For 3 years, Sen. Clinton had taken the same position on Iraq as Bush.

She said the same words as Bush:
Sen. Clinton: "Every nation has to be either with us or against us"
Hear her say this on YouTube

Sen. Clinton did not read the National Intelligence Report (NIE) which raised doubts about WMD in Iraq. Sen. Bob Graham even urged her and other senators to read the NIE before casting their vote on Iraq War but to no avail.

Sen. Clinton said that "intelligence reports clearly showed Iraq had WMD" even though she did not bother to read the NIE. (Senate proceedings Oct 12, 2002)

Sen. Clinton also said "Saddam had links to Al Qaeda" on the senate floor. This was a Bush talking point and no credible intelligence indicated so. Even several senators who voted for Iraq did not believe any such Al Qaeda link existed. (Senate proceedings Oct 12, 2002)

Sen. Clinton has not once admitted that her war vote was a mistake. How can she confront the Republicans saying that war was a mistake?

In Nov 2003, Sen. Clinton called for a "tough-minded, muscular foreign and defense policy." She urged "patience" and worried about the political will "to stay the course." She also said her vote for war was the right vote.

In Feb 2005, Sen. Clinton said that much of Iraq was "functioning quite well" echoing Bush once again.

In 2005, Sen. Clinton appeared on "Meet the Press" saying it "would be a mistake" to call for the immediate withdrawal of troops or set a timetable.

Only after the majority of public opinion turned against the war, and she started thinking about her presidential run, Sen. Clinton changed her position.

Are you sure, she would not follow a "tough-minded" foreign policy similar to Bush's once she is elected. She already voted to label Iran's National Guard as terrorists giving Bush yet another pass.

All the quotes attributed to Hillary Clinton in this post are accurate and taken directly from this NYT article.

RealClearPolitics average of polls (includes 5+ recent polls by CNN, Time among others):

McCain 46.7
Clinton 45.3

Obama 47.5
McCain 44.2

RealClearPolitics

I don't know how Hillary would contrast herself with McCain favorably.

Iraq: Clinton supported the war for 3 years (longer than John Kerry did) before turning against it. McCain has consistently supported the war but criticized Rumsfeld for mismanaging it and advocated the surge. Obama has consistently opposed the war. All 3 have voted for continued funding of troops and compares favorably to him on economy as well.

Torture: Clinton actually supported an exception for torture in the ticking time-bomb scenario. McCain has been unequivocally against torture no matter what the circumstance. So has been Obama.

Ethics: Clinton leads all senators in the amount of earmarks - a staggering 2.5 Billion dollars including many to corporates. McCain has never done any earmarks in his entire career. Obama has 2 totaling $30,000 to non-profit organizations. Obama als has passed the toughest ehtics reform since Watergate and passed legislation resulting in creation of a website http://usaspending.gov/ that allows you to track how the government is spending the taxpayers' money.

Iran: Both McCain and Hillary voted to designate Iran's National Guard as a terrorist organization. Obama missed this vote due to campaign scheduling but gave a statement to oppose the move.

If you compare Hillary with McCain, she doesnt have a convincing record on national security or ethics. She compares more favorably on economy. Obama offers a clear-cut contrast with McCain on Iraq/Iran and compares favorably on economy as well.

Good night

Sen. Obama then misrepresents Hillary’s position on Iran. In fact, Hillary was one of the earliest and staunchest opponents of Bush’s saber rattling on Iran, and spoke out on the issue back in February:

Hillary made a floor speech declaring that President Bush must get authorization from Congress before taking military action against Iran. [Clinton Release, 2/14/07]
Hillary co-sponsored the Webb bill prohibiting use of funds for military action in Iran without Congressional authorization. [Clinton Release, 10/01/07]
Sen. Obama missed the vote he is now using to attack Hillary. He issued a release 9 hours later and co-sponsored a similar bill in April. The bill was also supported by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), a staunch anti-war Bush critic and prominent Obama supporter. Read more here and here.

Sen. Obama's comments on lobbyists come a week after Public Citizen released a report detailing ten bundlers for Sen. Obama who have registered as federal lobbyists.

Sen. Obama has also taken money from former lobbyists, partners of lobbyists, people who hire lobbyists, lobbyists' spouses, and state lobbyists.

Until he started running for president, Sen. Obama took money from federal lobbyists and, as a state senator, directly from corporations.

Tit for tat, "Amy".

I really liked what she had to say regarding health
care and getting private corpations out of the
business of student loans. That affects me directly.
(Screw Sallie Mae!) She actually talked a lot about
specific issues which is one reason why I like her so
much.

