniveling wimp.

Senator Hillary Clinton's stand on Iran

These people call them selves political leaders are totally unbelievable and the garbage they spew from their speech including all attacks on the opposite political party and peoples of them parties believe opposing party plants may occupy the same space.

Senator Hillary Clinton dose not give a damn about the American middle class; what they may think or what they may know as fact, what values are important too them, where information comes from and the facts may include more of the same as preceding administrations.

It is also totally unbelievable that they even have the desires to seek an office of such power that has been described as full of holes, nothing but failure and these people seem to say that they are the ones that have all the solutions right on hand in their back pocket.

It is bewildering to think these people do not have their own hidden agendas; must foresee the potential for enormous personal gain from their effort in running for nomination of presidential office are saying they can fix our nations problems that are now so overwhelming and out of control according to them when even some may believe is un-repairable based upon war issues, combat fighting for our nations freedoms.

“History does not entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid.”
Dwight D. Eisenhower

Legal American Minorities (the American middle class); we need to show more respect, honor, patients, compassion and sympathy for all these people that protect all rights and freedoms.

Most of our young family members travel miles through the desert heat risking their own lives crossing borders for all of our families, there homes and freedoms we all enjoy.

The land of the free and the home of the bravest do not get paid near enough wages for their sacrifices.

The volunteers do their job that illegal immigrants will not volunteer to do or are afraid too step out of the shadows and doing so on the tax payer’s credit.

Our American family members live in crowded conditions among foreign culture who speak many different and confusing languages.

These young and experienced Americans rarely have opportunities spend valuable quality time with their own families, and they face adversity all day each and every day.

These statements are not talking about illegal immigrants; these statements are talking about American troops!

Dose this not seem out of the ordinary that many of our nations political parties include Democrats and Republicans are willing to lavish all kinds of social benefits on illegal immigrants but do not support our troops and are now threatening to de-fund them?

Clinton is always on the defensive…..If you ask her a hard question she snaps like a firecracker. And what about those facial expressions? She makes me want to throw my remote at the t.v.

Ted Kwapien, Everett, Wa:

Hillary is told by her designers to wear pants and pant-suits because she has terrible legs.

Putting into law a bill that prohibits the president from attacking Iran!
Yea Right!

Do you think that will get throught the senate? 60 votes?
NO!

Do you think the president will sign away his power? Hellooooooooooo veto pen! He's dumb not THAT dumb!

Oh yea and judicial review? Even if her were that dumb the constitution defines the president as commander in cheif. The congress cannot stop the president from taking military action.
That would get shot down.

Does she think we're dumb?

I believe we are able to place economic sanctions on a country without
calling their national military a terrorist group. Myanmar?

To me it sounds like lining up for war.

It makes sense that she got so defensive.

I agree with the person who asked the question, what has the Senator learned from the Iraq experience. I don't think that we can trust the current administration not to take an opportunity to extend operations into Iran.

Hillary is a joke and would be a disaster for a President..this shows her own brand of arrogance and insider elitism..indpendents like me hopefully will steer clear of this woman at all lcosts..

Yeah….why is she getting all upset? She should just shrug her shoulders, smirk, and say "Yup..yup…yup….them childrens is learnin'" like the dufus we have in there now. He made his whole career of not listening to others, or the consequences of his actions, and it sure worked out ok for him! I mean, WE are screwed, but whatever!

To Mimi,

Yes during President Clinton there wasn't a war, or was there. Let's see. The World Trade Center was attacked. Two U.S. Embassies were bombed. The USS Cole was attacked. There were other attacks that were stopped. Believe it or not, we were at War and we did not know it.

Yes – there was no defecit, however because of September 11th, the Government has had to spend more for to protect us.

Also don't forget the economy was starting to go south at the time. Some of this was due to the Tech Balloon that we ALL rode during the mid 90s to early 2001.

