MyDD :: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA

Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA

by VT COnQuest, Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:30:03 PM EST

"First lady records show Clinton promoted NAFTA".

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton now argues that the North American Free Trade Agreement needs to be renegotiated, but newly released records showed on Wednesday she promoted its passage.

Here's the beef: http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsN ews/idUSN1933416820080319

Tags: hillary, clinton, nafta (all tags)

Permalink :: 58 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (1.75 / 4)

Geesh do you trolls ever take a few seconds to read over the diary list? You make yourselves look even worse (if that is possible) by posting the same damn thing over and over again.

by JustJennifer on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:38:57 PM EST

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

There have been at least 3 or 4 on Obama's grandmother. Certainly that "discussion" could be condensed.

by rfahey22 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:55:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

I agree - condense the diaries. It's very confusing to have multiple diaries going on the same subject.

by JustJennifer on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:16:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

Ooops... my sincere apologies. I didn't realize that the article was actually from yesterday. I'll look before I write next time.

*VOTE DEMOCRAT! - HRC or BHO* Obama '08 - Full of reason / Hillary '08 - Full of treason (Gallup Poll, March 26 2008) / McCain '08 - Diaper's full of Bushit.

by VT COnQuest on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:51:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

I apologize for being so rude.

by JustJennifer on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:15:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (2.00 / 2)

I will take this ANYTIME, ANYWHERE, ANYPLACE than than racist, anti-American "spiritual mentor" of Barack Obama.

by American1989 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:42:54 PM EST

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

Wait...you're agreeing with the diarist, but saying you'd rather "take" Hillary lying than what Wright said?

You mean having a crazy pastor is unforgivable, but lying as a candidate is acceptable to you?

Surely you don't mean that.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:54:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

Surely, you dont mean that you have some legal proof that Hillary Clinton lied?

If you did, then hurrp up, call Ken Starr coz he spent 50 million and couldnt prove anything.

by Sandeep on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:32:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

heh heh it is not our problem the Clinton's have a problem with honesty, the whole country feels that way.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/105097/Percei ved-Honesty-Gap-Clinton-Versus-Obama-McC ain.aspx

by rejectandenounce on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:04:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

I didn't take any position...the diarist said Hillary lied about NAFTA. Your comment was basically "so what, at least she didn't know Wright."

That's how I read it, anyway.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 02:43:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (2.00 / 2)

Here's what David Gergen told Anderson Cooper about a meeting he held on NAFTA: "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 didnt 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 theres some justification for her camp saying, you know, shes never been a great backer for NAFTA." [David Gergen, Anderson Cooper 360, 2/25/08]"

by yogi41 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:42:58 PM EST

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

Gergen wasn't coincidentally "there," he ran some of the NAFTA meetings for Bill Clinton. He's hardly a passive or unbiased observer. Just saying.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:56:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

So when ex-Clinton aides who are now siding with Obama say something, it is completely unbiased and 100% truthful?

Just saying like you.

by Sandeep on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:37:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

1. Since when is Gergen backing Obama?

2. I'm not saying he's being untruthful, or that he's purposely protecting the Clintons. He may even be 100% correct about what happened during those meetings. But it seems he's underplaying his role, and personally, I'm generally somewhat suspicious of Gergen for the same reasons I am of Broder. That goes no matter which candidate Geregen's supporting.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 02:47:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

I hate to shoot the messenger, but Gergen is currently part of Clinton's campaign, and obviously was closely involved at the time. He ran the salient meeting and his assessment seems to disagree with others who were there.

We have no proof for Senator Clinton's assertion that she was only reluctantly going through the motions to support NAFTA at the time but David Gergen's word, and I'm afraid he's anything but trustworthy on this. From the outside, it appears Senator Clinton was an enthusiastic supporter of NAFTA. As she's said herself until recently.

by McNasty on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:20:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

Gergen is not, and never has been part of Hillary Clinton's campaign.

by LakersFan on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:24:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I stand corrected. (none / 0)

You're right, he was an advisor and campaigner for the previous Clinton administration, and supports Senator Clinton unofficially now. I thought he had a similar role now to James Carville.

