Hillary Caught Lying Again About Iraq, This Time By The New York Times

As I was doing my prep reading this morning, I found this on the New York Times website: In Defending War Vote, Clintons Contradict Record. As the even a quick reading of the piece shows, "contradict" is too soft a word - Hillary's been caught intentionally lying to the voters again, this time yesterday on Meet the Press:

Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton have repeatedly invoked the name of Senator Chuck Hagel, a longtime critic of the Iraq war, as they defend Mrs. Clinton’s 2002 vote to authorize the war.

In interviews and at a recent campaign event, they have said that Mr. Hagel, Republican of Nebraska, helped draft the resolution, which they said was proof that the measure was more about urging Saddam Hussein to comply with weapons inspections, instead of authorizing combat.

Mrs. Clinton repeated the claim Sunday during an interview on “Meet the Press,” saying “Chuck Hagel, who helped to draft the resolution, said it was not 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,” Mrs. Clinton said.

But the talking point appears to misconstrue the facts.

...It was the White House proposal, not Mr. Hagel’s, that Mrs. Clinton supported, explaining in an Oct. 10, 2002, speech on the Senate floor that it was time to tell Saddam Hussein that “this is your last chance — disarm or be disarmed.”

The repeated references to Mr. Hagel by the Clintons make it clear that they are trying to distance her from the Bush administration’s handling of Iraq, by associating her with a persistent critic of the war.

Bill Clinton has raised the claim at least twice, including in an April 2007 interview on “Larry King Live” and, most recently, at a campaign event in New Hampshire just before the Democratic primary there.

This won't get the attention it deserves, primarily because of the mess that the Clintons' have gotten themselves into by bringing up gender and race in the Democratic Primary race, but it's heartwarming to see the New York Times call the Clintons on their lie, even though they are very gentle and bury it on the web instead of putting it in the dead tree edition.