Clinton’s 1993 NAFTA Meeting
One interesting event in Sen. Hillary Clinton’s just-released schedules from the 1990s comes on Nov. 10 1993, when the former first lady was to serve as the closing act during a briefing on NAFTA, the trade agreement she now assails.
11:30 am –
11:45 am
NAFTA BRIEFING DROP-BY
Room 450, OEOB
CLOSED PRESS
PARTICIPANTS: Approx 120 expected to attend
(See briefing book for further info)
FORMAT:
- Alexis Herman intros HRC for brief remarks
-HRC concludes program
(pp. 1375 and 1376)
Two attendees of that closed-door briefing, neither of whom are affiliated with any campaign, describe that event for ABC News. It was a room full of women involved in international trade. David Gergen served as a sort of master of ceremonies as various women members of the Cabinet talked up NAFTA, which had yet to pass Congress.
"It wasn’t a drop-by it was organized around her participation," said one attendee. "Her remarks were totally pro-NAFTA and what a good thing it would be for the economy. There was no equivocation for her support for NAFTA at the time. Folks were pleased that she came by. If this is a still a question about what Hillary’s position when she was First Lady, she was totally supportive of NAFTA.
That first attendee recalls that the First Lady’s office in the East Wing put together "the invitation list, who was invited authorizations and all that stuff."
And what is this attendee’s response to Clinton today distancing herself from NAFTA? "For people who worked hard to pass NAFTA and who support the importance of markets opening for the economy in the long term, they’re very upset. A number of the women who were there are very upset. You need to have some integrity in your position. The Clintons when Bill Clinton was president took a moderate position on trade for Democrats. For her to repudiate that now seems pretty phony."
Recalls a second attendee, "they were looking for women in international trade who supported NAFTA. Senator Clinton came by at the end. And of course she asked for our support and help in passing NAFTA."
Women who attended that event, the second attendee says, have been incredulous to see Clinton distance herself from the trade agreement as she campaigns today. "They’re all saying, ‘What’s this all about?’ We all heard it firsthand." She says Clinton isn’t being honest with voters today.
- jpt
UPDATE: The Clinton campaign has asked that I post this recent quote on CNN from Mr. Gergen, referenced above, saying, "I was actually there in the Clinton White House during the NAFTA fight and I must tell you Hillary Clinton was extremely unenthusiastic about NAFTA. And I think that’s putting it mildly. I’m not sure she objected to all the provisions of it but she just didn’t see why her husband and that White House had to go and do that fight. She was very unhappy about it and wanted to move on to health care. So I do think there’s some justification for her camp saying, you know, she’s never been a great backer for NAFTA."
It’s long-established that Hillary Clinton wanted to tackle health care before NAFTA. I don’t know that that necessarily undermines the idea that she supported NAFTA. But if she didn’t, then why was she telling this room full of businesswomen how great it would be for the economy?
Email
GOP Rap: 'Take America Back'
Afghanistan Timeline Realistic?
And, you’ve never re-evaluated an opinion after 14 years?
Posted by: pleasegrowup | March 19, 2008, 5:12 pm 5:12 pm
She is a liar and she had nothing to do with foreign policy when she was first lady besides touring some landmarks.. The MSM is a joke for pushing this “Hillary experience” lie.
Posted by: Ann | March 19, 2008, 5:14 pm 5:14 pm
And when are you going to start questioning people who attend or have attended Trinity United chuch about when Obama was in attendance and what he promoted????????
Posted by: s.b. | March 19, 2008, 5:16 pm 5:16 pm
I am very sure Mrs. Clinton’s view on NAFTA has changed a bit after she understood that she NEEDED to win Ohio because her hubby said so.
Posted by: Greta | March 19, 2008, 5:17 pm 5:17 pm
Dear please growup,
She only reevaluated it when she started running for president.
She is the biggest hypocrite, accusing of Obama of doing the wink wink to the Canadians (which was not true after all) and she flipping helped pass the thing!!
Her gall and chutzpah never ceases to amaze me.
Posted by: erizin | March 19, 2008, 5:18 pm 5:18 pm
They wont even have to go back 14 years Jake. Why not go back 14 days and ask people at Trinity United what he was saying 2 weeks ago to them????
Posted by: s.b. | March 19, 2008, 5:19 pm 5:19 pm
Lets see what was Obama promoting 14 years ago????
Posted by: s.b. | March 19, 2008, 5:21 pm 5:21 pm
So we are looking at the comments stated now of two supposed attendees back then? Well who are these two attendees? We’re just suppose to believe what people whose names are withheld, say? WEIRD….
Posted by: PINK | March 19, 2008, 5:23 pm 5:23 pm
Isn’t David Gergen the one who has come out MANY times and stated that Hillary was against NAFTA in the White House and told that she needed to support it because it was a bipartisan effort???? Also, she had been criticized back then for being “loudly” silent on NAFTA…..
Posted by: Sharon | March 19, 2008, 5:25 pm 5:25 pm
That is correct Sharon. I remember.
Posted by: PINK | March 19, 2008, 5:26 pm 5:26 pm
I thought she was fully vetted. Don’t tell me I was lied to.
Posted by: Kevin K. | March 19, 2008, 5:27 pm 5:27 pm
I had no respect for that woman, Mrs. Clinton, but now I almost feel compassion. She was already in a sinking ship and not they put the weight of 11000 pages on the already heavily damaged boat.
Easy stuff for cartoonists.
Posted by: Fred | March 19, 2008, 5:28 pm 5:28 pm
Who cares,…lets talk about Obama and Pastor Wrong!! What were THEY doing 14 years ago?
Posted by: Jerry | March 19, 2008, 5:30 pm 5:30 pm
NAFTA is a complex issue. It was a comprise of both parties with international interests. NAFTA will be revisited to see if it is still the best interest for US… It is just one of national policies which needs to re-evaluate along with time to fit the best interest of America…
There is no wrong/right doing on this issue…
Posted by: Truth | March 19, 2008, 5:32 pm 5:32 pm
HILLARY CLINTON has made it clear that NAFTA needs to be revisited and revised. Her message is consistent. Hey Vanessa, do you know the difference between 1993 and 2008?
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | March 19, 2008, 5:32 pm 5:32 pm
Article does not carry any weight as it is already establish Hillary was against it, but, she has to support it in public.
Posted by: Humm | March 19, 2008, 5:34 pm 5:34 pm
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!
Posted by: John | March 19, 2008, 5:34 pm 5:34 pm
Hillary needs to be held accountable for all the things she did while she was in the White House. She supported NAFTA. That’s part of her 35 years of experience. It will be interesting to see what other “experience” Hillary had.
Posted by: Janet | March 19, 2008, 5:35 pm 5:35 pm
Hello!!!
She was told she NEEDED to support NAFTA back then IN THE WHITE HOUSE!….go check out DAVID GERGEN’S recollection of her feelings about NAFTA….she new then it was a bad idea…SHE ALSO NEW BEFORE ANYONE ELSE THAT OUR COUNTRY’S HEALTH CARE SYSTEM WAS GOING TO TANK…SHE TRIED TO GET UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE AND THE REPUBLICANS SPENT MILLIONS SCARING EVERYONE AWAY FROM IT….HAD THE REP. FOOLS DONE THEIR JOB AND PASSED IT, WE WOULDN’T BE IN THE HEALTHCARE MESS WE ARE IN NOW…..SHE WILL BE A BETTER PRESIDENT THAN EVEN BILL WAS….SHE IS SO INTELLIGENT AND SO AHEAD OF HER TIME…AND HAS BEEN ALL HER LIFE. DO SOME RESEARCH!
Posted by: Sharon | March 19, 2008, 5:36 pm 5:36 pm
Why won’t the press ask her to explain this?!? Why does the media keep letting her and her campaign get away with telling lie after lie?
Posted by: Mary | March 19, 2008, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm
First of all, why we have a right to see what the First lady was doing 14 years ago, or at all, is beyond me. She wasn’t an elected official so what the hell do I care about her calendar as First Lady? As First Lady she was a hostess, meaning she met scores of people for any number of reasons. Lastly, she has said she has rethought her position on Nafta, doesn’t reject it outright but thinks it needs tweeking. What’s wrong with that. For those who want to make this such a hot button issue, saying you’ve changed your position is not the same thing as lying to the voters and then secretly saying something else to the Canadians who, by the way, seem to come out of thids okay, as opposed to the OTHER partner, Mexico. Everybody would like Nafta if it were not for the Mexicans.
Posted by: druggstohr | March 19, 2008, 5:39 pm 5:39 pm
Remember: US has been changed trade agreements with other countries year by year…
US used to fight japan 50 year ago now they are the partners…
Again.. there is no wrong/right doing on this trade issue… Only issue is that the trade agreement is still the best interest for US or not…
Posted by: Truth | March 19, 2008, 5:42 pm 5:42 pm
Nafta-Canada has a better dollar than us. They have universal health care. Canada is our number one oil supplier and their oil is considered as part of our national strategic plan. Canada is our number one supplier of electricity, light metals, heavy metals, and they are running a budget surplus. We have pipelines coming down through Alberta to bring Alaska oil to American markets. They have better environmental laws than us. They have better safety standards than us. The Prime Minister of Canada said that if the Americans reopen NAFTA he will put their oil on the table which means they are looking to sell to China and India. It is in our national interest to not pi*s Canada off. If we reopen NAFTA Canada will pull their troops from Afghanistan in a heartbeat and we can’t get other countries to go there as it is. Besides, Canada is not taking our jobs, China and India are!
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 19, 2008, 5:44 pm 5:44 pm
she was very clear that she was agaisnt NAFTA back then, her position on issuesis whatever is politically convienient at the time.
Posted by: Louis | March 19, 2008, 5:44 pm 5:44 pm
HEY, OBAMA4US
YA, I GUESS AS A “FIRST TERM” FIRST LADY SHE SHOULD HAVE SHOUTED FROM THE WHITE HOUSE LAWN THAT NAFTA WAS A BAD IDEA…GONE AGAINST THE FIRST BIPARTISAN EFFORT ON BEHALF OF THE ADMINISTRATION AND CONGRESS……I’m sure that would have gone over well….PLEASE RESERCH!
Posted by: SHARON | March 19, 2008, 5:45 pm 5:45 pm
Will the Gospel According to Jeremiah Wright sink the Obama candidacy? Not very likely.
Let’s start with two basic facts:
(a) Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) has already won the Democratic nomination. It’s over. Regardless of how the remaining primaries and caucuses go, including Michigan and even Florida, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) can never catch Obama in elected delegates. His current lead of 170 pledged delegates will not be overcome no matter what happens. Even if Clinton beats him by 10 points in each of these primaries, he will still lead among elected delegates by over 100. The superdelegates will not override the will of the voters unless Obama is in jail. They will not let themselves in for a civil war by overruling a black man who is beloved by the young by going over the heads of the electorate and naming the candidate that lost the primaries as the nominee. Regardless of how damaged Obama may be by the Wright tapes, it will not provide sufficient cover or cause for them to do so.
Posted by: Joris | March 19, 2008, 5:45 pm 5:45 pm
I think all the reporters and Obama campaign are going crazy to relate Hillary’s hour by hour activities with Hillary stand. With schedule so public, it is very rare that anyone can say one thing and do something else
Posted by: Humm | March 19, 2008, 5:46 pm 5:46 pm
“First of all, why we have a right to see what the First lady was doing 14 years ago, or at all, is beyond me. She wasn’t an elected official so what the hell do I care about her calendar as First Lady?”
Is this not what she is calling her “experience”? Now she can pick and choose what she calls experience? Come on now! If you take her years away as being a First Lady then she does not have an “experience” argument. You just made it easy!
Posted by: Korey | March 19, 2008, 5:48 pm 5:48 pm
A fascinating thing is that Hillary apparently isn’t very proud of her White House. Why wouldn’t she? There’s no mentioning at her official site of the release of these papers. For any good reason?
Posted by: Greta | March 19, 2008, 5:56 pm 5:56 pm
Isn’t David Gergen the one who has come out MANY times and stated that Hillary was against NAFTA in the White House and told that she needed to support it because it was a bipartisan effort???? Also, she had been criticized back then for being “loudly” silent on NAFTA…..
———————————
Thank you. David Gergen is a straight shooter.
Posted by: OhioNative | March 19, 2008, 5:57 pm 5:57 pm
Lou Dobbs used to keep a list of companies that moved jobs overseas. Last time I checked it was over three hundred (300) to China and India and some other far east slave wage economies. And some to Mexico.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 19, 2008, 5:58 pm 5:58 pm
He He He. First defeat of Obama. Shame Shame Shame.
Posted by: Humm | March 19, 2008, 5:59 pm 5:59 pm
It is no suprise that a lot people will be very interested in finding out what happened to Hillary when her husband had affair with intern at that period..
It will be good thing for Hillary. People will find out how strong she was to go thru this down time and came back strong again…
A true woman and a true fighter apprear to us now…
if someone wants to use this most painful and difficult time against a woman as personal attacks or jokes, she/he can only be called a “jerk” and “shame”…
Posted by: Truth | March 19, 2008, 6:01 pm 6:01 pm
This is CBSNEWS headline on the relaese of papers; I am absolutely disgusted with the media:
“Hillary Was Home On Day Bill Had Affair”
It looks like the Enquirer!!
Posted by: marie | March 19, 2008, 6:03 pm 6:03 pm
Dear Ann,
NOT and blamed everything on someone else…No!