I apologize for the mistake.

by McNasty on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:28:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I stand corrected. (none / 0)

He has been critical of Clinton at times and has never supported Hillary publicly like Carville or Begala. That is why CNN has him as independent strategist.

by Sandeep on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:39:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"supports Senator Clinton unofficially" (none / 0)

Cite? I haven't heard about this, and don't believe it. To start with, Gergen's a moderate Republican. His kindest words have been for McCain, but I'm fairly certain he has not indicated preference for a candidate because he wants to wear his political analyst hat.

In case you do have a cite, I apologize for the inference.

In case you don't have a cite, please don't make crap up.

by Trickster on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:40:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "supports Senator Clinton ... (none / 0)

For what it's worth ... I watched Gergen's comments live on TV and the quote is accurate.

by dwmorris on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:14:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I stand corrected. (none / 0)

I think you're confusing Gergen with Paul Begala.

by LakersFan on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:24:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (2.00 / 2)

How many diaries do we need on this? You can put up hundreds of them and it isn't going to make this false assumption, and make no mistake it is an assumption, take hold.

by americanincanada on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:43:00 PM EST

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

Calling it an assumption is kind of you. It's a deliberate misrepresentation.

On to the Convention Floor!

by oh puhleeze on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:16:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (2.00 / 3)

i'll make a prediction here ,

hillary clinton would win penn by double digits

Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.

by lori on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:43:28 PM EST

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

Heck, I'll agree with you on that one. Obama was down big even before l'affaire de Wright. Sometimes it just doesn't happen for your candidate in a given state.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:57:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Of course she promoted NAFTA (2.00 / 0)

That was the policy of the administration.

The article proves that she was very involved in the Executive decision making process and supported those decisions, even promoted those decisions, when she still might not have agreed with every one of those decisions.

This might be too difficult for people to understand.

But I don't think it is.

Ergo. False outrage remains the order of the day.

by Edgar08 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:44:59 PM EST

Re: Of course she promoted NAFTA (2.00 / 0)

So now she was secretly against all negative aspects of the Clinton Administration but in favor of all positive aspects? Since when are politicians allowed to have it both ways on a piece of legislation that they helped to enact?

by rfahey22 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:57:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't know (none / 0)

Is Obama responsible for all the negative things that happened with the funding he helped to provide for the war?

by Edgar08 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:57:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

There's a lot of difference between (none / 0)

actively opposing NAFTA, and working for its passage while purportedly opposing it privately. Senator Clinton has asserted she was in opposition to it from early on. If so, she kept that very quiet.

by McNasty on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:22:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Considering (none / 0)

The position she was in, there's really no explanation for being so quiet about it at all.

Hey. I'm betting she even agreed with some parts of it.

by Edgar08 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:56:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (2.00 / 0)

You are absolutely right. PA is now Obama's to lose. Hillary no longer stands a chance there. In the light of these new revelations, if Obama doesn't win PA by at least 10 points, it will mean that his campaign is completely failing.

by markjay on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:46:40 PM EST

What is the meat of the story? (2.00 / 2)

Since you give us only the lead, I'll step in and provide the meat. It's contained in this quote:

Among the thousands of details of daily life for Clinton, there was a November 10, 1993, entry -- a "NAFTA Briefing drop-by," in Room 450 of the executive office building next door to the White House, closed to the news media.

Approximately 120 people were expected to attend the briefing, and Clinton was to be introduced by White House aide Alexis Herman for brief remarks concluding the program.

So The Monster "dropped by" a meeting to make "brief remarks concluding the program" and that's supposed to prove what exactly? Do we have some reason to believe that her "brief remarks" consisted of something other than telling the guests where to find the punch and cookies?