I am not a Bush supporter and I am not a Clinton Supporter either, but come on let's get the facts right.

My other question is you are all applauding her for noticing that this guy is a plant. Great, however she still did not answer the question. It needs to be answered.

How many of you posting on this are plants for Hillary?

It's disturbing that Hillary's first thought when she gets this question several times is that it's a conspiracy and not a genuine concern of primary voters. Even if they're misunderstanding Kyl-Lierman people have genuine concerns about anything Cheney-Bush might try to construe as authorization.

In any case, at least she apologized for her mistake. Can't say she's done that about all of her mistakes.

Absolutely classic. You have to believe the republicans are just hoping Hillary wins the nomination. She's the most polarizing person on earth. My crystal ball says if Hillary is the nominee, it will be like 1984 and the republican candidate will carry 49 states….including Hillary's home state of Illinois, Arkansas and I guess NY.

You people who comment are all the same ones who put W in office twice. The man invaded a country and let Americans die in battle so his Vice President's company could make billions of dollars. W cares NOTHING about this country. He and the Republicans are about one thing only, MONEY for themselves and there friends.

Mrs Clinton can not handle the pressure. What will be it like when Iran and North Korea or others call her bluff? We need a much steadier hand in the White House than her.

The process is simple:

1. Ask her a question.

2. Get her answer. It is hers and it is resonable. But it isn't the answer that you want.

3. Bash Hillary!

What could be simpler?

ARE ALL REPUBLICANS FOOL'S? ARE ONLY FOOL'S REPUBLICANS?

Planting in Iowa's cornfields aside, the questioner could have posited the argument that if the U.S. can unilaterally declare soldiers from another country as terrorists, then any country has a similar right to declare American troops terrorists. Now the problem arises in that by declaring someone a terrorist, certain actions toward those people are now considered acceptable. Our soldiers then become subjects of torture, refusal to give rights under the Geneva convention, etc.,etc. In addition, if economic sanctions are then possible because of the designation of terrorist, what is sauce for the goose becomes sauce for the gander. America's oil pipeline can be disrupted, America's funds held in foreign banks can be frozen, etc., just as Hillary proposes be done in this instance. I am not a plant, but if I were it wouldn't be the hemlock we are preparing to consume.

Soooo… everyone that disagrees with Mrs. Bill Clinton is a plant? Please! I guess Monica was a plant too huh? I'm still investigating how all those staff members of her husband's went 'missing'…

Anway, why on earth does Mrs. Bill Clinton thinks the nomination should be handed to her? She reminds me of a street Mafia thug. That smooth head nod, wicked smile and stank attitude will quickly come to an end on elections night. I surly hope she doesn't think she's setting standards for women going for the Presidency.. as a matter of fact he has destroyed what a woman is and the meaning of Woman in Charge!

Hey Karlo in Portland-
The next president whoever it may be wont take office until 1-21-2009. The election isnt until november of 2008.

All of you Hillary haters might-as-well start your whinning now because weather you like it or not, she will be our next president. The American people have had it with the Republican party because of what they have done to this country and what they represent.

Please……………. it was clear the guy had no clue about the question he was asking her. BTW…. I don't think that there is anything she could say to that kind of guy to get his vote.

Clinton was a good president domestically but a basket case on foreign policy. He cut the military he had to foregocAfghanc intervention, although he showed a surplus at the end of his term. Old man Bush was an even better president. His son is the worst of my 54 year lifetime. Hillary has the Foster thing haunting her electability

It really doesn't matter whether he was a "PLANT" or not. It was a legitimate question. Why couldn't she answer it? Why the need to get defensive. the implication is that people at her events should only ask her easy questions. otherwise why refer to him as a plant.

Ofcourse it did,,dont ask the LIAR any tough questions,,,What a loser that woman is….

To Mimi:

The Clinton years set us up for where we are now.

You wonder where the jobs are going? Take a peek at NAFTA. That opened the door to outsourcing. Look up who said the "Global Economy will bring more opportunities for Americans.".

