Sandhusker said:Try these;
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0207/2714.html
http://infinitewisdom.typepad.com/infinite_wisdom/2008/01/hillary-clinton.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22634967/page/3/
Let us know what you think.
From the msnbc link:
Number one, the Levin amendment, in my view, gave the Security Council of the United Nations a veto over American presidential power. I don't believe that is an appropriate policy for the United States, no matter who is our president.
Number two, I have the greatest respect for Senator Levin. He is my chairman on the Senate Armed Services Committee. And I--immediately after we did have the vote on the authorization, went to work with him to try to make sure that every piece of intelligence we had was given to the U.N. inspectors. And Senator Levin and I sent a letter to Secretary Powell, we pushed that position very hard because we both had the same view that we were going to put inspectors back in and we needed to let the inspectors do the job that they were asked to do.
Number three, I actually joined with Senator Byrd on an amendment that would limit the president's authorization to one year. I was very strongly in favor of limiting what President Bush could do. Unfortunately, that amendment did not pass.
Fourth, it is absolutely unfair to say that the vote as Chuck Hagel, who was one of the architects of the resolution, has said, was a vote for war. It was a vote to use the threat of force against Saddam Hussein, who never did anything without being made to do so.
I think she made a credible case for her vote. I think it was wrong and she should just say so and go on. But she does have a case from the MSNBC transcript. No, I won't hold that against her.