= new reply since forum marked as read
She supports promoting trade and multinational corporations running the show over sovereign goverments (they are so unreliable).
"Economic Statecraft" = it's how the Secretary of State makes other nations safe for people like the Koch Brothers.
She warns against "state capitalism", says private boards and investors offer more transparency and accountability:
"Now, state-owned or state-supported enterprises... ...often lack the transparency and accountability that come with private boards and investors."
And finally, the resurgence of state capitalism, a challenge at once economic and strategic. Now, state-owned or state-supported enterprises are not necessarily problematic in all cases. But they do often lack the transparency and accountability that come with private boards and investors. And then, diplomatic challenges arise when states abuse their economic advantage to bully their neighbors or box out competitors, like when we see countries cut off gas flows in the middle of winter over a political disagreement. So, the State Department, working with seven other U.S. Government agencies, launched a comprehensive study on state capitalism. And in the coming weeks, we should see a final report with detailed recommendations for how we engage on the challenges posed.
http://www.state.gov/secretary/20092013clinton/rm/2012/11/200664.htm
Check it out at the 25:54 mark in this recording:
“In addition to lowering tariffs, the agreement also includes improvements on intellectual property protection and enforcement, fair labor practices, environmental protection, regulatory due process,” Clinton said. “That’s also true of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a new far-reaching regional trade agreement that will bring together at least 11 economies, developed and developing alike, into a single Pacific trading community.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/hillarys-trade-dilemma-116278.html#ixzz3a2r8UN69
Clinton supported most favored nation trade status despite concerns about China’s human rights record. “We have to use our our moral and material strengths in ways that serve our evolving interests,” she said. “We have to ask ourselves what hope does the global market hold for the tens of millions of victims of child labor, or for the 100 million street children without homes or families whom I’ve seen everywhere from Brazil to Mongolia who are being left to fend for themselves.”
Source: Dean Murphy, NY Times , Oct 20, 2000
Voted YES on free trade with Oman: Reference: United States-Oman Free Trade Agreement; Bill S. 3569 ; vote number 2006-190 on Jun 29, 2006
Voted YES on free trade with Chile: Reference: US-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act; Bill S.1416/HR 2738 ; vote number 2003-319 on Jul 31, 2003
Voted YES on free trade with Singapore: Reference: US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act; Bill S.1417/HR 2739 ; vote number 2003-318 on Jul 31, 2003
[font size=10] And, took Koch Brothers Money!
The 13 Questions Hillary Clinton Has Answered From The Press
It has been a month, and the candidate has answered just 13 reporter questions (at least that we've been able to find, building on the work of National Journal). And you can quibble about whether some of the answers were really answers.
1 "You lost Iowa in 2008. How do you win this time? What's your strategy?" Welker asked.
Clinton's reply, as she walked toward an open van door: "I'm having a great time. Can't look forward any more than I am."
Campaign finance plan:
A pair of Washington Post reporters spotted her outside of an unannounced event and asked about campaign finance reform. The answers weren't substantive.
According to the Post, she said "We do have a plan. We have a plan for my plan."
http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/05/13/406250488/the-13-questions-hillary-clinton-has-answered-from-the-press
World Nut Daily, you so funny!
The 13 Questions Hillary Clinton Has Answered From The Press
1. Strategy in Iowa
"You lost Iowa in 2008. How do you win this time? What's your strategy?" Welker asked.
Clinton's reply, as she walked toward an open van door: "I'm having a great time. Can't look forward any more than I am."
7.-8. Campaign finance plan
A pair of Washington Post reporters spotted her outside an unannounced event and asked about campaign finance reform. The answers weren't substantive.
According to the Post, she said, "We do have a plan. We have a plan for my plan."
More RW crap from the Washington Post:
Asked about her campaign finance agenda, she said: “We do have a plan. We have a plan for my plan.”
When The Post asked about the role of Priorities USA Action, a pro-Clinton super PAC trying to raise hundreds of millions of dollars to help her campaign, Clinton shrugged her shoulders and said, “I don’t know.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-hits-the-trail-in-iowa-again/2015/04/14/a2bf68b0-e2e8-11e4-b510-962fcfabc310_story.html
She's so BOLD!
That should tell you something. 
Your evidence that Clinton will coordinate with a different Super Pac is this ignorant statement from another Super Pac? LOL!
So if someone said that about Bernie you would assume he is going to break the law, too? You are too funny.
On Thu May 14, 2015, 08:30 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
She's prohibited from coordination with Super Pacs
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6668105
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Rude, nasty personal attacks. Accuses a DUer of using a RW site, when they linked to NPR. Name calling and insulting beligerence. Nasty post, HIDE.
JURY RESULTS
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu May 14, 2015, 08:42 AM, and the Jury voted 6-1 to HIDE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: looks to me like the comment was refuted in the thread. Lord it is going to get bumpy in here.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: 
no personal attacks, please.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Agree with alert. Disagree with member? Challenge him. This kind of juvenile attack serves no purpose.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Troll
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: "You don't know much about politics, do you?" is a rude thing to say to anyone on DU. I've seen worse things stand.... but it IS rude and that's one of the criteria for a hide. Won't be surprised if I'm out-voted, but there you are.
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
It was a pretty relentless and baseless accusation.
And she's not going to buck them for one nanosecond.
Here's a and a 5. 
From OP.
It's like a Scientology induction meeting... EST anyone ???
Matt Bai
National Political Columnist
May 14, 2015
My colleagues in the media keep insisting that Hillary Clinton take a position on the proposed free-trade pact that has riven her party. Which is just ridiculous, because she made her position perfectly clear during a swing through New Hampshire last month, when she said: “Any trade deal has to produce jobs and raise wages and increase prosperity and protect our security.”
Well, there you go. Were you guys just not listening?
Trade deals that help workers and make us safer — check. Trade deals that crush workers and benefit terrorists — thumbs down. No wonder she called her book “Hard Choices.”