Kyoto treaty was also on the table when Bill was in office and no one seems to take umbrage with that.

Sandy Berger.. Not even going into that. Let's just say that having a National Security Advisor who steals documents in his pant legs, pretty much sums up what a swell job he did.

Basically those years were before the bubble "burst" if you will.

We need the next FDR to rebuild America's infrastructure, not special interests as usual.

Maybe we need a third Party.

Hillary keeps stating she wants to be the first female president of the United States. Why then doesnt she dress like a female instead of wearing pants all the time. when was the last time you saw Hillary in a skirt of dress. She could take a lesson or two from Nancy Pelosi who dresses like a classy woman.

For her to lash out like that, just makes me question what type of leader she is. If you know you made a mistake in the past by voting for military action in Iraq, shouldn't you be well prepared to answer this question whether it be one or one hundred times instead of getting angry, especially when you're trying to win the highest office in the government. In any case, let's wake up fellow countrymen, no more Bush's, no more Clintons, vote for change and vote for someone else.

Perhaps the reason that George W. Bush never has to answer tough questions is because he never – never – has a question and answer session that isn't invite only.

Isn't it CRAZY how ignorant people just HATE intelligent people. Hillary will never be president of the United States – too many ignorant Americans are intimidated by her.

As I read these comments, I get the feeling that some of you just really don't like Hillary Clinton. You've ignored the fact that this guy however offended he was, is someone who obviously does this sort of thing quite a bit at other functions. A gentleman even advised he knows who this guy is and he is a plant, yet you still want to bash Hillary for responding that way. C'mon people, if you can't think clearly when given new information then maybe you should stop writing. Maybe some of you guys are related to those swift boat clowns.

She is laughable.

She must have taken exception with the fact that this "plant" took the place of her "plants" that lob those nice "slow pitch" questions in her direction.

Maybe people ask her the question over and over again because she never answers it.

If its not a question she has a pre-canned answer for, this appears to be her response.

Plant or not, Hillary should be able to address the issue with confidence. It seems all too often that she does not exactly know where she stands on certain issues. The voting of said legislation will quite possibly lead to the demise of her candidacy. So long Hill.

This message is for the person "reviewing" the comments before posting them: Hillary is going to be your President whether you like it or not!! You can keep posting all the negatives messages people send about Hillary in your ticker and leave the good ones behind, but you are going to have to sleep at night knowing that no matter how much you do, Hillary is your President. I can't wait for 01/21/2008.

This is just the beginning, Hillary.

If you think Karl Rove has just "gone away," wait until you are the official Democratic Party candidate.

Or, you could be looking at a new maggot to take the veteran maggot's place.

After all, Rove, at 19 years-old, was mentored by Watergate schnook, Donald Segretti.

You people act like the Republican Party would even host events like this. She is a very diplomatic individual with a very compassionate history, I recall the Republican Party declining several debates, such as the Logo Debates and numbers of others. If the issues of individuals’ quest for equality aren’t even acknowledged by this Party, then why would we EVER put them into office, hypocrisy lies in kind with the Republican Party and it’s members.

You go Hillary, Kansas City is on your side =)

I'm very proud of you Hilary.
Way to go!!!

I hope that somebody videotaped the incidence and put it on the youtube.

I'm not sure who I'll be voting for, but it won't be Hillary Clinton. I think 20 years of "Democratic" rule between Bush & Clinton are enough.