Posted by: Kevin | March 19, 2008, 6:05 pm 6:05 pm
ABC…Way to go!!!
Here I was thinking that there were some negotiation of NAFTA by HRC and then I noticed the schedule time: 11:30am – 11:45am (all of 15 minutes)…wow! Hillary is amazing to accomplish so much in 15 minutes!
Again ABC, are you kidding me???
Posted by: Sophia | March 19, 2008, 6:09 pm 6:09 pm
Are we surprised? Why doesn’t the media do a story on all of these inconsistencies?
Kind of crazy how the Clintons are controlling the campaign narrative right now when they’re the ones with the most baggage.
Posted by: JW | March 19, 2008, 6:13 pm 6:13 pm
It makes no difference if Hillary was for or against NAFTA, she didn’t have a vote. Just as it makes no difference if Obama was for or against the war. Both Obama and Clinton have stated they will not do away with NAFTA but they will make some changes. This is a non- issue. The real issue is the fact that Obama is done. The right wing is just getting warmed up and there is more to come.
Posted by: Firefighter | March 19, 2008, 6:13 pm 6:13 pm
Hillary supporters are sinking in quicksand and still yelling “IT WASN’T HER FAULT”!!! SHE HAD TO DO IT!!!
What suckas!
On the other hand……….
Will the Gospel According to Jeremiah Wright sink the Obama candidacy? Not very likely.
Let’s start with two basic facts:
(a) Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) has already won the Democratic nomination. It’s over. Regardless of how the remaining primaries and caucuses go, including Michigan and even Florida, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) can never catch Obama in elected delegates. His current lead of 170 pledged delegates will not be overcome no matter what happens. Even if Clinton beats him by 10 points in each of these primaries, he will still lead among elected delegates by over 100. The superdelegates will not override the will of the voters unless Obama is in jail. They will not let themselves in for a civil war by overruling a black man who is beloved by the young by going over the heads of the electorate and naming the candidate that lost the primaries as the nominee. Regardless of how damaged Obama may be by the Wright tapes, it will not provide sufficient cover or cause for them to do so.
Posted by: Joris | March 19, 2008, 6:13 pm 6:13 pm
It’s not about changing her opinion after 14 years. It’s about her lies to the Ohio votes who are jobless and suffering. Tax season is going to be even better then this.
Posted by: Travis | March 19, 2008, 6:14 pm 6:14 pm
ABANDON SHIP!!!!! ABANDON SHIP!!!
Hillary’s ship is sinking. We cannot save it this time!! WOMAN OVERBOARD!!!
Posted by: Joris | March 19, 2008, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm
Still waiting for the Clinton Library to release the Hillary Healthcare documents. Then the real fireworks will begin. Hillary compaign is already on fire and as more documents are released it just a question of time until she goes up in smoke.
Hillary changed her story so many times she does not know what she said to whom.
Her compaign is done.
Posted by: BILL5321 | March 19, 2008, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm
The Clintons are finally at the point where their bucket of lies will hold no more. Anyone who has researched their political careers must immediately conclude that they have a dual existence: an open and warm public persona, and a self centered private persona. Throughout this campaign her opponents have obviously been her partisans; this will not be the case in the general election. The abundance of records will be brought into the light and democrats will loose. No one will vote for a dishonest candidate. Two things John McCain has over Hillary Clinton: honesty and experience. This country cannot handle the global repercussions of electing another republican. The people around the world will not understand this decision, especially after their support for Barack Obama.
Posted by: Daniel Georgiev | March 19, 2008, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm
FINALLY EXPOSED!!!
Can’t wait for the taxes, errr raa, the final straw that will not only break the camel’s back, but will bury it.
Posted by: Joris | March 19, 2008, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm
“Clinton isn’t being honest with voters today”
When has she ever been? I find it amazing the anyone could support this lying, power hungry witch. Now if we could just get those Tax Returns and the list of donors for the Clinton Library, we could put a fork in her campaign and political career – forever!
Posted by: John, Danville, CA | March 19, 2008, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm
Dear Hillary’s pollster:
Buyers remorse. Do-over in Ohio,please!
Posted by: adam | March 19, 2008, 6:18 pm 6:18 pm
If all the talking points they got from Hillary papers is that she supports NAFTA because she attended a meeting sure does not seem like the end of the world to me.
The media seems to be guilty now of slamming Obama with the Wright issue, so they are looking for dirt to pin on Hillary, all the race talk has the media shaken, yet Obama stand their and make a mockery of the constitution on the US and not one media house has called him out on that.
Also his speech had nothing to do with the issue at hand, what he did was diverted the attention from Wright on to race. The media are now overlooking that he lied, overlooking the anti american statements of Wright, overlooking what is the association between Obama and this man, they are overlooking everything because of one word and one play the race card.
Posted by: SJ | March 19, 2008, 6:19 pm 6:19 pm
All we can say for Clinton is Whoops! I’m not sure we were supposed to see that.
Posted by: Russ G | March 19, 2008, 6:19 pm 6:19 pm
Regarding honesty, Obama has been caught many times right now…So he can’t claim himself as an honest man…But he was honest to admit every time he got caught…
Posted by: Truth | March 19, 2008, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm
Hey Vanessa,
When will your Obama going to release his Illinois records? Oh yes, he did say he had no record of eight years of work in the state senate. LOL!!!
Posted by: Halfy | March 19, 2008, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm
Wow. Does anyone here even know what NAFTA is? Anyone? How about you, Joris? Care to explain the NAFTA agreement your talking about?
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 19, 2008, 6:21 pm 6:21 pm
If anyone is interested, Larry King is taking questions from callers/emailers tonight when he interviews Obama tonight on Iraq and Race. Of course, we can be assured that the questions chosen by cnn will help support their view. I won’t be watching.
So tell me, somehow I may have missed the overwhelming, positive press coverage of Hillarys address she made regarding her views on Iraq this past week. Oh wait, it’s more important to cover where she slept the night Bill was with Monica. Outrageous.
Posted by: catherine in nm | March 19, 2008, 6:22 pm 6:22 pm
When NAFTA was passed the Democrat party not only held the presidency, but also a majority in both houses. If she really was against it, then why doesn’t she dress down her idiot husband and other dems in power who helped pass it. The sad is all these young Guevara wannabes think that it was Bush 41 who did it. I’m sorry to add to your self hate with facts but thems the breaks.
Posted by: jojo | March 19, 2008, 6:22 pm 6:22 pm
FOR MUTTSOLDIER:
FOOD FOR THOUGHT:
Will the Gospel According to Jeremiah Wright sink the Obama candidacy? Not very likely.
Let’s start with two basic facts:
(a) Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) has already won the Democratic nomination. It’s over. Regardless of how the remaining primaries and caucuses go, including Michigan and even Florida, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) can never catch Obama in elected delegates. His current lead of 170 pledged delegates will not be overcome no matter what happens. Even if Clinton beats him by 10 points in each of these primaries, he will still lead among elected delegates by over 100. The superdelegates will not override the will of the voters unless Obama is in jail. They will not let themselves in for a civil war by overruling a black man who is beloved by the young by going over the heads of the electorate and naming the candidate that lost the primaries as the nominee. Regardless of how damaged Obama may be by the Wright tapes, it will not provide sufficient cover or cause for them to do so.
WILL HILLARY’S LIES TO THE PEOPLE OF OHIO damage her credibility not only in PA, but the rest of the country as well?
OOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHH YEEEEEEEEEAAAA!
Posted by: Joris | March 19, 2008, 6:25 pm 6:25 pm
She’s a Clinton. She’s a liar. Her experience as first lady? There for the first lady tea parties. There for the blue dress. There for NAFTA. “But some of the documents also serve to conceal much more than they reveal. There are redactions — blacked-out sections — on more than 4,400 pages, and on many days there is an entry for a “private meeting” that gives no clue as to whom she met or what the meeting was about. The documents offer no support for her claims, made during the presidential campaign, that she helped to negotiate the Irish peace accords or facilitated the flow of refugees in the Balkans. Neither is there evidence in them to back up her claim that she helped pass the Family and Medical Leave Act, the first legislation Mr. Clinton signed as president. The legislation, sponsored by Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut, sailed through Congress and landed on Mr. Clinton’s desk 10 days after he was inaugurated. Indeed, on the day Mr. Clinton signed the bill into law, Feb. 5, 1993, there is no indication on that day’s calendar that she attended.
The documents offer no insight into her role in appointments to key administration posts or in courting donors for her or her husband’s political campaigns.
And they do not add to an understanding of how she coped with revelations in 1998 of her husband’s sexual betrayal with a young White House worker, or provide a paper trail of the discussions that led to her declaring her candidacy for the Senate in 1999.
The dry records carry all the emotional punch of a factory worker’s time card, showing where she was for much of her eight years in the White House but telling nothing about what she was saying, thinking or doing.” From a paper that supported her. The NYT.
Posted by: kravitz | March 19, 2008, 6:27 pm 6:27 pm
NAFTA was good to US in 1993. It may not be the best in 2008 (Rep still supports it) – need to re-evaluate…
If someone ever fought Japan/Germany in 1945, now he made friends with Japanese in 2008, is he called “liar”?
Every policy will be re-visited period to see if it is the best interest to America now… That is the job for congress and US government…
Posted by: Truth | March 19, 2008, 6:29 pm 6:29 pm
THIS IS SMALL POTATOES. I WANT TO SEE THE TAX RETURNS. I WANT TO KNOW WHICH CORPORATIONS AND LOBBYIST DONATED THE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLAR THE CLINTONS HAVE AMASSED SINCE BILL LEFT OFFICE.IS THERE A LINE OF MONEY THAT SHOWS THAT HILLARY SOLD OUT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HEALTH CRAE HOPE IN EXCHANGE FOR SOME OF THOSE MILLIONS?
Posted by: BOB | March 19, 2008, 6:29 pm 6:29 pm
Joris-What is NAFTA? How long did various parties take to negotiate this agreement? What does it cover? What are the obligations from all sides? Do you even have a clue?
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 19, 2008, 6:32 pm 6:32 pm
All I have heard this last year is , how does Hillary claim experience being first lady. Seems this is just the begining of what she has done. She is a true democrat, she supported her party, good job Hillary! Bring it on Obama people! Oh, what was that Obama told the canadians through his people? Oh yeah its just political jargin! You have no good judgement Obama, drop out now!
Posted by: D | March 19, 2008, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm
Oh, I almost forgot, did she disagree with her husband granting “favored nation trading status” to China also? How about selling China our nuclear military secrets, did she disagree with that too?? I have never seen such a wretched case of selective amnesia as this broad has in my life. She and her husband have disgraced the Democrat party beyond belief. Truman and JFK are rolling in their graves over these two morons.
Posted by: jojo | March 19, 2008, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm
What a bunch of FOOLS you all are trying to make a big deal out of a 15 minute nicey, nicey speech made by a first term, first lady that happened 15 years ago. What happened ABC? You went through her documents and couldn’t find anything but some speech? What happened to giving some respect to the ones who make this country great? We have all sat by and watched George W. Bush tear apart everything good that Bill Clinton did. I think we all should stand up and take notice of how GREAT this country WAS when the Clinton’s were in the White House. Like Hillary said “It took a Clinton to clean up after the last Bush, and it will take a Clinton to clean up after this Bush”.
Vote for change you can COUNT ON, because anyone can BELIEVE in change, but you have to know how to make it happen.
Hillary 08!!!
Posted by: Dee | March 19, 2008, 6:35 pm 6:35 pm
Busted baby! What liars are the Clintons! If Obama doesn’t hammer her over the head with this in Pennsylvania, I will be severely disappointed.
Posted by: AG | March 19, 2008, 6:36 pm 6:36 pm
The major fools, will be the ones that decide to give them another set of keys to the Oval Office!!!
Posted by: Tom Albright | March 19, 2008, 6:39 pm 6:39 pm
I do believe that Senator Clinton said that she was going to revisit the Nafta thing to see if there were any changes that needed to be made. This is not news. Many people change their minds about something 14 years after the fact. I guess you would rather have somebody in the whitehouse that listens to a person who spouts off hate and unpatriotic statements.
Posted by: J | March 19, 2008, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm
no matter what Obama says now, how can we trust him! He has disgraced the party! He is a LIAR!!!
Posted by: D | March 19, 2008, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm
Basically it boils down to Hillary wants to claim her time in the White House as `experience’ and at the same time doesn’t want to be accountable for what she pseudo-involved in…
On many issues, including NAFTA, she is able to get away with the typical Democrat response, `I’m FOR-GAINST it!’ or was that `AG-FOR’ it???
Of course all Clinton issue positions depend on wind direction, and `what the definition of `IS’ is’. Thank God that Al Gore created the internet and global warming…because of him, we all have better things to do and worry about.
Posted by: Bill | March 19, 2008, 6:41 pm 6:41 pm
Hillary gave a 15 minute speech in support of her party. Now top that Obama!
Posted by: D | March 19, 2008, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm
well, i guess she was involved in policy!
Posted by: tony | March 19, 2008, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm
Come on people, lets read this for what it is. These women mentioned in this article, and no one saw fit to say that before the release of Hillary’s schedule as first lady until now?
Posted by: mona | March 19, 2008, 6:44 pm 6:44 pm
What is wrong with this? Why would she NOT attend? It was an official function. Do you really expect that she would go in and trash NAFTA? She explained many times that she had reservations that she expressed privately. That has been documented. Would you expect Laura Bush to go to a White House breakfast meeting and speak out against the war? Reality check.
