"She has also subsequently claimed that her vote “was clearly intended to demonstrate support for going to the United Nations to put inspectors into Iraq” and was “not a vote for pre-emptive war.” The record shows, however, that Senator Clinton voted against an amendment by Senator Carl Levin that would have allowed for U.S. military action to disarm Iraq of any weapons of mass destruction and weapons systems pursuant to any future UN Security Council resolution authorizing such military actions, which would presumably have taken place had Iraq not allowed the inspectors back in as promised. In other words, she not only was willing to ignore U.S. obligations under the UN Charter that forbids such unilateral military actions by its member states, she tacitly acknowledged that she was unconcerned about supporting UN efforts to bring inspectors back into the country. Indeed, in her floor speech, she warned that this vote “says clearly to Saddam Hussein - this is your last chance - disarm or be disarmed” and the resolution that she did support clearly authorizes President Bush to invade Iraq at the time and circumstances of his own choosing, regardless of whether inspectors were allowed to return to Iraq and regardless of whether the Bush administration received UN support."

http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4802

You want to vote for Cheney in a pantsuit, be my guest. But please don't pee on our heads and claim that it's rain. Or in this case, devour spoonfed lies and regurgitate them as if they're filet mignon...

Her Imperial Majesty, with all her vaunted "experience" has never made a mistake....

I mean, it's not like he directly benefited from $165 million in Kazakh oil monies or anything.

But let's not talk about the 2000 lb. gorilla in the living room when we can bitch about the neighbor's poodle instead.

Actually, I believe that she could.

Neither Gore nor Kerry seemed to inspire the same kind of visceral, irrational hatred as any Clinton and as Hillary in particular. I'm not really sure why and I've always found it puzzling (granted, I have expressed my disdain for Her Imperial Majesty in no uncertain terms on numerous occasions, but my reasons are founded in her political stances-- most notably on Iraq), but there it is.

An otherwise demoralized Republican base, who might well be expected to stay home rather than vote for any of an unsatisfactory array of "ideologically impure" candidates, would easily be motivated to respond en masse to vote Anybody But Hillary.

And, frankly, I have my doubts as to whether our Republic could withstand another 4 to 8 years of GOP maladministration.

I don't even know you, so I certainly wouldn't consider you a friend, nor would I refer to you as Glutueus Maximus...

As for the rest of your bizarre rant, the less said the better.

who donated the morning after New Hampshire. I've donated twice since then and expect I will donate again.

It's worth any amount to keep Her Imperial Majesty from driving the Democratic Party into electoral oblivion, as I firmly believe will happen should she get the nod at the convention.

I can think of 3941 men and women that would argue-- could they speak from the grave-- against their being "collectively better off."

I guess this little non-starter of a "corruption scandal" is supposed to leave me with only one choice: to vote for the STERLING, incorruptible character of Her Imperial Majesty.

NOT.

Maybe Her Imperiousness' consort could go back to referring to Obama as the black candidate. That certainly did wonders for her rep.

"Then she reminds her competitors that they, like she, pledged not to campaign in Florida or Michigan, and that she will "expect" them to abide by that pledge."

The meaning is clear. There is nothing Her Imperial Majesty will balk at saying or doing in her quest for power. It sickens me that THIS is my party's leading candidate.

My wife is a schoolteacher. My children are students. I've attended many PTA meetings. Ergo, it must follow as night doth the day-- at least according to NYT logic-- that I have the experience to be a college professor.

In any case, it seems to me that experience is what brought us to this sorry pass to begin with-- Dick Cheney has a ton of it. So too, for that matter, do the toothless, ineffectual, spineless hacks leading the Democratic majority in Congress. You know, the majority that Her Imperial Majesty has followed, and seldom lead, into the current malaise in which our country finds itself.

This country is in a mess in part BECAUSE of the much touted EXPERIENCE of inside-the-Beltway slugs, ward-heelers and machine politicos.

Expect more of the same from those with the same type of "experience."

It's time for a change.

Edwards has yet to come in higher than third place in any primary and looks to continue that streak in So. Carolina. Eyes on the prize indeed.

As for Her Imperial Majesty, I don't place any great hope in this past supporter of the conflict, and expert in lip service, to actually do anything to alter the situation in Iraq.

But she damned sure voted to authorize a war because of them.

Oh, I forgot. She thought it was an authorization for more inspections.

And we need yet another lying president, why?

If McCain did get the nod and two thirds of the Republicans in the country followed this idiot's advice...

Cut off nose, meet spited face.

Yep, that's about my analysis, too. Edwards and Obama may well be splitting the same base of voters, saddling us with Her Imperial Majesty as a candidate come the general election.

Which bodes ill for the Democratic Party, in my opinion, as the heretofore divided and demoralized Republican base is galvanized to come out in droves to vote ABH (Anybody But Hillary).