CNN has a minor flaw in this article, the "town meeting" was held in New Hampton, IA, not North Hampton, as it reported.

typical Hillary, passing the buck

Hillary is the only choice for President

Who cares if he was a plant? It was a valid question that she dodged once again. Just answer the question. Why doesn't she think Bush can use this as justification for the use of force? He can use anything for justification. If she didn't think Bush would actually go to war with her Iraq vote (oh my gosh, really?!?) why should we trust her when she says "No it doesn't"? Are you so easily fooled? Anyone that believes they have to vote in support of such a bill JUST so they don't look weak is not presidential material. I don't care what gender, race, sexual orientation you are, if there is any reason other than sound logic that you make a decision that leads to increased aggression toward a sovereign nation, you are not presidential material. If you can not answer a simple question from an audience member w/out going off, you are not presidential. If you cannot figure out that a lot of people wonder the same thing b/c 3 PEOPLE JUST ASKED YOU AND YOU INSTEAD WANT TO BLAME A CONSPIRACY, then you are not presidential. Let's bring back Sandy Berger, let's bring a million other scandals, let's believe all the lies, b/c that is SO much better than Bush! You get what you ask for.

I wonder how Hillary would do on The O`Reilly Factor? Any comments?

Spoken like a true PRESIDENT!
HILLARY FOR PRESIDENT!!!

Hillary is human, for crying out loud!

Hillary needs to work on the cackle. THIS was the moment, honey, when you should have cackled – not attack the guy.

You're coming across as an ego-driven control freak. We need you to only show a "soft-side" … warm and inviting for all those undecideds. You only need to play the role of "Experienced and In-Control" for another 12 months. Come on Hill, pull it together!!

(Satire – folks)

GO HILLARY! best way to handle the situation….

Folks, do we want someone who acts like that as President? That was Hillary dead out.

It is a fact of political life that every audience will have someone who wishes to make trouble for the candidate. I'm impressed that she had the gumption to stand up to this person and the personal strength to apologize immediately when she was wrong.

Hillary wants to create legislation to prevent the President from using force against Iran. Okay – what happens if Iran were to launch missles against US Warships, or shoots down a US Airliner? Does her bill prohibit the President from going after Iran?

To Paul – You are so sure that this guy is a plant, don't you think that each candidate also puts plants in the audience as well? I am sure each candidate has people in the audience to throw them softballs.

Someone does not have to be from that particular town to attend the Town Hall.

WOW what a surprise, JB from Hull,Ia. in the deepest shade of red Sioux County Ia. doesn't support Hillary, what a surprise. Also the guy was right it is NEW Hampton, not NORTH. GO Hillary GO. By the way I'm in Cherokee Co. Iowa, our nw corner touches Sioux County's se corner so I know just how republican it is in Sioux. Yes Cherokee usually is red too but not nearly as deep of red.

Hillary is the only one with the guts that tell it like it is. Like it or not she is going to be the next President!!

I tell you what, I'll take Clinton years again!!!! Tell me what was so bad then???? mmmm interest rates, nope all time lows, war…. nope. inflation…. nope. Can we say those things about either Bush– NOPE!! And I see its mostly men saying stupid stuff. She is smart and anyone who thinks that politics isn't about giving the right vague answer is just kidding themselves. You just need to pick the politician who does it best…. that way idiots in other countries won't understand whats going on either!

If you read Seymour Hersch's latest article in the Oct. edition of the New Yorker, you might also be convinced that there is indeed a grand conspiracy to attack Iran with the help of Israel, the UK and Turkey as a greater part of Americas War Map. I would not be one bit surprised if Bush's delay in bringing troops home from Iraq was out of a desire to keep them in place for the next phase of the operation. I agree that Hillary's original vote and general hawkishness is not to be trusted.

Obama? No, he's too junior (not enough experience). I think I'll be crossing over from Dem this time. Turning into a FRED HEAD!

Whining….I can't stand whining. If she doesn't want to have to deal with tough questions, she shouldn't be running. It is quite possible that the electorate is an intelligent group of folks who are genuinely interested in keeping their candidates accountable through frank and candid discussion. If she's going to put this kind of format out there, then she needs to be prepared for it and not belittle those who attend by suggesting that they aren't smart enough to come up with intelligent, meaningful questions. I hope voters are paying attention to this. If she's paranoid now, what do you think will happen if she gets in the White House?