Posted by: presto | March 19, 2008, 6:44 pm 6:44 pm
Change, why are you so mad with the article? Just because you found out that HRC has been lying about NAFTA?
Posted by: bkkarna | March 19, 2008, 6:45 pm 6:45 pm
Regarding the Clinton tax returns, you will see them will Hillary deems it appropriate, probably on or about April 15.
As for any additional information regarding Bill Clinton or the Clinton Library, you can probably see that on the same day we all get to see Michelle Obama’s senior thesis from Princeton.
Michelle Obama’s writing probably won’t be as vulgar as Jeremiah Wright’s sermons, but you can bet it won’t incorporate the “change we can believe in.”
Oh, yeah. Michelle won’t release her papers until November 5th…how convenient!
Sounds like a good time frame for the Clintons.
Posted by: Change | March 19, 2008, 6:47 pm 6:47 pm
It’s amazing that a few comments made in 30 second sounds bites, out of context, run by the right-wing machine can claim to damage Obama, who never made those statements.. Yet, 35 years of scandals, lies, corruption, poor judgment (Iraq vote), etc.. doesn’t some how hurt Clinton. There is such a double standards in this country. Let’s also look all the ministers on the GOP side that have made even more offensive comments … yet nobody reacted this way. Hypocrisy at its best! Washington slash and burn, Washington never changes. YOU CAN CHANGE IT! VOTE FOR REAL CHANGE – OBAMA
Posted by: Shawn | March 19, 2008, 6:48 pm 6:48 pm
HILLARY IS A DEMOCRAT, she is for the party people, I am sure for 8 years, she supported her party..THANK YOU HILLARY FOR 8 GREAT YEARS, LETS DO IT AGAIN.
Posted by: D | March 19, 2008, 6:48 pm 6:48 pm
This is where we need Jeremiah Wright to say “The Chickens have come home to roost!”
Posted by: Doug | March 19, 2008, 6:51 pm 6:51 pm
8 great years of Clintons? LOL … scandal, impeachment, sex, lies… what great years those were.
Posted by: Shawn | March 19, 2008, 6:51 pm 6:51 pm
The problem is that she never admitted that she supported NAFTA. She did support it, didn’t she. That is what I call a lie.
Posted by: catiger | March 19, 2008, 6:51 pm 6:51 pm
Yes, lets have the media pounce on Hillary ‘s record of experience. Oh wait, Obama has nothing for anyone to pounce on. 8 years in Illinois with nothing to show for it. It saddens me how he had a very long speech about the racial divide in America yesterday and he has been in public office for many years now and no one has been able to say exactly what he has done to unite the people of Illinois. I suppose everyone is okay with waiting to see how he will unite this country once he is the president when he has had more than an opportunity to that in his own home state of Illinois and has done nothing.
Posted by: mona | March 19, 2008, 6:52 pm 6:52 pm
What did I just read? “Two things John McCain has over Hillary Clinton: honesty and experience”
are you kidding me?
Honesty – remember the Keating 5 scandal John McCain was smack dab in the middle of -
Honesty NO
It’s all on record = look it up.
Remember, John McCain CHEATED on his wife with Cindy when he got back from the war. He COMMITTED ADULTRY. It’s all on record if you want to look it up.
Honesty: NO
Morals: NO
Experience: Heck, he doesn’t even know what country he’s in or who he’s talking about. Maybe he WAS experienced, but he’s senile now. He’s just a right-wing hack and he can’t even see that.
This could prove very dangerous to our country.
Experience: Used to but can’t remember anything now.
Posted by: sUSAN | March 19, 2008, 6:52 pm 6:52 pm
How can you tell HRC is lying? her lips are moving.
This woman is a pathological liar
Posted by: Bill | March 19, 2008, 6:52 pm 6:52 pm
Actually karna,
It’s old news. Maybe you weren’t around then, but Hillary’s support of NAFTA is not anything new.
Obama/Wright…The Scheme Team…
Posted by: Change | March 19, 2008, 6:53 pm 6:53 pm
A drop by meeting she attended as the First Lady has nothing to do with current views on this issue.
Of course, ABC, and I’m sure the rest of the media will harp on this and what she was doing when her husband was with Monica.
I’m more concerned frankly, with what Mr. Obama was doing for TWENTY YEARS with his radical pastor and his church. Go to that website and read the doctrine he has been influenced by all these years.
His wife won’t even salute the flag for God’s sake!
What a wonderful first lady she’ll make, and imagine the tea parties she’ll have spewing hatred of America while holding the white house china.
Posted by: marlene | March 19, 2008, 6:54 pm 6:54 pm
You’re a bald-faced liar, Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: James | March 19, 2008, 6:55 pm 6:55 pm
NAFTA-For those of you who forget NAFTA was negotiated by the first Bush Administration and then signed into law by the Clinton administration. Clinton signed a done deal at that time.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 19, 2008, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm
the point is she LIED to the OHIO and TEXAS voters in order to win those states. This tells you what kind of president she’ll be.
Obama ’08
YES WE CAN – It’s really gonna happen!!!
Posted by: Susan | March 19, 2008, 6:59 pm 6:59 pm
For gosh sakes, see the handwriting with both candidates. I have, and I am voting Republican this year. I campaigned for and voted for Clinton when he last ran, but this is totally different. We are fighting for the country now, economically and politically. Liars and people looking to pad their pockets are not required. McCain may not be an exciting speaker, but he has integrity.
Posted by: Edward | March 19, 2008, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm
A true woman and a true LIER apprear to us now…
Posted by: Susan | March 19, 2008, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm
Hillary’s fifteen minutes vs Obama’s TWENTY YEARS with Wright. No contest. Obama wins!
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 19, 2008, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm
They actually spoke to people yesterday on the news that had attended church with Obama. They all stated that Wright very rarely went on such rants and when he did the majority of the people in the congergation looked around at each other strangely asking what was going on… They were all very surprised at the few times this happened.
Posted by: Adam | March 19, 2008, 7:02 pm 7:02 pm
I GUESS AS A “FIRST TERM” FIRST LADY SHE SHOULD HAVE SHOUTED FROM THE WHITE HOUSE LAWN THAT NAFTA WAS A BAD IDEA…
No the thing is she CONSISTENLY and PURPOSELY LIED ABOUT THIS issue to the OHIO and TEXAS voters.
Posted by: Susan | March 19, 2008, 7:02 pm 7:02 pm
NAFTA is by and large a good deal for the US and Hillary should say that. The Mexican component might have to be tweaked somewhat but without the Canadian component US gas prices would be extremely expensive. A direct result of NAFTA.
If it was renegotiated by Obama or Clinton the Canadians would pump up the price of oil immediately.
Posted by: jackinthebox | March 19, 2008, 7:02 pm 7:02 pm
True that Susan this is TRUE, THE CLINTONS
WILL DO ANYTHING TO GET INTO OFFICE. Thats what I’ve been saying to people all along, they will manipulate and shape shift through out the campaign to get what they WANT.
GO OBAMA 08 “YES WE CAN”
Posted by: Antoin | March 19, 2008, 7:03 pm 7:03 pm
It’s one thing to vote for McCain if you truly believe that spending billions of dollars a year for the next hundred years on a pointless war is the right thing to do and is some how going to help our economy… but voting for him because the democrats have all this drama… that makes no sense.
Posted by: Adam | March 19, 2008, 7:04 pm 7:04 pm
Does this attendee have a name or did that attendee vote present that day.
You want tax records, I want the attendees name.
Posted by: ShadowKnows | March 19, 2008, 7:08 pm 7:08 pm
Hillary did not tell the Canadians he did not mean what he said, Obama did! Obama said this was only politics. Personally speaking, I’ll take the fifteen minutes and I’ll raise you TWENTY YEARS with the Brother Wright hate machine. Oh, Obama threw his own grandmother under the bus. Yep. You just can’t make this stuff up.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 19, 2008, 7:08 pm 7:08 pm
Heh…
Everyone here thinks they are intelligent and have something important to say. But in reality it’s only you, alone with your computer – angry, sad, and pathetic – hoping someone will listen to you.
Funny stuff.
Posted by: Norman Fell | March 19, 2008, 7:08 pm 7:08 pm
What? A Clinton being untruthful? Can it be?
To re-evaluate is one thing….to categorily lie, another. If one cannot discern the difference, then they are either a Clinton or a Clinton supporter.
Posted by: Jimbo | March 19, 2008, 7:10 pm 7:10 pm
Hillary has never said she didn’t support NAFTA at the time and as first lady she had to support whatever the president was supporting. and these two women may not be “affiliated” with either campaign but I would bet a million bucks they’re Obama supporters
Posted by: max | March 19, 2008, 7:12 pm 7:12 pm
Jackinthebox-You are dead on in your post. I saw the article in the Globe and Mail in Canada that quoted Prime Minister Harper saying if the Americans wanted to reopen NAFTA he was putting oil on the table. Canada has the second largest oil reserve in the world after Saudi Arabia. Plus Canada is our number one supplier of natural gas and electricity.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 19, 2008, 7:13 pm 7:13 pm
Hey, Let’s wake up here. What good is the economy, health care, infrastructure or any thing else that we do on a daily basis? If we don’t have National Security and Freedom, all else is for not. Without these 2 basic’s we will go nowhere but down hill. Oh, I forgot we are already heading in that direction.
Posted by: Wellinton Butler | March 19, 2008, 7:13 pm 7:13 pm
She’s so unprepared to be President of the U.S.
Posted by: Chukkal | March 19, 2008, 7:16 pm 7:16 pm
Hey if you think all Black Ministers and the community are supporting Obama, Check out The Honorable James David Manning, PhD. Google him and you will see, not everyone believes he is change.
Posted by: Dee | March 19, 2008, 7:17 pm 7:17 pm
Well, you know, I guess she could have stomped her feet and thrown a tantrum and told Bill she wouldn’t do the NAFTA breifing.
Posted by: KDH55 | March 19, 2008, 7:18 pm 7:18 pm
This is really a non-issue. Both candidates have the same exact stance on NAFTA. Both agree it is good for some parts of the country and bad for others. Both plan to insist on renegotiation of NAFTA so that it will be a fair trade agreement (good for all parties involved and all parts of the country). However, Obama recently pushed for and voted for an identical free trade agreement with Peru and wants others with Asian countries. Clinton voted against the one in Peru because it is too much lke NAFTA and needs to be revamped so that it is fair and not just free trade. So it appears, actions speak louder than words. Obama’s actions are pro free trade while Clinton’s actions are pro fair trade. The media, Obama camp, and the RNC are going to be vetting for some time on these documents. let it continue but dont fall for the hype. The facts on this are clear and always have been.
Posted by: DCVoter | March 19, 2008, 7:20 pm 7:20 pm
I am more concerned about a man that cannot distance himself from an unpatriotic, racist preacher. Nafta is something Hillary said she would look at again. People can change their minds 14 years after the fact. God knows my views on things have changed from then til now.
Posted by: J | March 19, 2008, 7:21 pm 7:21 pm
BRAVO!!!! Mickey!!! You are my hero!! Its good to know that there are other people out there who remember how NAFTA began. Ditto on everything you said!
Posted by: Dee | March 19, 2008, 7:22 pm 7:22 pm
It’s the principle of the whole thing. People will call someone else out about so called lying, but when it comes to their candidate, they look over it.
Hillary wanted to give the voters in Ohio the impression that she was not hold heartedly behind NAFTA in the beginning. Well, she lied. All you guys in Ohio voted for her behind that lie. Why it wasn’t already understood that Hillary would lie through her teeth, I don’t understand.
I was surprised the other day to find out that it wasn’t just last years Tax Returns of the Clinton’s that have not be disclosed, but none since 2000!! Let’s be real here. If Sen. Obama had not released his tax returns for 8yrs, the Clinton camp would be screaming bloody murder. People with the kind of money that the Clinton’s have don’t sit at a computer and figure their tax returns, they have an accountant. That accountant only needs to push a button on that computer and print them out in 15 minutes.
I could be wrong, but I thing they have something to hide. Remember, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s usually a duck.
Posted by: Phyllis | March 19, 2008, 7:23 pm 7:23 pm
Clinton partisans will argue that you can’t judge her for changing her views since she was not in a position of power, but I guess was in a position of experience. Obama partisans (yes, I am one of them) will argue that changing positions is fine, loyalty is fine (unless it is to a devil incarnate like the spiritual leader of a major church) but lying about it is not correct. The Clinton supporters will argue that there is really nothing to see here. If that is the case, some Obama supporters will argue that shows there really is little substance. I will leave it to the lunatic fringe to argue that the parts about killing Vince Foster and such were redacted, but it does defy reason that positive things would have been removed which support that Hillary Clinton had significant experience in the White House and in national affairs that is greater than that of Laura Bush, Sheryl Crow, or Sinbad.