Another little piece of that story I noticed you left out:

The documents clearly indicated that Clinton had a powerful role at the White House, frequently meeting foreign leaders and presiding over meetings.

by Trickster on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:49:47 PM EST

Re: What is the meat of the story? (none / 0)

Yes, but that's only part of the story.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/ 2008/03/clintons-1993-n.html

by rfahey22 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:54:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What is the meat of the story? (none / 0)

Unless those two anonymous women are willing to stand behind their story in public as David Gergen is then there is no 'there' there.

by americanincanada on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:57:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What is the meat of the story? (none / 0)

Keep telling yourself that. First the standard response was that this wasn't "breaking" news (even though it "broke" in the last day). Now we have to see if the anonymous people come forward to contradict the completely unbiased David Gergen? Time will tell, I guess.

by rfahey22 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:02:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What is the meat of the story? (none / 0)

Time is telling that people think Obama lied about Nafta and Hillary is for common people.

Ask any of the blue collar democrats and most of them love Hillary.

Such a charming caring lady she is:-)

by Sandeep on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:44:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What is the meat of the story? (none / 0)

Well then what is there to be afraid of? Let the chips fall where they may.

by rfahey22 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:48:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nice catch, rfahey22! ;) (none / 0)

From that link: "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." - http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/ 2008/03/clintons-1993-n.html

*VOTE DEMOCRAT! - HRC or BHO* Obama '08 - Full of reason / Hillary '08 - Full of treason (Gallup Poll, March 26 2008) / McCain '08 - Diaper's full of Bushit.

by VT COnQuest on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:48:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What is the meat of the story? (2.00 / 1)

If she had sucha a powerful role, why didn't she work to stop NAFTA?

by NewOaklandDem on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:54:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What is the meat of the story? (none / 0)

if a tree falls in the forest...

by americanincanada on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:57:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What is the meat of the story? (none / 0)

She can't be a fighter for the common man and a "powerful member" of an administation that sold out manufacturing jobs to Mexico. These issues go hand in hand. You can choose one, but not the other.

by NewOaklandDem on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:20:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Would you like some parsley with that parsing? (none / 0)

"Do we have some reason to believe that her "brief remarks" consisted of something other than telling the guests where to find the punch and cookies?". Ok, so she held no power in the White House as First Lady and was actually more like the First Homemaker? ... "The documents clearly indicated that Clinton had a powerful role at the White House, frequently meeting foreign leaders and presiding over meetings." No wait, so she played Susy Homemaker ONLY at the NAFTA meeting. Don't pee on my head and tell me it's raining, Clinton apologists.

*VOTE DEMOCRAT! - HRC or BHO* Obama '08 - Full of reason / Hillary '08 - Full of treason (Gallup Poll, March 26 2008) / McCain '08 - Diaper's full of Bushit.

by VT COnQuest on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:25:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Widen out your thinking (none / 0)

First Ladies play traditional wife/hostessing roles. I think that has been true of every First Lady from Marth Washington on. Hillary Clinton most assuredly did not renounce her traditional role as the White House hostess.

Many first ladies have also been advisors to their husbands. A few have even been given policy portfolios. I'm not sure what the reality is, but Hillary Clinton has widely been perceived as one of the most active and engaged First Ladies in terms of policy and advice. That's supported by these papers, at least according to this article.

I see no obstacle whatsoever to playing both roles. I'm a guy, and even I would feel confident about my ability to serve tea and cookies at 4 o'clock and then join a policy meeting at 6 o'clock.

It's also possible that she appeared at the NAFTA meeting in black leather with a whip and ordered the attendees to support NAFTA. All I'm saying is that the document released here doesn't say one blessed thing about what she said at the meeting, just that she made "brief remarks". She may well have been playing hostess; she may well have made substantive remarks that didn't indicate support for overall NAFTA (such as, e.g., praising the side agreements her husband had negotiated); she may have personally guaranteed that NAFTA would cure cancer and give all men larger penises. We just don't know one way or the other, and those documents prove nothing and are completely unsurprising.

by Trickster on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:04:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary is NOT TRUSTED (none / 0)

Look at the honesty/trustworthy surveys. 67% say McCain is honest/trustworty - 63% for Obama- and ONLY 44% say the same for HIllary.

This is a losing proposition for Hillary.

She. Cannot. Win.

by highgrade on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:04:37 PM EST

Oh please. (none / 0)

She certainly can win, and if she somehow gets the nomination, I will be glad to see her do so.