Hillary always deflects questions she cannot answer as a "conspiracy." She did it when Bill and Monica were eposed, and several times after that. She gets hyper. One can tell by her laugh. No surprises in Iowa.

Her screeching voice irritates, her arrogance nauseates me, her phoniness disturbs me, but I think former Clinton supporter and Hollywood media mogul David Geffen said it bes –"Everybody in politics lies, but they [the Clintons] do it with such ease, it's troubling."

Don't listen to these people, most of whom have based their opinions on their biases and haven't even heard the actual exchange.

Judge for yourself.

Van
Posted By VanReuter NY NY : October 8, 2007 5:20 pm

Common Sense,

You chose your name well – you are so right!

If only more people realized that Obama is one of those candidates who only come once in a generation. An extraordinary and quite brilliant human being.

Way to go Hillary! Put them in their place!! You have my vote Mrs. Clinton.

Don't listen to these people, most of whom have based their opinions on their biases and haven't even heard the actual exchange.

http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=277#comments

Judge for yourself.

Van

Who cares if the guy was a plant? A presidential candidate should be able to answer ALL questions.

Point proven. Go Obama! It is time for a change.

Clinton is just like the rest. Please understand you are being lied to and you need to fight back. Thanks.

Come on people…

1. Do you really think Iran is not doing everything they can to disrupt things in Iraq.

2. Do you really think that if Bush/Cheney wanted to attack Iran they would wait for congress' support?

3. I don't want war with Iran but classifying them this way may make them think twice about what they are doing.

I cannot wait until it's Madam President.

OK, let's say that the guy was a plant (which I don't think he was – I think he's just taking his perceived role as a "first in the nation" citizen seriously), that doesn't give Sen. Clinton a free pass to not answer. It wasn't like she was asked something offensive or crude. It was a serious question, regardless of the mouthpiece. That is her problem, she can't handle tough questions, and can't stand to be "attacked." I just wish she could be attacked directly by the other candidates without there being cries of sexism, which, I fear, is likely to occur.

United we Stand… Divided we FALL!!!

This story has been all over the net this weekend. It takes CNN this long to post it on it's ticker and then tries to impunge the questioner. What didn't CNN quote the guys thought. He said, he was offended by Clinton's rudeness and trying to brush him off as a plant and not answering the question. HRC kept referring to previous language in the ammendment, not what was actually voted on. Why would some one give Bush a second chance at starting a war. HRC isn't qualified to be President.

Hillary will self-destruct. The only question is when – before the nomination or before the general election?

And, CNN, a voter has the right to ask hard questions. If only more people did. Interestingly, though, we don't hear reports of Richardson or Obama being rude or making false accusations.

A true leader knows how to handle tense situations.

Though I am leaning for the nomination of Hillary R Clinton I do think she made an egregious error in voting for this label to be applied to the Iranian military. I do agree that she should have learned from her Iraq vote. It was pure naivete' for her to give Bush this victory. Bush being the pathological moron that he is will see this as carte blanche consent to wage war with Iran.
THIS WAS A DUMB-ASSED-VOTE HILLARY THAT COULD ULTIMATELY BE YOUR 'SWORD OF DAMOCLES'.

I am proud of this Iowan who had the courage to ask this extremely important question of Mrs. Clinton. Her vote absolutely should be called into question because it demonstrates her poor judgement. Maybe three people asked the question because it is key to understanding her mindset. I question her judgement further for finding it odd that three people asked the question.

She just doesn't get it. She does not demonstrate good presidential judgement with this vote. Just as she said that she thought GWB would use her last vote for sanctions, she is doing it again, in spite of expert opinions that tell us that it opens the door for GWB to use aggression.

In addition, her response to the Iowan demonstrates another absolutely key character trait that remains. She does not allow dissent. This trait caused her failure at healthcare reform and she obviously hasn't changed her style. She is not a different person from the one who blamed all of her failures on the vast right winged conspiracy.