Posted by: Jonathan Swift | March 19, 2008, 7:23 pm 7:23 pm
Obama supporters are yelling for Hillary to be held accountable for all her years as an adult but yet they past off Obama 20 years of choosing to have close ties (very close) with hate spewing people who hate this Country and most of its people. You just pass that off as a race loyalty thing. Get real! Obama said that he was in the church when the Rev. said things he didn’t agree with but he choose to sit when someone was damning his country. Michelle will not be presenting her little history until Nov. I guess it’s because this is the first year she is proud to be an American. When you really look into the Obama’s household and after hearing Michelle’s speech, I wonder how much of that hate for the Country rubbed off on the whole family. And if the Obama people insist on Hillary being truthful and declare her a liar in nearly all these post. Let me tell you, if Obama had been truthful in the beginning about his close association with pastor, mentor, advisor, there is no way he would even be in the running. Now, he wishes to disallow the Mich. and Florida delegates. He and all his people will be denying citizens their right to vote. So much for bringing this Nation together. I think if they can throw Florida and Michigan away, then they should throw how all the caucuses. They are the most unfair way of voting. How can anyone be sure who voted for who? Their wrote a name on a piece of paper, tore it off and put it in a box. Most of the people weren’t able to vote in the caucauses. They should not be legal. I’m a Democrat but I can say I have never known a party to get things so messed up as they have this primary and the way they count votes and delegates. I’m for replacing everyone who has anything to do with the National Party committee.
Posted by: Mickey | March 19, 2008, 7:24 pm 7:24 pm
How important is Canada in NAFTA? I know because oil is my job. I do know that the OPEC nations have three times sent a delegation to Calgary, their oil capital, asking the Canadians to honor the OPEC call for reduced oil output. OPEC sent a delegation to Calgary as late as this past December asking Canada to JOIN OPEC. Each time Canada has refused. If Canada were to join OPEC well, you can figure that out for your gas prices.
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 19, 2008, 7:25 pm 7:25 pm
Lies and more Clinton lies….
1100 of pages of stuff to troll through to find most of the “Experience” was rubbish like we all knew from the start.
Posted by: Tes | March 19, 2008, 7:32 pm 7:32 pm
Lies and more Clinton lies….
1100 of pages of stuff to troll through to find most of the “Experience” was rubbish like we all knew from the start.
Posted by: Tes | March 19, 2008, 7:32 pm 7:32 pm
Caught out in another Clinton lie and exaggeration. Just give up now…
Posted by: TBD | March 19, 2008, 7:33 pm 7:33 pm
I would like the Clinton supporters posting here just how exactly they expect her to win the election, assuming she does get the nomination. I can tell you that this individual is very offended by the kinds of stuff being posted about Mr. Obama. It is the kind of stuff we all complained about when the Republicans did it to John Kerry.
I intend tomorrow to change my registration from Democrat to Independent. I probably will not vote for McCain and while I do have some doubts about Obama I can tell you all that as it stands right now it is very much unlikely that I can vote for Mrs. Clinton.
I am disgusted with the scorched nature of her campaign and it seems that almost everone supporting her and posting here along with her pundits on TV are not interested in having the support of anyone who is willing to think for themself. The Clinton campaign in my humble opinion is fast becoming a ROVIAN operation.
Posted by: fisher | March 19, 2008, 7:35 pm 7:35 pm
Tes-What is NAFTA? Do you have any idea what it is? What does NAFTA do? Why is NAFTA important? Or not?
Posted by: Dogsoldier | March 19, 2008, 7:36 pm 7:36 pm
I apologize for couple of typos in my earlier entry.
Posted by: Onlooker | March 19, 2008, 7:37 pm 7:37 pm
Hillary Clinton is a liar, her supporters just don´t want to see it
Posted by: david | March 19, 2008, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm
Hillary seems to have an informal approach to truth and integrity. It’s one thing to say, she changed her mind on Nafta, it’s an entirely different matter when you lie about it. Hillary has shown a lack of honesty that’s inherent to her character. Most of these issues are no big deal, all she had to do is to admit she was wrong and, that her position has evolved. No, this is too simple. I am wondering if her tendency to lie has to do with the fact that she was lied to, repeatedly by Bill.
Posted by: JustinA | March 19, 2008, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm
So Hillary is for NAFTA? I thought she said she wasn’t. Hmmm.
Posted by: Jim B | March 19, 2008, 7:40 pm 7:40 pm
Caught in another lie and Hillary just moves on saying that was in the past! I cannot vote for double speak!
Posted by: Agmines | March 19, 2008, 7:44 pm 7:44 pm
I am in michigan and voted in our early primary, because that is my right. It is still unclear if our voices will be heard but our re-vote all lies in the Obama camps hands, which I find utterly stupid. He has to agree with this. Just so everyone knows, when I voted, HRC was NOT the only democrat on the ballot there was Chris Dodd, Dennis Kunich, Hillary Clinton and Uncommited. John Edwards and Barak Obama both CHOSE to remove their names, and then Obama had the nerve to run negitive ads against the people in Michigan in Iowa and N.H. to make himself look good.
By the way Hillary won 58% here to 41% uncommited and 5% to Dennis Kunich.
Posted by: Dee | March 19, 2008, 7:44 pm 7:44 pm
I’m not mad because she blindly pursued a policy that was harmful to the American people and lost millions their jobs.
I’m not mad because she lied to us and only decided to change her mind on it once she started running for president.
I’m not mad because she framed Obama for what SHE told the Canadians behind our back, and used it to win Ohio on a lie.
I’m mad because she had the nerve to come onstage and yell “SHAME ON YOU BARACK OBAMA!” and accuse him of deceiving the voters when she is the only one who is consistently lying in this competition. Even McCain has more integrity…
Posted by: Daniel | March 19, 2008, 7:46 pm 7:46 pm
So tell me again why the Clintons stayed popular well into the end of his terms, if so many people here seem to dispise them both.
Posted by: Nate K | March 19, 2008, 7:48 pm 7:48 pm
This will carry a lot more weight if it had some names to go with the 2 people being quoted
Latr
Posted by: Chris | March 19, 2008, 7:49 pm 7:49 pm
….. that was “run down rat infested unheated broken down tenements which served as home for the poor”…. some of whom could have used some
assistance from B O’s wonderful, giving church.
But Rezko, was his “buddy” , and never asked him for favors…..
Posted by: questioner | March 19, 2008, 7:51 pm 7:51 pm
Who said Ohams won the nomination…
Even Bush knew he has not yet…
Posted by: Truth | March 19, 2008, 7:53 pm 7:53 pm
It took Hillary 16 days after Bill was sworn in to push through the entire FML law!
It took Hillary 14 years to figure out that her deeply involved work on NAFTA was a bad deal for the USA.
It took Obama 20 years to finally criticise the hate speech of his minister and friend.
It took Obama 24 hours to publicly call for Imus’ dismissal from NBC for uttering two ethnic words that blacks use to describe their women.
This kind of commedy can’t be coming out in a presidential campaign, can it? It’s just tooooo entertaining to miss!! Ok…who to call at 03:AM? LOL!
Proud to be a republican.
Posted by: doofus | March 19, 2008, 7:56 pm 7:56 pm
Lie about what…Lie about she said she supported in 1993 but now she is against in 2008…..
The lie is Ohama says he is against but his staff told Canada he didn’t mean it at the SAME time..
Posted by: Truth | March 19, 2008, 7:57 pm 7:57 pm
The Clinton’s are liars and thieves; always have been always will be.
Hil and Bill took millions for presidential pardons; and make the Bush family look like Boy Scouts.
Posted by: John | March 19, 2008, 8:00 pm 8:00 pm
Who said NAFTA was a bad deal to US in 1993, who said NAFTA was a bad deal to US in 2000, who said NAFTA was a bad deal to US in 2008….
Whether NAFTA is good or bad to US in 2008 is still under evaluation….
Posted by: Truth | March 19, 2008, 8:01 pm 8:01 pm
Susan, I can’t agree with you concerning that the people looked around when the pastor went on one of his rants. You best look at the tape again. All the congregation was clapping and amening the Rev. The more they clapped the more he spewed his hate for the Country and the people. It was a lovefest for the minister and he was enjoying it. No pastor who preaches in such a way just does it once or twice. And no congregation who enjoyed such a rant that time will not enjoy the next time. So, get real and think of something else to cover Obama’s butt for sitting there for 20 years.
Posted by: Mickey | March 19, 2008, 8:08 pm 8:08 pm
A true pastor is not to promote the hatred but to ask people to repent the sins in name of God…
Obama’s pastor has crossed line as a pastor….
Posted by: Truth | March 19, 2008, 8:12 pm 8:12 pm
Clinton Schedules Vague But Lead To Evidence of NAFTA Lie
Hillary Clinton released her schedules from when she was First Lady and we can be certain that journalists will be spending quite a lot of time digging through them. The records were quite vague, lacking specific information on the meetings. NBC News n…
Posted by: Liberal Values | March 19, 2008, 8:16 pm 8:16 pm
Dee: Can you provide a single link or single line of evidence to support your statement that “Obama had the nerve to run negative ads against the people of Michigan?”
I hope your vote, and everyone’s vote is counted, but I’d like to see proof of your statement.
Posted by: Mara | March 19, 2008, 8:16 pm 8:16 pm
Dee: Can you provide a single link or single line of evidence to support your statement that “Obama had the nerve to run negative ads against the people of Michigan?”
I hope your vote, and everyone’s vote is counted, but I’d like to see proof of your statement.
Posted by: Mara | March 19, 2008, 8:17 pm 8:17 pm
This woman is a liar. She voted for the war and now we are supposed to believe she will get us out of it. She worked for a year and a half on her universal health care plan and didn’t succeed and now we are supposed to believe she will do it now. She now has been shown to give a pro nafta speech it doesn’t matter how long ago when she is saying that she didn’t support it. And BTW this thread was about Senator Clinton and her mistruths not Jeremiah Wright, if you have nothing positive to say about Hillary Clinton you should just pass I think.
Posted by: deb | March 19, 2008, 8:17 pm 8:17 pm
Just reported by ABC
In the case of his relationship with Rezko, Obama has also been slow to acknowledge the full extent of his relationship.
It was only last week that he revealed Rezko had raised some $250,000 in campaign contributions for him.
The campaign had initially claimed Rezko-connected contributions were no more than $60,000, an amount the campaign donated to charity. Then the figure grew to around $86,000, and there were additional revelations that put the amount at about $150,000. Obama’s $250,000 accounting was a substantial jump and clearly contradicted earlier campaign statements that Rezko was just one of “thousands of donors.”
Which is it?
Obama should go home to his O’Mama!!
At least we know and have met all of Hillary’s skelton’s in her closet.
There isnt much we don’t know about her.
Posted by: Dee | March 19, 2008, 8:18 pm 8:18 pm
At least she didn’t tell Canada NAFTA was a good deal, like Obama tried to sneakily do in secret.
Posted by: KDH55 | March 19, 2008, 8:18 pm 8:18 pm
All these comments about “you guys in Ohio voted for Hillary because of her lies about NAFTA” is a joke. You don’t know what you’re talking about. Here in Ohio, both candidates were running anti-NAFTA campaign ads on T.V., true, but not one of Hillary’s ads said that she was against it from the beginning. So, technically, she wasn’t lying. And we voted for her because we saw through Obama. He’s racist. He’s inexperienced. He’s so far left, he’s off the charts. He makes all these empty promises about how he’s going to change the world and we’re not hypmotized and we don’t follow him blindly like his supporters. He surrounds himself with angry, hateful people (his wife, his pastor). I’m not crazy about the Clintons but in this case, and I never thought I’d say this, she is the lesser of the two evils. So, I guess you can say people in Ohio voted for Hillary because they are not so easily decieved as the states who voted for Obama. Or maybe those states just had more black people in them.
Posted by: Kristi | March 19, 2008, 8:19 pm 8:19 pm
All these comments about “you guys in Ohio voted for Hillary because of her lies about NAFTA” is a joke. You don’t know what you’re talking about. Here in Ohio, both candidates were running anti-NAFTA campaign ads on T.V., true, but not one of Hillary’s ads said that she was against it from the beginning. So, technically, she wasn’t lying. And we voted for her because we saw through Obama. He’s racist. He’s inexperienced. He’s so far left, he’s off the charts. He makes all these empty promises about how he’s going to change the world and we’re not hypmotized and we don’t follow him blindly like his supporters. He surrounds himself with angry, hateful people (his wife, his pastor). I’m not crazy about the Clintons but in this case, and I never thought I’d say this, she is the lesser of the two evils. So, I guess you can say people in Ohio voted for Hillary because they are not so easily decieved as the states who voted for Obama. Or maybe those states just had more black people in them.
Posted by: Kristi | March 19, 2008, 8:19 pm 8:19 pm
There is nothing wrong with NAFTA . Its been the way its been IMPLEMENTED and run by the Bush administration that is the problem . The united states CANNOT survive without NAFTA. They just need to put more controls on it to curb the abuses.
Clinton will certainly make this clear to the american people. This idea that NAFTA in its principal is somehow the cause of our ills is WRONG.
The administration has to make sure it functions properly. Nobody is going to just strike down NAFTA. Its a global economy now. They need to PENALIZE companies for outsourceing jobs. Not strike NAFTA down in its entirety.
Posted by: tomdavie | March 19, 2008, 8:21 pm 8:21 pm
As I read the just released calender of Mrs. Clintons’s itinerary, I was amazed at the shallowness of her experiences. I personally feel the White house chef had as much experience as Mrs. Clinton did in setting policy etc. She could not even control her husband let alone leaders from around the World. I feel she was to busy scheming and planning attacks on her enimy lists to really contribute anything positive to the White House experience..
Posted by: Sterling A. Hill | March 19, 2008, 8:22 pm 8:22 pm
As I read the just released calender of Mrs. Clintons’s itinerary, I was amazed at the shallowness of her experiences. I personally feel the White house chef had as much experience as Mrs. Clinton did in setting policy etc. She could not even control her husband let alone leaders from around the World. I feel she was to busy scheming and planning attacks on her enimy lists to really contribute anything positive to the White House experience..