Apparently there were over 5000 of us. There were
four Young Republicans with their "Hillary is Mean"
and "Bush -- Great President or Greatest President?"
signs. And there were the three LaRouche cult members passing out his literature outside. But mostly just 5000 Hillary supporters eager to see the Senator.

Anyway, all in all a good event. I liked how Governor Locke and Ron Sims fired up the crowd. And Representative Inslee's quip about how, after electing the least person capable of being president, surely we can now elect a woman.

I'm considering going to the Obama thang tomorrow, just to see if he talks about issues and specifics, or if it's just more talk about change and hope and healing. As Clinton noted, healing's good, but we need to make sure we heal in the right direction.

Universal health care is a good start.

can we just note how many people there were NOT over 65!

pretty disappointing - especially when the candidate is someone who thinks "everyone should participate". isn't she supposed to be the uber-manager?

–noun 1. a wether or other male sheep that leads the flock, usually bearing a bell.
2. a person or thing that assumes the leadership or forefront, as of a profession or industry: Paris is a bellwether of the fashion industry.
3. a person or thing that shows the existence or direction of a trend; index.
4. a person who leads a mob, mutiny, conspiracy, or the like; ringleader.

(source, www.dictionary.com)

Democrats

1) have larger, wider constituencies, hence more bases to cover

2) have a less disciplinarian/authoritarian basis to their political philosophy

3) believe in talking and talking about problems, so sometimes ramble on a bit past the alotted time, making them late for the next appearance

4) aren't afraid to take questions or discuss (when campus security isn't tazing the kids), rather than just arriving to dictate marching orders to supporters and talking points to the media, hence more schedule stresses

5) are, in a word, more "free form"

Find it very interesting that the Gov is going to endorse Barack as well as the Seattle City Council members going 6-3 in favor of him with their endorsements.

Last, easier to "pack" a smaller hall. Nice trick from the campaign trail.

(btw, little known fact: obama has SICK kitchen skills--not only can he win the caucus, but he would clean up on top chef)

It was held in a hard to get to place, was thrown together quickly, the venue was tiny, making it look "packed" but there was barely 3,000 people in it. The 5,000 estimate was an optimistic joke.

Hillary seemed old and tired. It was indeed quite a shock to see such few people at "rally" that is for the PRESIDENT. There should have been 10,000 + at a bigger venue.

I think the writing is on the wall...

She is already using her OWN $$$ to fund her campaign.... Her campaign center has asked for $6 Mill in donations in the next 48 hours...

The end of this nightmare is finally near...

Reality Check

Huh? I thought she said Obama was the frontrunner now. How is that consistent with her sweeping Super Tuesday?

I am hoping to unify the country,

Sure, in opposition to her. She and Huckabee are the only candidates who mobilize people to the polls to vote against them. Obama's wide appeal comes in part from his running on her husband's campaign themes, which must really gall her. Imagine a Bill without bimbo eruptions.

Also, a wether is a castrated ram. So Washington is a castrated sheep with a bell around its neck.

Ah, my friend, glad to see you have an opinion on this issue.

The end of this nightmare is finally near...

Yes, thank god. Soon we may see the horror of engaging & well watched debates, record turnouts, and unity ticket talk finally get killed like the zombie vampire era that it is. Stop the madness.

Clinton/Obama 2008.

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=076fd56f-4aca-4683-a9d1-3c55d748946e

Looks like she has the Lincoln bedroom booked for her entire first term...

McCain will be able to lasher her with this donor list throughout the general election. (And just imagine what he will find when he starts turning rocks over…)

that is such bullshit. people were turned away due to space issues.

she's also had a huge turnaround on $$. She did ask for 6 million in 72 hours... and has already raised 7.5 mil.

I'm calling in sick tomorrow to caucus for Clinton.

Clinton/Obama 2008!

Do we not teach civics in school any more? You don't have a right to vote in a primary. And you don't have a right to pick the candidate for a party.

Yes, it totally sucks if you are an active member of your local District Democrats group, and you can't attend your caucus.

But if you're not a member, if the only political action you take is to vote in November every four years, then maybe you're not the most qualified person to be choosing the PARTY's candidate.

*SIGH* And then we still invite you to come participate in the caucus in hopes that you'll get more involved. But you only have rights when you exercise them, people!

What difference does it make if you're not an active member of your party? All people should be able to participate if they want to. Caucuses disenfranchise people who have to work on Saturdays or who have to be out of town.