We need to wake up. Her judgement is still poor, and her ability to reconcile differing opinions is non-existent. She will be a disaster to this country if allowed anywhere near the White House.

Finally, with regard to her plans to have Bill serve as a foreign relations representative. It is illegal for a spouse to hold a cabinet position. You can call this job anything you want, but it sounds like Secretary of State to me. He has many lovely characteristics and should continue the good work he is doing via his foundation. He does not need to be first husband to have a positive influence on the world.

The guy was a plant. He blogs for a local version of KOS, and was in the NYT on Oct.5th. Google him and you'll find his extreme left writings and photo in the NYT.
The sad, angry, and vocal fringe minority of Hillary haters will latch on to anything, no matter how trivial, to reinforce their bias and soothe their tortured souls.

The crowd cheered Clinton.

Yes I have to agree…she always avoids the tough questions and does the classic defensive measures for smoke/mirrors.
Very much the BushCheney approach.

Whereas you ask the SAME question to someone like Barrack Obama or Ron Paul…they'll tell you straight up where they stand.

The person questioning Sen. Clinton was right in doing so. Her evasive, incendiary response is validation that four years of Hillary Clinton will be much like eight years of George W. Bush.

I would love to have a Democrat to vote for in 2008. But, if Hillary Clinton is the Deomcratic choice, I'll be reaching for another candidte.

The same questioner has a history of asking particularly pointed questions of presidential candidates. He has asked questions in a similar fashion at events for Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.

Seems to me like he was PLANTED. why doesnt he question Republicans and WHAT DOES HE DO FOR A LIVING that allows him to go to all these campaign stops.

I too disagree with labling the Iran Guards a terrorist organization. But the idea that it allows Bush free reign to go to war with Iran is stupid.

BTW Bush can invade IRAN right now if he wanted to. It would be a military action not a war though, Like clinton and kosovo…

Please, anyone but Hillary (or a Republican)!She voted in favor of the Iraq war, who's to say she won't do so again with Iran? I think we've been in the deserts of the Middle East long enough. We desperately need new leadership with new aims and, above all, something to replace the oil we've become dependent on.

8 years Bush as VP
4 years Bush as President
8 years Clinton as President
8 years of Bush jr as President
28 years of Bush or Clinton.

Isn't that enough years of Clintons/Bushs guiding our country?

He asked "pointed" (should we read"provocative"?) questions to Clinton, Obama and Richardson…Hm-m -m – does it smell as Mother Elizabeth Edwards friend?

Comments about Hillary's "inability" to answer tough questions are laughable – if an idiot or a provocator asks you a dumb question and you answer to him and he keeps insisting on his point of view – you would finally tell him "I'm sorry, sir, it DOES NOT!"

Number one – it was New Hampton, Iowa not North Hampton and this was not a person from that community. How do I know – I am from New Hampton, Iowa and was there.

In quoting the ignoramouses favorite catch phrase of the hour, "Her response was not very 'Presidential'".

Please people, do not make this mistake.

Go Obama!

She really hates those questions huh? She couldn't lash out at Tim Russert during the New Hampshire debate, but she just couldn't control herself this time! Wow. Maybe you keep being asked that question Hillary, because it's a question that NEEDS to be answers, and it's a question you REFUSE to answer.

We could use a president who can't keep their temper on a leash… I'm glad CNN put this article on the ticker. I was worried they'd let it slip by. It gives people a taste of what Hillary is -really- like. She only answers what she wants to answer. You can only question what she wants you to question. Rediculous!

I'm sorry, are we pretending that we think that political parties DON'T plant questioners in audiences of their opponents?

How else do you explain that there is some sick dude who wants to smoke weed at every event a Republican goes to?

Hillary was acknowledging a VERY obvious fact – that guy, like so many others – had been planted to ask a tough question.

