For The Record: Hillary Clinton -- CBS News

[Demagitator]

February 29, 2008


(CBS) Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential potential has been a topic of discussion among her peers since the '60s, CBS News correspondent Nancy Cordes reports.

Her position on NAFTA has become a point of contention in job-strapped Ohio.

Publicly, she supported it in those early days. But within White House walls …

"She had grave reservations about NAFTA - was probably against it," said Reporter and biographer Carl Bernstein.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/29/eveningnews/main3894687.shtml

[DearAbby]

1. Off topic, what a lovely photo of Hillary n/t

[Yael]

10. That really is a nice shot.

She looks energized there.

[elixir]

15. Yael, what's up w/ your sig graphic?

[Yael]

20. Eh?

Edwards Demo supporting Obama. Is something other than the "O" with the red lines showing up?

It is on my Photobucket account.

[anonymous171]

2. Why didn't she say anything then?

Another example of the fair weather fighter.

[MagsDem]

11. She DID say something then

In fact she complained that health care, not NAFTA should be the priority.

[anonymous171]

12. Not about healthcare, about NAFTA.

If she cared so much, why didn't she fight to have it changed (or get her husband to do something, since she had so much influence?)

[jasmine621]

36. Same reason Obama didn't say anything when speaking at Kerry convention.

He even said he didn't want to hurt the chances of Kerry who had voted for the IWR. Seems reasonable to me that Hillary would not want to undermine her own husband publically. I give her credit for that.

[Beacool]

39. She didn't say anything because at the time she was the First Lady of the nation.

First ladies do not sabotage their husband's administrations.

[DearAbby]

3. I can accept that, she would have to put on a happy face for

the decisions of her husband.

[sandnsea]

4. From her own book

2003: Hillary Clinton Expounded on Benefits of NAFTA, Calling it An Important Legislative Goal. “Creating a free trade zone in North America—the largest free trade zone in the world—would expand U.S. exports, create jobs and ensure that our economy was reaping the benefits, not the burdens, of globalization. Although unpopular with labor unions, expanding trade opportunities was an important administration goal. The question was whether the White House could focus its energies on two legislative campaigns at once . I argued that we could and that postponing health care would further weaken its chances.”

2003: Clinton Called NAFTA a “Victory” For President Clinton. In her memoir, published in 2003, Clinton wrote, “Senator Dole was genuinely interested in health care reform but wanted to run for President in 1996. He couldn’t hand incumbent Bill Clinton any more legislative victories, particularly after Bill’s successes on the budget, the Brady bill and NAFTA.”

[MagsDem]

7. Oh bullshit - I have that book right here, and you are lying

What she says, what you left out, was that Bob Rubin said “Creating a free trade zone in North America—the largest free trade zone in the world—would expand U.S. exports, create jobs and ensure that our economy was reaping the benefits, not the burdens, of globalization. Although unpopular with labor unions, expanding trade opportunities was an important administration goal. The question was whether the White House could focus its energies on two legislative campaigns at once . I argued that we could and that postponing health care would further weaken its chances.”

Those are not her words at all. In fact, the context of that quote was that she was pissed that healthcare was being put on the back burner. My god, what a complete liar you are.

It's on page 181 by the way.

[DURHAM D]

13. I caught another Obama supporter doing something

very similar last week.

I was talking with a friend last night about the era of "big lies" ushered in my Newtie and that the Obama supporters are acting just like those right wing zealots. Tell a lie, repeat it three times, it becomes the truth.

They act like Bushies/Repubs - their support is based on faith - not facts.

[MagsDem]

16. Voting for him would make me feel dirty, like I was voting rethug

I swear, I can't tell his supporters apart from the Bushbots I've met.

[elixir]

17. Way to go, MagsDem. Setting the record straight! thank you.

[elixir]

18. Way to go, MagsDem. Setting the record straight! thank you.

[Honeycombe8]

19. I haven't read the book, but what you say doesn't oppose what the prior poster said at all.

The fact that Hillary may have been ticked that healthcare was being put on the back burner has nothing at all to do with whether she thought NAFTA was a good trade agreement to enter into.

The problem she is having with NAFTA is that she now says it wasn't a good agreement. The problem she is having with NAFTA is NOT that the W.H. didn't also focus on healthcare.

[sandnsea]

24. That's exactly right

and that is also what they're trying to turn into opposition to NAFTA. It wasn't, it was opposition to not focusing on health care.

[MagsDem]

27. Your quote is a deliberate lie

I'm looking at it right here. All one needs to do is check the index for the few references to NAFTA. Not once, not a single time in that entire book does she champion NAFTA.

[sandnsea]

31. "NAFTA is proving its worth"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jW4XPRA2jIk&feature=related

"I think on balance NAFTA has been good for New York and America" 2004

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bi1nQZEx8Uc&feature=related

[MagsDem]

32. Oh get real

If you have to lie about a quote in a book, or take a 13 second clip from news report instead of showing the entire thing that's pretty telling. You do realize he supports NAFTA, right?

[MagsDem]

33. Here's the full quote your vid clips

She said that "on balance, NAFTA has been good for New York and America" but that the Bush administration needed to do more to enforce fair trading rules. She said the United States had to be more "upfront" with Canada, which had devised various "rationales" for blocking the import of agricultural products from New York.

[sandnsea]

34. She supports the goddamn bill

Everything she has said in the last ten years indicates her support for it. Obama didn't. That's the point. NOW she wants to say she's going to do all these changes to it, well it's too damn late, just like it's too damn late for her to change her mind on the war.