She'll just have a much more difficult time than would Senator Obama. She's playing Kerry's map exactly, but with somewhat better tactics. It will be hard, but she can do it, if it comes to that.

by McNasty on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:25:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

44% say the same for HIllary (in terms of honesty) (none / 0)

Finally she breaks 40% in something! (just NOT voting contests). Still about 20 points behind Obama though (just LIKE voting contests)! At least she's consistent... at losing.

*VOTE DEMOCRAT! - HRC or BHO* Obama '08 - Full of reason / Hillary '08 - Full of treason (Gallup Poll, March 26 2008) / McCain '08 - Diaper's full of Bushit.

by VT COnQuest on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:30:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (2.00 / 1)

It's entirely possible that she had a supportive role (for her husband, the president) in the public eye for NAFTA, while privately (with staff and aides) not supporting it.
Or, horrors, she might have seen that NAFTA didn't work out as planned, and doesn't support it any longer.

by skohayes on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:12:25 PM EST

As if Obama has any credibility on NAFTA (none / 0)

And todays events won't help Obama in PA much either.

by Mayor McCheese on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:13:09 PM EST

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

Clintopn lied about her stand on NAFTA.

Clinton lied about her level of experience.

What won't she lie about?

McCain's occupation plan will achieve victory when it bestows liberty to the freedom loving people of Iraq and their freedom loving oil.

by Lefty Coaster on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:23:28 PM EST

Apologies from Clinton's supporters (none / 0)

For having lied to her voters about her stance on an issue of national importance will undoubtedly be forthcoming . . .

After they diary Barack Obama's comment about his grandmother a few more times.

Priorities, people!

Support Regina Thomas, GA-12

by Drew on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:26:53 PM EST

Chill out. (none / 0)

There is no news here. So what?

by LibDem on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:33:58 PM EST

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

Can anyone who looks at this as a major "gotcha" moment describe exactly how a sitting First Lady is supposed to publicly go against the President's policies?
A lot of you are showing an embarrassing level of naiveté.

by big poppa smurf on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:39:17 PM EST

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

Come now. Clinton has made her White House years the focal point of her experience argument. How would one even begin to analyze that experience without assessing her efforts to pass legislation that was enacted during the Clinton Administration? It is naive to assume that, simply because she says so, she was against legislation that she actively sought to have enacted. And, were she merely Bill Clinton's mouthpiece, how would that count towards her experience?

by rfahey22 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:47:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

Funny.

by grlpatriot on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:44:00 PM EST

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

I thought being first lady Hillary was just sipping coffee and tea and not doing any policy work (as per many who dislike her).

I wonder those who dislike are getting desperate now:-) as they are implying her first lady experience should count now (as per this diary).

So much for hypocrisy.

by Sandeep on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:51:36 PM EST

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

Where's the hypocrisy? She says it counts, so, accepting that argument, let's see what it counts for.

by rfahey22 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:10:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Read about Obama and the Maytag plant (none / 0)

http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news Stock%20News/1057928

Obama seems to be more talk and no action when it comes to saving workers jobs. He had an "in" with the Crown family and didn't use it.

by katmandu1 on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 06:57:31 PM EST

Re: Bye-Bye PA! Reuters exposes HRC on NAFTA (none / 0)

Okay here it is one more time again. Tradition is that new Presidents Honor treaties negotiated by their predecessor and attempt to get them ratified. There is a good reason for this. Since we change Presidents on a regular basis no country would be willing to negotiate a treaty with a President if they were not confident that it would be honored by his successor. Bush 1 negotiated NAFTA, Bill followed a tradition that is necessary to give us any standing in the world of diplomacy and worked to get it ratified. Hillary did not like the treaty but as her official role was that of First Lady she did her job and help him do what he had to do. Get over it. Insiders have written and spoke of her dislike with NAFTA repeatedly, she did not lie and this is not a gotcha moment that will save your candidate from his own bad decisions.

"Do you know the difference between a War Story and a Fairy Tale?"

by RedstateLib on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:23:01 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.