Posted by: Sterling A. Hill | March 19, 2008, 8:22 pm 8:22 pm
A lot of people make a pre-assumption about Liar withour facts…
A liar is only called when she or he is caught….
It is obvious Obama has been caught several times jsut in a few weeks… So he is a facturally true liar, agree?
Posted by: Truth | March 19, 2008, 8:22 pm 8:22 pm
Vanessa still thinks Obama would make the best president. WHY ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/
I know. He gives pretty speeches.
Posted by: tomdavie | March 19, 2008, 8:23 pm 8:23 pm
Time4Change, Hitler did a lot of good for a few chosen ones. The pastor did not suffer any more than any other black person and SOME white, and some Latinos, and Native Americans. In fact, it looks like he has gotten along better than most. How do you know he was kicked and abused and raped? Most blacks such as Cosby and others are tired of some of the black race excusing their bad ways or lack of doing anything because of slavery or just being black. Most people in the past have had a hard times. Women have been denied the right to vote to own property. They are still being sold into slavery. Women have always had to work twice as hard to prove them self in the work place or even come near to earning what the male was earning. The Rev. Wright has done okay for himself so don’t try to make me feel sorry for him. I feel sorry for all black and whites(everyone) who have worked their bones to the ground and still can’t get ahead. Who have tried to be honest and hard workers and love their Country and yet nothing turns out right. I don’t feel sorry for any one who rants and spews hate out for this Country and the people. Don’t try to cover up the minister’s wrong by making him out to be someone who has been beaten, etc. As I said, he is much better off and has been much better off than the common person. He has made good money spewing his hate. I don’t care to read Obama’s books. I probably couldn’t believe they were his words. I heard his speeches but I had already heard his speeches from the true author of those speeches.
Posted by: Mickey | March 19, 2008, 8:25 pm 8:25 pm
Laura ’12
Seems she just as much experience as Hillary, being a 2 term sitting first lady.
Posted by: Rachel | March 19, 2008, 8:35 pm 8:35 pm
no offense to the “nafta ladies”…but perhaps they are the ones Hillary to whom she was being phony. I bet they would have bought the Brooklyn Bridge from Hillary that day. Like those who backed Pete Rose who placed bets on his own team and others (for and against) in baseball….there are fans that still love this jerk and think he should be in the hall of fame. Star struck. Not a good thing.
Posted by: mike | March 19, 2008, 8:43 pm 8:43 pm
Since all of your Obama supporters and the news media are judging Hillary as a first lady then you need to think about what type of First Lady will Michelle make? She, like her minister have not ever been proud to be an American. This year she feels proud now since her husband is running for office. (I still don’t think her minister is proud.} What do we know about her except a few quotes here and there and that she sat along side her husband in church for 20 years listening to anti-white and anti-country sermons. Obama supporters think she is another Jackie Kennedy but Jackie loved this Country and was always proud to be an American. I don’t believe Mrs. Obama has never seen such mistreatment to warrant her feeling the way she does about this Country. Mr. and Mrs. Obama need to mature a little more and stop blaming others for their own short comings. Stop dividing people and at the same time cry for change and bringing everyone together. Obama needs to get his own voice, his own speeches, his own legal matters right, his dedication to Country on the right track and stop associating with people who hate this Country. Most of all, he needs to stop calling everyone a racist who disagrees with him or doesn’t support him. Expecially since he is the one associating and having close ties with racist people. AND, most of all he and his supporters have be littled the Clintons and everyone who has worked and some have put their life on the line for the rights of black Americans. Now, these people have been put down as racist. Ferrario was a hard worker for humans rights and look how Obama, his supporters and Diane treated her. Shame on all of you.
Posted by: Mickey | March 19, 2008, 8:46 pm 8:46 pm
DCVoter,
OMG Obama thought Hillary was right, imagine that…lol. Of course he doesn’t have an original thought of his own.
Posted by: J | March 19, 2008, 8:47 pm 8:47 pm
LOOKS like 2 possibilities regarding NAFTA and HILLARY CLINTON
1)she forgot.
2)She’s been lying through her teeth to the millions of middle class blue color voters who lost their jobs when the Clintons and the Corporations sent the jobs to China.
Posted by: NO DIEBOLD PRESIDENT | March 19, 2008, 8:48 pm 8:48 pm
I take it that David Gergen was lieing when he recalled HRC being unhappy about NAFTA?
Keep fighting the fight for Obama.
It looks like everytime Obama goofs up, the media go the extra mile to try and find something wrong with Hillary.
Keep it up and you will be starring in the next SNL.
Posted by: Sammy | March 19, 2008, 8:52 pm 8:52 pm
DCV
If you have a moderation issue………go to HuffPo or Daily Kos. They won’t delete your posts. Matter of fact there is some buzz that HRC is under represented over there. They need you.
Or better yet go to Taylor Marsh.
There’s gotta be lots of places for HRC fans to hang out on The Internets.
Posted by: The Commander Guy | March 19, 2008, 8:54 pm 8:54 pm
I am a Canadian…and we would love to open NAFTA…you are getting our oil and energy prices at a grossly reduced price…and I would like to hear from Clinton as to which safety and trade practices that Canada has that aren’t superior to Americans. We know for a gact that is not true…
Posted by: Lynn | March 19, 2008, 8:55 pm 8:55 pm
Well, Hillary Clinton contributed more than I had expected to our international relations. Certainy when it comes to Russia.
In schedules there’s this three-day, January 1994 trip with her husband and daughter to Russia and Belarus. While in Russia, President Bill Clinton and then-Russian President Boris Yeltsin unveiled an agreement between their nations and Ukraine intended to secure former Soviet nuclear warheads. In Belarus, the President prodded leaders to institute democratic reforms and signed an agreement to encourage U.S. investment.
When Hillary Clinton wasn’t participating in ceremonial events with her husband, her schedule shows she spent most of her time with Yeltsin’s wife and other Russian and Belarusian spouses and U.S. officials.
She toured a cathedral and two hospitals, watched a birthing class, took in a ballet and had a lunch at the Krelim of Blinis with caviar and salmon, Game Chaudfroid and Mutton baked in puff pastry.
Posted by: Greta | March 19, 2008, 8:56 pm 8:56 pm
Mara,
I have tried to post a link, but my post keeps getting deleted. Search: Obama Iowa Campaign Ads about detroit automakers in Jan 08, and you will find
it.
Posted by: Dee | March 19, 2008, 8:58 pm 8:58 pm
I say we re-elect GWB for a third term. The country can stay afloat and move forward and avoid all of these terrible tax and kill the middle class policies that OBAMA and Shrillary have planned for us. I KNOW he has the best plan for Social Security. Besides, who will all of you whackos blame for the demise of the brown-tailed weasel eared deermouse that is being put in danger because we want to tap our own resources and stop paying $6 a gallon for gas. Who will you blame for the ocean’s becoming more saltier. Who will you blame for the gravitational pull of the moon being slightly altered. Who will you blame for the Pyramids losing 50 pounds of sand each. Who will you …… you get the point. GWB please don’t go !!!!!!!!!
Posted by: kgb | March 19, 2008, 9:01 pm 9:01 pm
Another Clinton lie in a long line of lies. Are the Ohio pro-Hillary camp feeling cheated? Some blue collar workers (Ohio and Pennsylvania) are so afraid of voting for a man with African heritage, they will take the gun and blow their own brains out rather than vote for Obama.
Posted by: Ann | March 19, 2008, 9:02 pm 9:02 pm
Don’t let this story die!
Posted by: Bill | March 19, 2008, 9:08 pm 9:08 pm
So, let me get this straight:
Hillary was FOR NAFTA before she was AGAINST NAFTA.
She suffers from “JohnKerryitis.”
Posted by: SteveD | March 19, 2008, 9:26 pm 9:26 pm
So what is new? Hillary herself told about this many times………Crappy article…..
Posted by: MattOhio | March 19, 2008, 9:27 pm 9:27 pm
Mr. Gergen said that privately, Hillary did not support NAFTA, but is that relevant? Does it matter what she thought? It is what she did and said publically is how we must judge her. As she always SAYS “actions speak louder than words.” And in this case, she didn’t even have words.
Posted by: Terri | March 19, 2008, 9:33 pm 9:33 pm
Terri
Obama admitted to smoking dope years ago….do those actions count now?
Posted by: MattOhio | March 19, 2008, 9:35 pm 9:35 pm
Obama & Hillary are the SAME old thing, just different race &/or gender. They are NO different from one another. I’m from IL, Obama is a crooked Chicago-machine politician and that’s a fact. They’re the worst of and what’s wrong with post-modern American politics: dishonesty prevails and partisanship is the plan of the day.
Posted by: E. O'Neal-from IL | March 19, 2008, 9:40 pm 9:40 pm
So, does her time as First Lady count as experience or does it not? You can’t have it both ways.
Posted by: LOM | March 19, 2008, 9:41 pm 9:41 pm
People following this election should read Ibsen’s play Enemy of the People, about how a guy trying to do some good for his community becomes the subject of a mass hysteria campaign orchestrated by those forces who want to prevent any good at all from taking place. Now, if you research Hillary Clinton’s career, it’s pretty clear she’s never been part of trickle down economics, but instead has worked on family and children’s initiatives all her life. Quite frankly, this country needs her more than she needs us, and this window of opportunity may not open again for a long, long time. For more on the real-life Enemy of People premise as it’s playing out in the Democratic primaries, I’ve posted an article at thecityedition.com. (Hint: Karl Rove figures prominently into the equation.) Click on my screen name for a direct link.
Posted by: Factcheck2 | March 19, 2008, 9:42 pm 9:42 pm
What is wrong with the democratic party organization?
Don’t they know that a civil rights problem of the first order,
was created by denying the represntation of the will of the people,
in the choosing of their candidate, that right is constitutionally protected.
If you are denying me the right to have my vote count,
you are denying me of my protection of the constitution,
to be represented, and my vote either locally or statewide or nationally,
is comprimised. that deprives me of my civil rights.
How many lawyers does it take to see the simple solution.
Sue The Pants off the Democratic National Comittee.
Posted by: bornsr | March 19, 2008, 9:45 pm 9:45 pm
For all the questions on ethics raised by the author of this blog, there are some troubling issues with this blog.
I had questioned why JT does not acknowledge the people, who leave some interesting pieces of information in their comments which become the topics of his blog later. Additionally, I also noticed that a comment was deleted within an hour. The info in the comment became the topic of a blog next day.
My comment that questioned the professional ethics was deleted in 10 minutes.
I am sure this also will be deleted quickly.
Practice what you preach – I guess not only politicians but reporters too are exempt from this dictate.
Posted by: Onlooker | March 19, 2008, 9:50 pm 9:50 pm
whoever the first guy is ranting about his so called “right to vote” I challenge him to find anywhere in the Constitution that any citizen has a “right” to vote. Sorry about that but voting in this country (unless some state constitutions specify such a right) is not a right at the federal level
Posted by: ken | March 19, 2008, 9:54 pm 9:54 pm
HILLARY’S EXPERIENCE:
First, she became a lawyer. During Hillary Rodham Clinton’s 12 years as first lady of Arkansas, she continued to pursue children and family issues. She chaired the Arkansas Education Standards Committee to improve the testing standards of new teachers, founded the Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families, and introduced Arkansas Home Instruction for Preschool Youth, a program that trained parents of preschool children in preparedness and literacy. The first lady also served on the Arkansas Children’s Hospital Legal Services board, Children’s Defense Fund board, while continuing to work for the Rose Law Firm. She was named one of the 100 most influential attorneys in America by the National Law Journal in 1988 and 1991. She was also named Arkansas Woman of the Year in 1983 and Arkansas Mother of the Year in 1984. During her eight years as First Lady, Hillary Rodham Clinton initiated the Children’s Health Insurance Program in 1997, increased research funding for prostate cancer and childhood asthma to the National Institute of Health, as well as assisted in determining the cause of a mysterious illness affecting veterans of the Gulf War. She also initiated and guided the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997. She has received many prestigious awards, including the Secretary of Defense Medal for Outstanding Public Service, the President’s Award of the League of United Latin American Citizens, Role Model of the Year, by the United Steel Workers of America; the Martin Luther King Jr. Award from the Progressive National Baptist Convention, and the National Association of Elementary School Principals Distinguished Service Award. Rodham Clinton also has authored best-selling books, including her autobiography, Living History and It Takes a Village: And Other Lessons Children Teach Us, which won her the 1997 Grammy Award for Best Spoken Word Album for the recorded version. Since becoming a senator for New York State, Hillary has worked to strengthen New York’s economy and homeland security, while supporting a return to fiscal responsibility. She worked to bring economic relief to victims of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The senator introduced legislation to provide funding for threat-based homeland security to ensure adequate resources for first responders, and such high-target communities as New York City. She has served on various senatorial committees, including the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee; Environment and Public Works Committee; Special Committee on Aging; and in 2004 was the only senator on the Transformation Advisory Group to the Joint Forces Command. She has visited troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and other locations, to learn about the challenges American combat forces face. She also has worked for prescription-drug safety for children, to lower the cost of prescription drugs, and to prevent contamination of the American food supply by bioterrorism. She co-sponsored legislation to extend tax credits in regions that contain designated Renewal Communities, as well as introduced legislation to increase access to broadband technology in rural areas. In November 2004, she announced she would seek a second term in the Senate. At that time, she was considered by some to be a potential candidate for the presidency in 2008. THROUGH HER NUMEROUS ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN THE WORLD OF POLITICS AND PUBLIC SERVICE, HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON HAS MADE AN INDELIBLE MARK ON AMERICAN SOCIETY AND ON PROGRESSIVISM.
