Political Punch

FYI - Rev Wright did not say God Damn America - he said God damned America. WE reaped what WE sowed. Now WE should be accountable and WE have to do the right thing.
Posted by: dotheresearch | Mar 23, 2008 9:57:56 AM
________________________________________
Thank you for the research. Those same cable television stations and newspapers that ran that 30 second snippet over and over would not accept this because as truth because those good old boys from big business, ABC, FoxNews/CNN, Sanctimonious Lou Dobbs,InSane Hanity, ORielly, Ann Coultrus and the analysts, Sen Obama's opponents are pressing this issue only because it affects their wallets, bottom line. It's sad that these type of people have that much power to smear this man's name/character under the guise that he will ruin this country if he is elected, when they know it's more about their wallets. These are the elitists and it's like they enjoy what they do.
They will be accountable in the end when it's their time to leave this earth, God; see's everything and they reap what they sow.
I bet they don't even go to church.

On that note the Clinton years are probably the best years America and the world experienced for anyone over the age of fifty. Since Clinton left office every lead indicator took a 180 degree turn.
Posted by: Moot article | Mar 24, 2008 12:11:27 PM
_______________________________________
Better for whom? The upper elitist class like the Clintons who made $109 millmion dollars, some of which was made behind closed doors with China. We have people here that's still homeless, veterans that's homeless. She's got $300 million portk barrel funds set aside, where is that money going, it's certainly not going to help the American people. We pay taxes and our taxes paid for a war she voted for. So forgive me, if I "don't" give her credit for anything but for lining their pockets while the rest of America is hurting. She has a home to go to.

BOB S. - Couldn't agree with you more. The Kennedy Clan should embrace the Clinton's, its just the passing of the torch... Hillary now, Chelsea next! Go girls.

Question: Is the rumor true; “if Obama gets elected to the “White” House he plans on changing the name to “Black” House and having it RE-painted a different color than “white”? If this is true, isn’t this taking the race card to major extremes?

Fact check the historical NAFTA question about Hillary Clinton's position with David Gergen --

Gergen categorically stated in a recent TV-news statement that, as First Lady, Hillary Clinton most certainly did oppose NAFTA in private discussions. Gergen's veracity is above reproach.

Do people really expect a First Lady to publicly oppose a program her husband, the President, is supporting?

Who is promoting this outrageous "nit picking" over every word Senator Clinton said when she was First Lady?

Whoever it is, point those individuals/groups back to the substantive issues. Otherwise we'll all have to go back and review all of Obama's instances of dissembling.

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...

It seems that the Dems have lost track of the fact this is a contest Between T. Kennedyand B. Clinton to see whois going to run the Democratic party in the future. Pay attention!

It seems that the Dems have lost track of the fact this is a contest Between T. Kennedyand B. Clinton to see whois going to run the Democratic party in the future. Pay attention!

How do they Ignore?
Look, where did You find those facts? somewhere down on this media page (some other did not even publish it).
So all those facts are in a whisper, headlines are not saying that. Such a trick.
And clinton’s supporters do not bother themselves neither to read more than headlines nor to think. That is why they are ready to be fooled.
What a pity, Media is doing that.
Dishonest. Do not you think?

I think the soldier issue comes into play here on more then just a superficial level. An officer against making a charge will still follow orders after expressing their thoughts. The officer may rally the troops and lead the charge but that states nothing about there own personal thoughts or belief. You can’t expect Hillary Clinton to be the first lady and undermining her husband’s administration. If you want to blame Hillary Clinton for everything in Bill Clinton’s term you have to also credit her with everything positive. On that note the Clinton years are probably the best years America and the world experienced for anyone over the age of fifty. Since Clinton left office every lead indicator took a 180 degree turn.

Is it an wonder why the Clintons are called opportunist? The facts speak for themselves. The fact is America is in SERIOUS trouble because of the policies of both CLINTON and BUSH.
That's what our children see, that's what WE SHOULD SEE.. Thee is no place for the same old political games produicng the same results. Whether we like it or not, WE NEED A CHANGE IN THE WHITE HOUSE. Do we really think Cheney wants someone other than Mccane or Clinton?

I'm curious, how do the Clinton supporters ignore all the evidence? I am white, female, over 50 and should be supporting Hillary according to the polls. But for the life of me, I cannot support someone that cannot run her campaign without dissention, she is in the red financially with her campaign, she lies to the American public for her own gain. She is an embarassment to me as a woman. Please tell me is manipulation necessary for women to get ahead? Or would honesty and integrity be better. Am I just old=fashioned? I need a President that I can respect.

Posted by: cathy |

FINALLY ... someone who uses her BRAIN. Cathy, you and your likes are unique as compared to the norm.

How about David Grogin, Tapper?

Hw says he knows she opposed NAFTA, and you, apparently, consider him a liar.

Your Saint John MCCain has stated that he was the first to call for Runsfeld's firing, yet no one can find any public declaration to that effect.