[MagsDem]

35. Why did you have to deliberately lie if that is true?

As for Obama: "on Sept. 8, 2004, he said that Americans "benefit enormously from exports, and so we have an interest in free trade that allows us to move our products overseas. The United States should continue to work with the World Trade Organization and pursue deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement, but the country must be more aggressive about protecting American interests."

Sure sounds to me like he supports NAFTA.

[sandnsea]

37. I quoted her own words

"Creating a free trade zone in North America—the largest free trade zone in the world—would expand U.S. exports, create jobs and ensure that our economy was reaping the benefits, not the burdens, of globalization."

I'given quote after of her support of NAFTA. It's been long term and consistent.

Obama has always advocated being "more agressive" about protecing American trade interests. There is a difference.

[MagsDem]

38. No, liar, you quoted Bob Rubin's opinion

and attributed it to her, even though the book is crystal clear that the quote starts with the words "Bob Rubin thought..." Why did you delete the words "Bob Rubin thought" from the beginning of the quote if not to mislead and lie about the issue?

Give it up, dude, because you have been busted in a big fat lie, and everyone reading this thread knows it.

[MagsDem]

30. Yes, it certainly does -- the poster lied

The poster left out "Bob Rubin thought..." quite deliberately to make it appear as though those were HRC's views instead of Rubin's. The ENTIRE context of that quote is her talking about health care and why she was told NAFTA was more important.

[Honeycombe8]

40. I see. But that's inconsequential, if that was Hillary's position, right? ARe you saying

that was NOT her position? Then....why would Hillary include Bob Rubin's quotes in her book?

[mtnsnake]

41. I'm glad you caller her on her lies

She used to jump in on almost any thread I'd start and lie through her teeth about me, hijack the thread, and then it would take the mods 2 hours to delete her personal attacks and lies. By that time the thread would be a goner. Lying is way of life for some of those sickos.

[durrrty libby]

21. Nice catch

[sandnsea]

22. She didn't oppose NAFTA at all

She considered it one of Bill Clinton's successes, exactly like she said. The only thing she opposed was NAFTA taking precedent over health care, exactly as you said. When Bernstein tries to interpret that as opposition to NAFTA, he's full of it - and so are you.

[MagsDem]

29. That's your interperation -- it doesn't say anything like she supported it AT ALL

She barely mentions it at all other than to complain it was pushed ahead of healthcare, and why OTHERS thought it should be. Face it, you just posted a total fabrication, and you did it deliberately to mislead people.

[Straight Shooter]

14. BUSTED!

:o

[Johnny__Motown]

5. So, was she lying to us then or is she lying to us now? I can't keep track anymore

I guess the newest line is that she was lying to us then.

[MagsDem]

8. SandandSea is lying

And that is perfectly clear if you look it up in her book. In fact there is not a SINGLE word in her book praising NAFTA.

[sandnsea]

23. Listen, you better take another look

The only thing she ever opposed was NAFTA taking precedent over health care. She specifically says she NAFTA was one of Bill's successes.

[MagsDem]

28. It's right in front of me, and shows you are lying

She says Bob Rubin thought it was important, and that she was not happy about it being prioritized over healthcare. NO WHERE does she say she supports it in that book. And if you have it in front of you, then you know you are lying. Took me about 2 min to pull it off my bookshelf and check the index.

[Yossariant]

42. Et tu, Barack?

Regarding the North American Free Trade Agreement, Obama recently boasted, "I don't think NAFTA has been good for Americans, and I never have." Yet, Calvin Woodward reviewed Obama's record on NAFTA in a February 26, 2008 Associated Press article and found that comment to be misleading: "In his 2004 Senate campaign, Obama said the US should pursue more deals such as NAFTA, and argued more broadly that his opponent's call for tariffs would spark a trade war. AP reported then that the Illinois senator had spoken of enormous benefits having accrued to his state from NAFTA, while adding that he also called for more aggressive trade protections for US workers."

Putting aside campaign rhetoric, when actually given an opportunity to protect workers from unfair trade agreements, Obama cast the deciding vote against an amendment to a September 2005 Commerce Appropriations Bill, proposed by North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan, that would have prohibited US trade negotiators from weakening US laws that provide safeguards from unfair foreign trade practices. The bill would have been a vital tool to combat the outsourcing of jobs to foreign workers and would have ended a common corporate practice known as "pole-vaulting" over regulations, which allows companies doing foreign business to avoid "right to organize," "minimum wage," and other worker protections.

http://www.counterpunch.org/gonzalez02292008.html

[sniffa]

6. "I just thought it was a bunch of charts and graphs"

Ready to *giggle* on day one.

Why hasn't she gone back to this NAFTA strategy?

[MagsDem]

9. Your post is a perfect example of sexism

[RBInMaine]

25. This corporate media biased CBS "reporting" was total crap !

What total and complete corporate media crap ! How in hell could anyone actually see both reports (the one done on Obama and then this one on HRC) and not see the blantantly obvious bias and horseshit pulled here by this slightly watered down version of FOX? The Obama report focused very little on what he did as Prez of Harvard Law Review, community organizer, etc. and talked about Rezco (which has been debunked, etc.). They barely talked about the many good things he did both in Illinois govt. and the US Senate. On the other hand, Hillary had a campaign staff member speak for her in her covrage. NO mention of the fat cat clients of her Rose Law Firm. NO mention of her connections to Norman Hsu. SKIRTED over the 1990's White House and Whitewater Scandals. Turned her healthcare debacle into a "victory" when she continued to work on the issue afterward. NO mention of her lackey work for Walmart. And on and on. Absolutely unreal and sickening. Anyone who would give these corporate bullshit propaganda media outlets any credibility is beyond me.

[Obamanaut]

26. But on the other hand, the report did mention her $342 million in

earmarks.