Posted by: proudamerican2008 | March 19, 2008, 9:58 pm 9:58 pm
Please cancel NAFTA, I know a lot of people in Canada wish you would. You would no longer have free unrestricted access to our water/oil/resources. We could make our Oil cheaper for the Canadian people and charge what ever we wanted to anyone else (NAFTA does not allow that). I am sure the rest of the world would love to have a supplier that is secure and solid.
South America or the Gulf would be more then happy to supply you with what ever you need….. oh no… wait.. you like to dump on them also.
I have to admit… Internationally.. Obama seems to be the only one with the abilty to help you regain some of your friends.
Posted by: John Victoria BC | March 19, 2008, 10:04 pm 10:04 pm
She flip flops like a fish depending on who has the worm but the only problem with that is what she really wants to hook is US, the American public….Just say NO to 4 more years of Clinton Abuse!
Posted by: Sam | March 19, 2008, 10:06 pm 10:06 pm
The only thing worse than Hillary is Obama. Obama is a creepy liar from incredibly corrupt Chicago. Barry is a bigger con man than Bill and Hillary. Illinois has among the highest tax rates in America, worse than MA, NY and CA. I am not a McCain supporter either. Fred would have been pretty good but Mccain is the lesser of the three evils.
Posted by: Franc | March 19, 2008, 10:06 pm 10:06 pm
proudamerican2008:
Excellent job posting some highlights of Hillary Clinton’s experience and accomplishments. I would also note that even prior to becoming a lawyer she was always very active in civil rights and protection of children.
Thanks for your post. Everyone should read it!
Posted by: cappamore | March 19, 2008, 10:10 pm 10:10 pm
The biggest irony is while Obama was sitting in the pews listening to the hate fest, his pastor was demonizing whites. I wonder if it dawned on Obama that his white “devil” grandparents raised him while his African father abandoned him. Those evil white devils. Obama attended the church and sucked up to his bigot pastor because the pastor turned out the votes and got Obama elected. Meanwhile, his Syrian criminal friend Rezko was getting rich keeping black people in tenement apartments. Obama is worse than Bill and Hillary, which is hard to imagine.
Posted by: Franc | March 19, 2008, 10:16 pm 10:16 pm
I’m sorry, but the “Experience” cited for Mrs. Clinton may make her look experienced compared to Obama, (3 yrs. as a US Senator of which he has spent 3 yrs. campaigning for President), but get real. Serving on various boards and being given awards does not equate to practical experience. (And, no she can’t claim her husband’s experience as her own either, sorry)
Posted by: Bryan | March 19, 2008, 10:27 pm 10:27 pm
Interesting that it was just two weeks ago, and even now, that Hillary has been saying, “I was firmly against NAFTA from the start!!!!”….watch her own videos…and compare to her white house records….
Also, for those of you unaware or still refusing to acknowledge the truth, check with ANY of the Canadian newpapers regarding the fact that it was the Clinton camp that contacted the Canadian government to give a “wink and a nod” that Hillary was just making talk but not to worry. The Canadian Prime Minister was on all the major Canadian News programs denouncing the Clintons for the action and trying to implicate the Canadian Government in Hillary’s lie. So much for Hillary’s ability at improved foreign relations……
Posted by: Lady Professor | March 19, 2008, 10:32 pm 10:32 pm
All you Hillary revisionists and Obama haters are becoming more conspicuous hour by hour. Your passion for a woman with faux experience is insulting to men and women across the country who have spent time leading, managing and handling risks that Hillary can only simulate in speeches.
I’m an independent voter who wants an honest leader as our President and she is not qualified on this count and many others.
Posted by: Steve | March 19, 2008, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm
The civil fraud trial of Bill Clinton for defrauduing Hillary’s largest donor in 2000 into giving her campaign more than $1.2 million, pending in Los Angeles courts since 2003, is now preparing for a November, 2008 trial. The discovery that is now proceeding after a February 21 hearing, and the pending trial, have NEVER been announced by the mainstream media thanks to heavy pressure from the Clinton campaign (see note of mysterious Clinton-related deaths below……………..).
Hillary was able to extricate herself as a co-defendant in the case in January, 2008 after years of appeals to be protected by the First Amendment from tort claims arising out of federal campaign solicitations she made. Her abuse of the intent of California’s anti-SLAPP law after the California Supreme Court refused to dismiss her from the case in 2004 is emblematic of her contempt for the Rule of Law.
Hillary will be called as a witness in both discovery and the trial according to the trial court Judge who so-advised Hillary’s attorney David Kendall when he dismissed Hillary as a co-defendant in 2007. A subpoena is being prepared this month and will be served personally on Hillary, along with Chelsea, Pa Gov. Ed Rendell, Al Gore and other well known political and media figures.
Yet the media has refused to report about this landmark civil fraud case- brought by Hillary’s biggest 2000 donor to her Senate race, regarding allegations that were corroborated by the Department of Justice in the criminal trial of Hillary’s finance director David Rosen in May, 2005. That indictment and trial was credited as resulting from the civil suit’s allegations by Peter Paul, the Hollywood dot com millionaire Bill Clinton convinced to donate more than $1.2 million (according to the DOJ prosecutors and the FBI) to Hillary’s Senate campaign as part of a post White House business deal with Bill.
The media – except for World Net Daily- has also suspiciously refused to report on Hillary’s last FEC report regarding her 2000 Senate campaign, filed in January 30, 2006. In a secret settlement of an FEC complaint by the plaintiff in Paul v Clinton, Peter Paul, the FEC fined Hillary’s campaign $35,000 for hiding more than $720,000 in donations from Paul, and it required Hillary’s campaign to file a 4th amended FEC report.
In that report Hillary and her campaign again hid Paul’s $1.2 million contribution to her campaign and falsely attributed $250,000 as being donated by Paul’s partner, Spider Man creator Stan Lee, who swore in a video taped deposition he never gave Hillary or her campaign any money.
Lee did testify to trading $100,000 checks with Paul to make it appear he gave $100,000 to Hillary’s campaign (admission of a felony) but none of that has been reported by the “overly critical” media!
Where is the outrage from Obama that the press is engaging in a double standard relating to his possible role in the Rezko trial and his refunding the $85,000 contributed to his campaign by Rezko- which Obama has always admitted taking. The media makes no mention of Hillary’s role as a witness in Bill’s fraud trial for defrauding Hillary’s largest donor- and Hillary’s refusal to refund the $1.2 million she illegally received from Paul, which she has denied taking from Paul ever since the Washington Post asked her about Paul and his felony convictions from the 1970’s before her first Senate election in 2000?
Posted by: Lady Professor | March 19, 2008, 10:52 pm 10:52 pm
J. Wright, (ok Donna, I found it)
Interesting. Since you QUOTED that remark, I am sure you can point us all to the exact citation so we can all look it up.
Regarding your “favorites” I suggest that you look in the senate records instead of in the Hillary website. You will find that those good amendments were tied to generally extremely poorly written bills, or in some cases were good bills weighted down by dozens of extremely bad last-minutes “earmarks”.
Posted by: Lady Professor | March 20, 2008, 12:46 am 12:46 am
As Sam Rayburn once said “I only wish they had been elected dog catcher sometime in their career”. Meaning, neither Hillary, nor Obama, has any real meaningful experience that suggests they are ready, or able, to be Chief Executive of the United States. Yeah, they got elected Senator, so what. So did John McCain. Personally, both parties had at least four years to groom and develop a viable candidate. One who could be “President”, not just want to be one. They failed miserably.
Posted by: Richard | March 20, 2008, 12:49 am 12:49 am
Obama favoured 50 state strategy and criticized Clinton for not supporting it. 50 state strategy has failed. Obama seems to have some Math problem or did FLIP-FLOP on his decision. He will get decision from 48 states as his campaign already derail the Do-Over in Florida and in Michigan it seems that it is almost off the table. Again, it is politics of Mr. Obama’s convinience.
Posted by: Humm | March 20, 2008, 12:53 am 12:53 am
ABC, you are beating a dead horse while infuriating Clinton supporters and others who demand a measure of fairness in the news. This article breaks every canon of ethical journalism because it transparently targets Hillary who shouldn”t have to pay for Bill”s indescretion years ago. It is time to get into current news. Readers of tired of this garbage!
Posted by: Ed | March 20, 2008, 1:19 am 1:19 am
Dear Friends,
why are we engaging in this type of conversation. If we are going to tear the only 3 canidates left who are running for president. Who will we have. those of you who are engaging in this type of talk-must be living pretty good, no concerns for healthcare,student loans, the economy, or all the good people dying is this war. I enjoy getting on Political Punch
What shall we do? Obama is no good anymore-and I’ll bet some of you voted for him) and you think Hillary has a nerve running for president-and Mccain is just an old war hawk-and plus he’s old. Why- are we doing this? We have this wonderful technology-the blog-we are blessed to be living in this country-able to go and vote. and all we can do is write this stuff? Please, lets try and pick up the tone of this conversation-we are intelligent people-at least we know a little about typing-what don’t we spend some of this time trying to discuss what could be right about the only canidates we have (Now I know some are mad because Paul, huckabee and other are not running anymore) so Obama, Hillary and Mccain are all we have left-Lets try to discuss some of the issues facing us today-we are not perfect people-and nor are the 3 we have running for president. Now, I happen to be a Hillary supporter-you are not going to change my mind about Hillary-by bringing up all the old stuff. I like what Hillary has said she will do for healthcare, student loans-(I have one child in college class of 2010 and one who will start college in 2010) I like where Hillary stands on the issues of the economy-what she will do about the war going forward. i believe she will do what she is saying she will do about ending the war. We all need to check ourselves-If you had the desire to serve this country-the way these people have decided to-could you pass the test-you are putting on them?
As I said I am a Hillary supporter,two of the reasons why are-I do not think obama is ready-he said it once himself-
One day I hope before I die maybe he will be-his political career is still young-Mccain scares me with the notion of we could be in this war another 50-100 years. (a war he will not be around to finish) As I have said before, If I need surgery-I want the surgeon with the best mind-ability to know where to cut-and the courage to cut. I do not need them to be perfect Human Beings-just a good command of the profession they have chosen. Now for me, Hillary is the full package-Se runs circles around Mccain and Obama on the issues-we need a president who is able to think on their feet-and able to voice the what they will do about the issues that face us today-plainly. for me the complete person-of the three left is Hillary. Lets take advantage of this most great mean of communicating to talk about what is right about the 3 left, instead of tearing them down, which will not help any of us.
The World is holding its breath hoping we get if right this time-(as spoken 1st by HRC.
Please no more rubbish, just the issues.
Posted by: jgaw | March 20, 2008, 1:22 am 1:22 am
I guess it’s crucial to realize that this is an ABCnews site, not some unmoderated discussion. We should do a better job of keeping things civil.
Dogsoldier: Let me buy you a beer if you’re ever in Chicago. Our evolving exchange got hacked, and anyhow is probably too nuanced for a space like this.
And, more power to Huckabee.
Posted by: Tungsten | March 20, 2008, 1:30 am 1:30 am
John from Victoria, Canada: “Please cancel NAFTA, I know a lot of people in Canada wish you would. You would no longer have free unrestricted access to our water/oil/resources. We could make our Oil cheaper for the Canadian people and charge what ever we wanted to anyone else (NAFTA does not allow that). ”
John, do you really think that any Canadian oil company would sell it’s oil “cheaper” to Canadians? Dream on, kid. The US has no access to Canadian resources that any other country doesn’t have. We pay our “good friends” in Canada for oil the same price we pay the Arabs. You don’t give us even a penny break on price. The US does not import Canadian water. Canada has been no friend to the US in recent years. All it has been good for recently is importing America hating Muslims and opposing the US at every turn. If we had any brains we’d turn Canada into a US territory whether you liked it or not. You couldn’t stop it since you have always depended on the US for military protection thereby freeing up your tax money for your own benefit. As for NAFTA, it has been an immense benefit to Canada and Mexico. The US has done nothing but suffer. For Canada and, especially, Mexico it has been a dream come true. Canadians resent the US because you wouldn’t have any economy whatsoever without the US and that always breeds resentment. Any fool can look at the trade numbers, John. Try it.
Posted by: Doug W | March 20, 2008, 1:33 am 1:33 am
Hillary lied about something again? NAFTA, you say. Oh, you mean she opened her mouth and started talking.
Posted by: bob10001 | March 20, 2008, 1:40 am 1:40 am
I recall that Mrs. Clinton’s husband was impeached by the United States House of Representatives on two charges, PERJURY and OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.-LYING
It wasn’t the intern, it was the LYING, not just to the Authorities, but to the American people, right into the camera lens with finger wagging emphasis.
Does any thinking person yet believe that the Clinton leopard has changed it spots?
LYING…also condemned in Church, but the Clintons were too busy in borrowed Church pulpits crucifying Obama by proxy to read the fine print about “bearing false witness”
Posted by: NO DIEBOLD PRESIDENT | March 20, 2008, 2:05 am 2:05 am
CLINTONS FAMILY ARE THE MOST GREAT LIER IN US HISTORY …stay out from dinasties nonsense.
