Clinton Gets Testy with Iowan in Defending Her Vote about Iran
This is what Athena Jones reported over at MSNBC's blog:
At a campaign stop here, Hillary Clinton sparred verbally for several minutes with a man who pressed her on her recent vote to call Iran's army a terrorist organization.snip
Randall Rolph, from nearby Nashua, asked why he should support Clinton's candidacy when she did not appear to have learned any lessons from having voted to authorize force in Iraq.
Clinton accused the man of being a plant who had been sent to ask the question, to which he took exception, saying the question was a result of his own research.
"I apologize," Clinton said, explaining that she had been asked the very same question in three other places.
Then Amy Lorentzen of the AP, who witnessed the same exchange, contributed to Norma Pickler's report that the dialog became more heated:
Their exchanged grew heated as he insisted the bill would authorize combat. Clinton snapped back, her voice rising, "I'm sorry, sir, it does not."
Well, let's hear it for Madame Clinton. She finally apologizes for something, mainly for her own paranoia, but of course, she still thinks she's right.
Clinton lost his vote, and no telling how many others that he will caucus with on January 5th. As the Roundtable on MTP said today, the polls are misleading because it's still early, and the folks, particularly in Iowa will continue to ask Clinton questions of substance and she will have to answer them.
That exchange is something she is unaccustomed of--clearly. And Iowans do study their candidates' views, usually beginning in October. Impressions time is over, and Clinton better do her homework about Iowans and their expectations via retail politics. Her spouse did not compete there in 1992, so this is a different ballgame. Iowans are tougher about asking questions than the traditional media such as Fox News is, and they expect honest answers.
I know John Edwards would never lose his patience with an Iowan.