I used to work on Capital Hill and in the Maryland General Assembly, and we CONSTANTLY had people planted to ask questions. Sometimes, we would say, "could you elaborate," and they would come back with something like "you heard me!" or "if you don't know the answer, I don't care to elaborate," which is roughly translated to "I memorized the question but I don't actually don't know what the hell I'm talking about."

It is a shame people dislike Hillary so much – she is one of the two or three people in this race who is actually competant and knows what the hell she's talking about.

From the most recent Iowa poll:

"On the flip side, the Democrat with the greatest crossover repeal among likely Republican caucus participants is Barack Obama, who could get the support of 15 percent. Bill Richardson could get 11 percent. John Edwards, 9 percent. Hillary Clinton, just 6 percent."

Full results can be read at:
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070520/NEWS/110050003/-1/iowapoll07_october

an ordinary citizen questions her and she flies off the handle and starts making unsubstantiated accusations… experience and leadership indeed.

God bless the questioner for putting the tough questions to all of the candidates and, particularly, to Ms. Clinton! He was correct in pointing out her prior war authorization vote (with no apologies) and how she might blindly be setting herself and US up for the same madness as before. I am a lifelong Democrat and will not vote for anyone who believes that we (the American voters) can't have the same dire concerns nor come up with the same questions on our own.

I love how she won't take that questioner's BS. She was right in her actions and it shows the difference between her and the other candidates who most likely would have played it off, let it slide or just not say what they think.

This woman makes me very uncomfortable. I don't think she'll have my vote. She just appears very consentingly….. crooked…

She mastered the art of lying, dodging questions and critical issues. I think she should go into acting. There’s a shortage of overage female actresses in Hollywood….

Hillary's policy toward Iran might be close to Rudy Guiliani's.
The two of them seem too much alike in other ways, although the neo-cons who got us into the Iraq mess are flocking to Rudy's camp.

Bush Lite.

That's what she is. That's what we'll get if we make the same mistake thrice. Bush 1, Bush 2 and Hilary 1.

You and Russert, Hillary, for one hour, one-on-one, no waffling, no managing the message. You've got to ask yourself one question: Do you feel lucky? Well, do you, babe?

This is exchange is a great example of the arrogance that is Hillary Clinton. I have sure lost a lot of respect for her as I have watched this campaign. She does not talk with people or even to people – she talks down to them. The exchange here, the exchange she had with Tim Russert at the last debate when she insisted that she knew the question in the middle of him asking this. Do we really want a President with this kind of attitude? This attitude suggests to me that she will not listen to the people when she gets elected – she will go on with her own agenda and the only difference between her and our current President will be that there is an "R" behind GW's name and there will be a "D" behind hers.

Get smart Dem's – cast your vote for the only viable candidate that can win in Nov. 08, respects people as people and will listen to the people that put him into office – Barack Obama.

Why is she so surprised? The reason she is asking the question is that people can't believe that Hillary is so stupid as to give George Bush a rationale for attacking Iran.

No wonder she won't apologize for voting for the Iraq War Authorization. It's par for the course.

Of course, anyone that calls her on it is "obviously" sent by someone. Sheesh.

lol Thats what you call experience at its finest! HillBill hates to answer the tough questions about how she is "BushChenney" I love it!

The use of two words have led to the defeat of Democrats for the presidency the last two times and possibly for a third. In 2000, it was "compassionate conservatism." In 2004, it was "nine eleven." And in 2008, it will be "Hillary Clinton."

Maybe she had been asked the question in 3 other places because a lot of people are thinking the same thing. I know when I saw the number of democrats that voted for that crap bill, I myself was wondering if they were being naive in passing said legislation.

LOL…. She is a joke! If you ask her a hard question she suggests "you're a plant" from … the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy??

Bravo to this questioner. At least SOME in the Democratic Party aren't letting Hillary get a free pass!