CHINA LOVE CLINTONSSSSSSSS
Posted by: slick willie | March 20, 2008, 2:15 am 2:15 am
So let’s say she DID support NAFTA in the beginning. Why in the world would anyone be upset that she doesn’t anymore. It’s not flip-flopping, it’s called adapting your beliefs to the way things are playing out.
Clearly, NAFTA hasn’t played out as expected and there are problems with it. Is it wrong for her to want to fix those problems? NO! So really, I could care less what her stance was in the beginning, what REALLY matters is her stance now and what she’s going to do in the future to help the American people!
Posted by: Bridgette | March 20, 2008, 2:18 am 2:18 am
Thank you Bridgette-
Posted by: jgaw | March 20, 2008, 2:25 am 2:25 am
Hey folks, remember, Clinton cant win at this point without wining by at least a 60% margin in all the remaining races. She has already lost.
Posted by: Lazaro | March 20, 2008, 2:35 am 2:35 am
Perhaps someone should tell Bridgette that Hillary recently [like two weeks ago] that she was against it from the beginning.
Oh Dear, perhaps as a consequence, Hillary will have been caught in a bold-faced lie.
Unprecedented, eh?
Who woulda thunkit?
Posted by: daveinboca | March 20, 2008, 2:39 am 2:39 am
Some of you are ridiculous, and also have some spelling issues to say the least. She was condemned for not being supportive enough of NAFTA, and now she’s being targeted as if it was HER policy. I have listened to the woman talk, and she has never once taken credit for something her husband did as President. She has only talked about her programs feeding a million hungry children, her work getting health care for women and children, and her relationship with foreign diplomats. She isn’t picking and choosing work her husband did and using that in her campaign. She is talking about what she’s DONE. Not a speech she gave about it.
Nafta at the time was thought to be a good program, and it benefited many people in several states. It was her husband’s policy. GET OVER IT.
Posted by: Geneva | March 20, 2008, 2:43 am 2:43 am
Sorry, Bridgette, I left out a word.
“Perhaps someone should tell Bridgette that Hillary recently [like two weeks ago] SAID that she was against it [NAFTA] from the beginning.”
[But now evidence comes out that Hillary “misspoke,” or even LIED THROUGH HER TEETH.
Probably the latter, Bridgette, I’m afraid.
Posted by: daveinboca | March 20, 2008, 2:45 am 2:45 am
Oops, Geneva.
Who would have thunk it?
Posted by: daveinboca | March 20, 2008, 2:48 am 2:48 am
shame on you OHIO NOW YOU SEE HOW HILLARY SHE,S A LIAR SHE’S SUPPORTED THE NAFTA SHE,S A LIAR NOW PENNSYLVANIA OPEN YOURS EYES THAT WOMEN SHE’S DANGEROUS FOR MARICA A GOOD ADVICE FROM YOUR CANADIEN FRIEND.
Posted by: ERIC BARTHEL | March 20, 2008, 3:05 am 3:05 am
You mean Hillary Clinton is a PHONY who will DO or SAY anything to get elected? … Are you sure. Just because there are 100 examples of this does not mean it is true.
Posted by: Robert Morrow | March 20, 2008, 3:43 am 3:43 am
Silly Me, I was working the phones for Hillary all day and night and got on here to read about the NAFTA and white house doc release. I laughed so hard at all these Obamabots, BKMC, Vanessa, Joris etc…
I got this picture in my head of 3 or more large vultures circling the sky for the dead rotting carcass of Hillary’s White House schedules, picking over every little scrap of paper and tearing it to shreds and devouring it..lol.
Talk about much ado over nothing. Hilarious I tell you.
They are all squawking and making noise to divert the attention away from the Obama train wreck, only they don’t realize no matter what, he is losing ground every day. I spoke to over 300 random people today in PA, and 12 supported Obama, and even they said they we still leery of his 20 year relationship with Pastor Wright. The Obama express is over.
Posted by: Jay | March 20, 2008, 4:19 am 4:19 am
Jay……….
Lets stick to the story….Hillary LIED!!!! Obama did not make the comments…his pastor did..If we are guilty by association then you are guilty of anti-women’s lib and you support men who do monica lewinskys in the oval office while the wife is down the hall!!! sick!
Posted by: duane | March 20, 2008, 4:47 am 4:47 am
The Obama express is over and i love it.
Posted by: Ed | March 20, 2008, 4:50 am 4:50 am
In his lust for personal wealth
has Barack Obama
sold his moral compass?
Posted by: Ed | March 20, 2008, 4:56 am 4:56 am
Clinton is thru……look at the delegate count. Bush won on the delegate count not the popular..Bye Bye
If this is ALL u can come up with concerning Obama……..Bye Bye
Do you remember division of Church and State? See Ya
Posted by: Duane | March 20, 2008, 4:56 am 4:56 am
Here are some of the headlines I can concoct to mark Obama’s mesmerizingly stupid speech
Obama lectures White America on Original Sin
Hate-Speech is Fine, as Long as You’re Really Angry
Obama – White Americans Hate like Blacks, so We’re Even.
Obama, Interprets America’s History, Tells Whites to Lay-off
Blacks to White America – “On Sunday we Hate You. Live with It.”
Obama, Black-America’s New Sharpton, Makes White America Understand
Obama Slams Clinton, Ferraro, McCain, White Guilt Innuendo
Obama says Distorted View of America Common To Blacks, no Apologies.
Obama Admits to Lying About Hearing Inflammatory Words, but Says “So What?!”
Obama Outraged by Pastor’s Remark, But Then Says They Are “ok.”
Obama Speaks, Media Listen, Voters say A-men
Former Slaves, Free To Hate
Obama and King; Two Ways to Sit-In
Obama Calls Wright a Distraction and Accuses Americans of Treating Race as Spectacle
Obama a spectacle of Logic. America Generally Wrong, Wright Generally Right
Obama Onslaught on Reason, When Will it Stop
Obama’s Impersonation of Lincoln, a Tasteless Parody
Posted by: Ed | March 20, 2008, 4:58 am 4:58 am
Sorry Duane: Hillary didn’t lie at all. She has a right to change her mind after 14 years. NAFTA was new and untested and it turned out it was a faulty concept. Hillary is just stating the obvious. Now you want to talk about a liar. I watch Obama on Olbermann stating profusely he NEVER heard those type of racist and hateful ANTI white and Anti-American remark from the pulpit while he attended church. I watched his speech 3 times and in his speech he said he has heard those remarks. A complete reversal and outright lie by Obama.
Posted by: Jay | March 20, 2008, 4:59 am 4:59 am
In news today, the Obama camp is asking for the release of Hillary’s medical records, dental records, social security #, driver license records, urine samples, hair follicles, fingernail clippings, DNA, old clothes, bank account and credit cards records, and all the names of her pets since she was born.
They will do anything in ObamaLand to distract the people from all of Obama’s lies.
Posted by: Jay | March 20, 2008, 5:03 am 5:03 am
Duane… Looks like Hillary Rodham Clinton leads Barack Obama by 49 percent to 42 percent in daily tracking polls conducted this past Sunday to Tuesday.
Posted by: Ed | March 20, 2008, 5:04 am 5:04 am
The Obama express is over.
Posted by: Ed | March 20, 2008, 5:07 am 5:07 am
Jay… that was funny.
Posted by: Ed | March 20, 2008, 5:09 am 5:09 am
Thanks Ed, I try hard, but the Obama folks don’t like it, and have no visible sense of humor except when they try to make fun of Hillary and they are so lame when they attempt it. But make a joke about their deity and all holy hell breaks loose.
Of course from what I have seen of Obama, he left his sense of humor in the Senate, with his “Your likable enough Hillary joke..lol
Posted by: Jay | March 20, 2008, 5:18 am 5:18 am
Actually, Mr. Obama is damaged good at this point. The super delegates are all sitting and waiting until every state has voted and Florida and Michigan get resolved. Then I am very confident they will fall behind Mrs. Clinton, because of the Pastor Wright fiasco, Mr. Obama is no longer electable, so since neither nominee can reach the 2024 earmark to secure the nomination, the Supers will have to support Hillary, or the Dems will be committing political suicide. By giving the general Obama, we will ensure the Republicans another 4 years of controlling the White House.
Posted by: Jay | March 20, 2008, 5:42 am 5:42 am
Also, this Pastor Wright thing is just not a big deal. An angry black man that grew up in the 50s and 60s? Wow, I am shocked.
The people making this a big deal are engaging in the worst kind of racism. What, do you think that Obama has some sort of secret agenda to lead a black revolution and kill whitey? So, no one can run that ever knew someone that felt as though they had been prejudiced and spoke out against it? People are really grasping at straws in an effort to besmirch Obama. I’m not even a big fan, and will probably vote for Nader. But, seriously…how is this a big deal? Can someone explain it to me?
Posted by: Mike | March 20, 2008, 5:54 am 5:54 am
It looks like there is an old fashion blood and guts brawl going on in the Democrat Party. It is also starting to look apparent that you seriously wounding your chances to win in November. Say what you will about John McCain. He is a gentlemen. He is stable. He has split his own blood in defence of this country. This may not be the blog forum to share this information, but you are snatching defeat from the jaws of victory…or something like that.
Posted by: bill | March 20, 2008, 5:59 am 5:59 am
It is a huge deal. Obama’s entire candidacy is based on hope, peace, love and unity, and he is mentored for 20 years by a bigot, a racist, and Anti-White and Anti-American preacher, who was his spiritual adviser. And only when he is caught in a web of lies and deceit does he try and distance himself from his friend and mentor.
Forget about any secret agenda, I want to know, how does Obama really feel about the white race? Read his books, he considers himself black and shuns his white heritage. I want a president who I know is working for all people, not the people of his own race.
I was born and raised in Chicago, very near Mr. Obama’s district. Since he was elected to the State Senate, he has done nothing for the people of Illinois, The City of Chicago, so what makes you think he will do anything for the USA & the entire world. He is a self-serving politician, only in this for power and his own political agenda.
Posted by: Jay | March 20, 2008, 6:01 am 6:01 am
Hillary (America’s Evita) will attempt to destroy the democratic party in her lust for power. Also, the bloggers here still going on about Rev Wright need to get a more interesting life. As a 50 something african american, black church life is filled with hypobole and that was not a “hate filled speech” It was received by the intended audience as a cautionary speech and is very much typical of black church presentations – so I am reading these blogs from people who took a snippet and made a thesis out of it – Give me a break!
Posted by: Ohioliberal | March 20, 2008, 6:39 am 6:39 am
Hillary’s schedules are not the real issue! It is getting the Republican’s out of power that is the most important thing right now. Obama no longer has a chance. The Republicans will scare everyone with Obama’s pastor’s words and videos. There is no way Obama can win the general election now. We need a revote in both Florida and Michigan in order for any chance for change from the Republican agenda. Obama may be putting his own interests above the countries if he opposes this effort.
Posted by: desertclair | March 20, 2008, 6:47 am 6:47 am
The Clintons are both liars–well known for their ability to lie to the people of America. What will they do, if elected and back in the White House? I bet you know. The first thing, in view of how secrecy, like Bush, is they will lock up/hide all their papers coming from our house. If forced to release them, they will redact three quarters of them. You can bet Bush has plenty of bad embarrassing stuff about Hillary and Bill hiding in his briefcase and will hand over to McCain anything to help him win. The friendship with Poppy Bush was more than a nice little vacation in Maine–it was networking.
Hillary had some eight years as Senator from New York. The excuse that she has a right to change her mind after fourteen years is quite shallow, but understandable, as it seems, stretching the truth and spinning is a Clinton disease caught by their followers. If she were really against nafta, she could have addressed the people of New York with that and done something to help them. She did not. It is only to get votes in Ohio that she lied and no doubt would have told the same lie to the people of Michigan. Little wonder that her minions in Michigan pushed up their primary date in violation of the rules because at that time, the Clintons were running on name recognition and thought they would take the state early before the real issues of this primary were discussed.
Posted by: duck puddle | March 20, 2008, 7:06 am 7:06 am
The American people are getting exactly what they voted for, lots of boldfaced LIARS! Ron and Dennis were the only honest candidates running this time and both were soundly rejected by the voters. Don’t pay any attention to anything the rest of them say and you’ll never be disappointed. For example, if this so called “War on Terror” were really true, our borders would be secure. If NAFTA had really been a good thing, our jobs would still be located in America. Our country is now facing so many serious problems and this is what we vote for? These self promoting liars and con artists are the best we can do? This is exactly how we ended up looking for nonexistent WMD’s with Bush. This is why our dollar is being destroyed and our rights under the constitution trashed. This is why we now openly torture people. This is why our wars never seem to end and our government must borrow money from our enemy’s to fund our stupid foreign policy blunders. It’s why our jobs have been shipped overseas with dumb trade policy deals like Clinton’s NAFTA. Electing liars who promise “smaller government” is exactly why were nearing 10 trillion in debt. It’s why the rest of the world is now shunning the dollar and laughs about the “Stupid Americans”. What a sad joke this country is turning into and most Americans are too blind to see it. Perhaps a repeat of the great depression will help them to wake up. Perhaps when the dollar is completely worthless? Just what will it take? Unless a good Independent runs, I’ll just sit this one out and prepare my family for the economic nightmare that’s now facing our leaderless country.
Posted by: Stephen Clark | March 20, 2008, 7:19 am 7:19 am
The topic is Clinton 1993 NAFTA meeting–yet many bloggers mention Obama. He hasn’t changed his position on NAFTA, or the war. Let’s discuss the topic! This slight of hand to change the discussion so that accountability is never addressed is how Bush/Cheney got re-elected. Clinton did support NAFTA that is the topic for discussion. If you support Clinton embrace her decisions!
Posted by: DQuinn | March 20, 2008, 7:19 am 7:19 am
The Democrat candidates, one of them are a liar, and the other is a racist, you can decide which one is which. BTW, if you believe for a minute that the whole Rev. Wright thing was exposed by anyone other than the Clinton campaign, you are being naive
Posted by: drock | March 20, 2008, 7:45 am 7:45 am
Liars? Seriously? Obama is the liar:
1) He lied about his stance on NAFTA to the OH voters – this has all been proven by the Canadian govt.
2. He lied last Friday when he said he didn’t hear Wright’s controversial statements, then he said he did in Tuesday’s speech.
3. He lied about how much Rezcko gave to him in campaign funds (see court docs).
Are you seriously kidding me? There’s something happening here and guess what? It’s happening by the end of the week and Obama will step down. There is no way this liar and fraud will step foot in my WHITE HOUSE, period.
Posted by: Jenny | March 20, 2008, 8:34 am 8:34 am
HILLARY, MAKE YOUR HATERS YOUR MOTIVATORS!
GO HILLARY!!! HILLARY 08!!!
Posted by: Eric | March 20, 2008, 9:03 am 9:03 am
“She’s a LIAR!”
“No, he’s a liar!”
“No, she is!”
“No, he is! And he’s a racist!”
“No, she’s a racist!”
“I’m gonna tell on you!”
“I’m gonna tell on you first!”
So this is political dialog in our country? Within the same party, no less. Everyone grabs the nearest sound byte and clings to it for dear life.
Nice.
Posted by: Em | March 20, 2008, 9:09 am 9:09 am
Yeah that meeting that took place 15 years ago is really important / relevant.
Posted by: Bing! | March 20, 2008, 9:15 am 9:15 am
Excuse me? Hillary’s campaign asked you to update your reporting with a quote from one of her supporters and you comply? Nice going Jake!
Posted by: Chude | March 20, 2008, 9:52 am 9:52 am
Go go Obama….They can not stop you now….What we need is unity,love and peace and better economy we normal people are the loser..they dont know our problems when they are in the white house….we love and support u…..
Posted by: kibs | March 20, 2008, 10:09 am 10:09 am
ALL POLITICIANS LIE! EVERY PERSON IN THE WORLD HAS TOLD MORE THAN ONE LIE IN HIS OR HER LIFETIME! WHY IS EVERYONE THROWING STONES WHEN THEY KNOW THAT EACH AND EVERY ONE OF ARE HYPOCRITES IN SOME SHAPE OR FASHION. “HE WHO IS WITHOUT SIN, CAST THE FIRST STONE.” IT NEVER CEASES TO AMAZE ME HOW PEOPLE ARE SO QUICK TO JUDGE OTHERS YET FAIL TO LOOK AT THEMSELVES IN THE MIRROR!
Posted by: wake up | March 20, 2008, 10:25 am 10:25 am
This is race to nominate what might be the next President of the USA not a religious convention on morality. But, WE MUST JUDGE the candidates on the basis of what they say they stand for and if it is discovered that what they say is all lies it matters! We need to inject integrity back into the political process and not allow any candidate to get away with lying over and over and over again. TIME TO GO HILLARY! YES WE CAN!
Posted by: NewDay | March 20, 2008, 10:39 am 10:39 am
I HAVE always known she was lying to her teeth when she said she never supported NAFTA.
Posted by: Kizeem | March 20, 2008, 11:11 am 11:11 am
I find it interesting that some people feel this story is not relevant. There are statements such as ‘all politicians lie,’ which seem to dismiss the doubletalk on this issue. Why should we accept that? It has been said before, but if Hillary wants to claim her First Lady years as experience, she needs to own up to all that happened, both positive and negative. Otherwise, she should have just left it alone. Obama is doing that; owning up to the negatives like Rezko and Wright. I can not trust someone who refuses to apologize for past behaviors or admit mistakes. That is what we have in George W. Bush.
This is a shining example of Hillary saying what others want to hear, saying something she does not believe in just to achieve a political goal. It reminds me this behavior did not just start during her run for the White House, it is a pattern of behavior she has engaged in for quite some time. Frankly, it is the type of behavior that turned me off politics since her husband’s election.
I have identified myself as a Democrat since I was aware of the concept of President of the United States (Jimmy Carter era); campainged for Mondale/Ferraro in my grade school. But, the negativity and lies I have witnessed in my adult years have soured my thoughts of what democracy means. It wasn’t until I heard the words of Barack Obama and realized a candidate who took no money from lobbyists could ever have a shot at becoming President that I have become excited about democracy again. Stories about how a candidate like Hillary Clinton
says things they don’t mean remind me of my apathetic voting days that I hope will not return.
Posted by: Carol, WI | March 20, 2008, 11:22 am 11:22 am
She is always laying.
Not a discovery.
Just take it and throw her out of race.
Our votes count.
Posted by: Luda | March 20, 2008, 11:42 am 11:42 am
From reading all these comments,just lets me know, We the PEOPLE have a lot of racism, sexism and hatred in our hearts. The Media is SUCCESSFUL with what it is trying to do. Keep us separated!! WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!
I am an Obama supporter, but I do like some of the values the Clinton’s posed as well. However, i have many of friends, that has horrible views on life or people, yet, they are still my friends. If we hold him accountably guilty by association, than we are ALL GUILTY BY ASSOCIATION.
Honestly, I would be fine with Obama or Clinton in office, Although, I am a strong Obama supporter. I am just looking at the facts: SUPERDELEGATES will not go against the will of the people and we need to take a look at who is ahead in the delegate count. Obama, even if Hillary wins, she will not win a large enough margin to gain delegates, even if Fl & MI was included. It is time for us to wake up and come together and start working on building a better world for us, and our children. Look at what is going on around us. The Republicans are loving this battle.
This yeas seems to be the end of the Democratic Party!!!
Posted by: Natasha | March 20, 2008, 11:49 am 11:49 am
She is one woman who does not shiver at the thought of lying. She has PhD in fabrication and falsehood.
Posted by: Kizeem | March 20, 2008, 12:11 pm 12:11 pm
“I must tell you Hillary Clinton was extremely unenthusiastic about NAFTA. And I think that’s putting it mildly. I’m not sure she objected to all the provisions of it but she just didn’t see why her husband and that White House had to go and do that fight. She was very unhappy about it and wanted to move on to health care.”
It would seem that Hillary was more concerned that her pet project of universal healthcare was taking a backseat to NAFTA than she was concerned about whether NAFTA was good or bad policy.
So, where does that leave us?
-If, at that time, she really didn’t believe NAFTA was good policy, she was saying what she believed to be politically expedient THEN.
-If, at that time, she believed NAFTA to be good policy, she is saying what she believes to be politically expedient NOW.
I believe this is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of what we can expect from her as a leader. More spin, obfuscation, and distortion – the same as we’ve had for 8+ years. It is time for change.
Posted by: jb | March 20, 2008, 12:24 pm 12:24 pm
I’m confused fellow bloggers; was this article about Hillary or Obama?
Obama ’08
Posted by: ddpwoman | March 20, 2008, 12:25 pm 12:25 pm
This isn’t news. America knew Hillary was lying when she said she opposed NAFTA.
Hillary is a LIAR folks get used to it.
Posted by: Syl | March 20, 2008, 12:38 pm 12:38 pm
“I must tell you Hillary Clinton was extremely unenthusiastic about NAFTA. And I think that’s putting it mildly. I’m not sure she objected to all the provisions of it but she just didn’t see why her husband and that White House had to go and do that fight. She was very unhappy about it and wanted to move on to health care.”
It would seem that Hillary was more concerned that her pet project of universal healthcare was taking a backseat to NAFTA than she was concerned about whether NAFTA was good or bad policy.
So, where does that leave us?
-If, at that time, she really didn’t believe NAFTA was good policy, she was saying what she believed to be politically expedient THEN.
-If, at that time, she believed NAFTA to be good policy, she is saying what she believes to be politically expedient NOW.
I believe this is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of what we can expect from her as a leader. More spin, obfuscation, and distortion – the same as we’ve had for 8+ years. It is time for change.
Posted by: jb | March 20, 2008, 1:02 pm 1:02 pm
Lets talk VP …PLEEEAAASSSEE.
I really like Kathleen Sebelius as VP to Obama. She is a woman of integrity, honest and she is a woman who stands on her own tru experience. As a woman, I believe in strong independent women who do not need to pretend they have experince and honesty, they just have it. She would make an excellent VP for Obama as she has all the qualities needed.
Posted by: Karen | March 20, 2008, 1:46 pm 1:46 pm
Another of the LIES of Hillary. Let’s talk logic: do you think that while her husband was ACTIVELY PROMOTING NAFTA, his wife would organize on 10 November 1993 a drop-by meeting with 150 influential and business oriented women in the White House to oppose the treaty? ARE WE STUPID OR MENTALLY RETARDED? This shows again that Hillary would say ANYTHING to get to the White House !!!!
Posted by: Denis van Dam | March 20, 2008, 1:48 pm 1:48 pm
Say Hello to President OBAMA everybody.
Posted by: Will | March 20, 2008, 1:59 pm 1:59 pm
Everyone should look into Hillary’s membership into the “Family”, a religious cult of the elite around the world. No wonder she isn’t saying too much about Obama and Rev. Wright. And look up the Tuskegee Experiments – see how the U.S. experimented on blacks with syphilis for 40 yrs. Bill Clinton apologized to blacks for this past agregious act of the U.S.’s. Rev. Wright should have used that example!
Posted by: Susan M | March 20, 2008, 2:23 pm 2:23 pm
A SURE WAY TO DETERMINE IF HILLARY IS LYING: SEE IF HER LIPS ARE MOVING, IF THEY ARE, SHE’S LYING.
Posted by: Randle Bate | March 20, 2008, 5:05 pm 5:05 pm
Isn’t it interesting that these docs were held until after the Ohio primary, just long enough to allow Hillary’s lie to get her extra votes.
Posted by: fool me once | March 20, 2008, 8:51 pm 8:51 pm
Yes, it’s crystal clear that Senator Clinton lied when she said she never supported NAFTA. Why do you think she hasn’t released tax returns and other records showing contributions from lobbyists? What could the reason be that she won’t expose this information until after the PA primary? On the other hand, Obama, openly and honestly fesses up to frailties and has open books. Come on Senator Clinton for once be transparent and quit hiding.
Posted by: lambs | March 20, 2008, 10:41 pm 10:41 pm
Now, you see after reading that, people still have made up their minds in who they are going to vote for. It doesn’t matter how many Documents they release on Hillary, or how many of Obama’s sermons you see on the TV, In the end, you all already chosen what you want. Lets see how many votes are tallied when the dust has been cleared.
Posted by: SDVoter | March 20, 2008, 11:08 pm 11:08 pm
I deeply resent my post being removed. With all the diatribes here. All the obvious “dumbed down” campaign posts.
Posted by: Michael | March 21, 2008, 2:06 am 2:06 am
THE CLINTON’S ARE PATHOLOGICAL LIARS.
THIS HAS BEEN CLEAR SINCE 1992.
Posted by: sammie | March 21, 2008, 11:20 am 11:20 am
Think about it this way: If Hillary can persuade others to vote for NAFTA, just think how she could do in the White House getting health insurance, the economy going again and building up the reserve again, ( like her husband did, remember )
Posted by: ikkeye | March 21, 2008, 12:33 pm 12:33 pm
As the old saying goes fair exchange is not highway robbery. If you are with a person and you have been knowing this person a long long time and he is your friend, you go walking with this person and he are she suddenly decides to jump off a bridge doesn’t mean that you will do the same. You can lead a horse to water but it doesn’t mean that the horse is going to drink the water.
The media, paper and magazines will always concentrate on the negative to make you buy. That is how they make their money. If you believe everything you hear are see then you are a troubled person.
Put the postives and negatives that you like about each candidate and if you have more negatives then that is not the candidate you want.. Take the Enquirer for example, do you believe all that is in it? Think about how much money is made if everyone buy it. Get the entirety of everything before you make a decision of who you want to be your president. America needs to say lets move on and get to the real issues. Stop wasting time. We are smarter than that to figure out what is going on.
Posted by: Sharon | March 22, 2008, 2:36 am 2:36 am
It is an indictment of main stream journalism, including news organizations such as ABC, that after they made such an extraordinary effort to smear Barrack with a story from a dubious source which was subsequently discredited only after the Ohio primary, they do not bother to even report that the Hilary campaign has indeed had meetings with the Canadian government. It is also very dishonest of the Hilary campaign and Hilary herself to have taken advantage of this erroneous story, when they knew it was false and very hypocritical considering that Hilary was never critical of NAFTA till it became a campaign issue. And now that she has suddenly “always been critical” of NAFTA” she really hasn’t said what specifically she doesn’t like about it.
Posted by: Philip L | March 24, 2008, 4:13 am 4:13 am
here’s a news flash. Hillary made a speech on a future housing plan today in Philadelphia; what’s so strange is that it is so similar to the memo Obama sent out March 2007 to Federal Reserve Chairman and Treasury Secretary. Hillary has a lot of gall and what she banks on is the American people not reading…
Posted by: rle | March 24, 2008, 3:25 pm 3:25 pm
hi??
Posted by: Calse | January 31, 2012, 9:02 am 9:02 am