Will either you (or your crack investigative reporter, Brian Ross)check into that, or do you continue to honor the press' endorsement of McCain's election?

You know what -- Did anyone listen to the entire speech from Rev Wright to get whole context of the sermon? The statements that were circulated were actually quotes from Ambassador Edward Peck a retired, career U.S. diplomat who served 32-years in the U.S. Foreign Service and was chief of the U.S. mission to Iraq under Jimmy Carter. Rev Wright prefaced his remarks as a "faith footnote," an indication that he was deviating from his sermon. He said -- "I heard Ambassador Peck on an interview yesterday," Wright declared. "He was on Fox News. This is a white man and he was upsetting the Fox News commentators to no end. He pointed out, a white man, an ambassador, that what Malcolm X said when he got silenced by Elijah Muhammad was in fact true: America's chickens are coming home to roost." Wright then went on to list more than a few U.S. foreign policy endeavors that, by the tone of his voice and manner of his expression, he viewed as more or less deplorable. This included, as has been demonstrated in the endless loop of clips from his sermon, bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki and nuking "far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon and WE never batted an eye." "Violence begets violence," Wright said, "hatred begets hatred, and terrorism begets terrorism."

And then he concluded by putting the comments on Peck's shoulders: "A white ambassador said that yall, not a black militant, not a reverend who preaches about racism, an ambassador whose eyes are wide open and is trying to get us to wake up and move away from this dangerous precipice... the ambassador said that the people we have wounded don't have the military capability we have, but they do have individuals who are willing to die and take thousands with them... let me stop my faith footnote right there."

FYI - Rev Wright did not say God Damn America - he said God damned America. WE reaped what WE sowed. Now WE should be accountable and WE have to do the right thing.

Hillary is UnTrustWorthy, she Praised McCain in National T.V. She wont release her tax info, she wasnt even against the War In Iraq, till she decided to run for Office, along with much, much, more, I just hate to mention!

Who oh who is backing Hillary that no one in the press ever talks about? And he said he is backing her because he has been friends with her for years. And that Hillary is a good person who does great things for America. And he knows Hillary will get us out of Iraq safely and quickly. None other than man of peace:

George McGovern

What didn't he back Obama????? Because Obamas payoff meant less than nothing to him.

The people that endorse Obama are promised something big in return.

Richardson, Kerry and Kennedy to start. It is all about political favors.

And John Glenn also endorsed Hillary in Ohio. Almost the exact same reasons George gave. Two honorable men with nothing to gain by endorsing Hillary accept to see the best president take office.

Thank GOD for good and strong people like Glenn and Mc Govern. We need so many more of them in America.

mudgeonc,
were you an Obama supporter prior to the Wright controversy?

It sounds like all the Clinton supporters are saying Hilary was against NAFTA but was for it. Do you people ever listen to yourselves.

So it sounds like if Hillary was not for Nafta, but did not sound like she was against it enough ...and she is being drawn and quartered for this...then why is Obama getting a pass for not agreeing with Wright , but still attended the church for 20 years...which to me was TOTALLy agreeing with the philosophy of this church....if he can blow in the wind then what is the deal with her?

So it sounds like if Hillary was not for Nafta, but did not sound like she was against it enough ...and she is being drawn and quartered for this...then why is Obama getting a pass for not agreeing with Wright , but still attended the church for 20 years...which to me was TOTALLy agreeing with the philosophy of this church....if he can blow in the wind then what is the deal with her?

Cheerleading for NAFTA to get it passed ain't no significant political experience or commander in chief preparation.

The real deal is LYING about it.

And this kind of petty lying, deceit, and duplicity ain't no commander in chief stuff.

America does not need a commander in chief who cannot stand for anything, who only espouses whatever gives political advantage at any given time, and--worst of all--who cannot own up (as in taking responsibility) for past actions and deeds whenever they appear to be unpopular.

You just cannot help to promote NAFTA as the best thing since sliced bread and turn around to lie to Ohio and Pennsylvania voters who feel shortchanged by it.

An honorable presidential candidate would have said--if she is HONESTLY convinced that NAFTA now hurts--"I am sorry I supported NAFTA, but it is now clear that this was an error of juedgment. Please forgive me. Going forward, I promise to review NAFTA."

But you can NEVER hear anything so noble from Hilary Clinton, which absolutely DISQUALIFIES her from being commander in chief, by which I mean, a position held by such human beings as George Washington, Abe Lincoln, FDR, and Eisenhower!

How do you stand up and lie before the voters when there is record that can be checked?

How do voters continue to supporter a candidate like this?

Its too bad that James Carvelle is not only physically frightening but it would appear that he has an ugly heart to match. His comment equating Governor Richardson’s decision to endorse Senator Obama as a Judas betrayal was appallingly disgusting and shameful. Frankly, this is the type of politics that Senator Obama is trying to change- it is the old Politics of tearing each other down.

I would like to remind Mr. Carvelle that Governor Richardson has not switched party allegiance – he is still a committed member of the Democratic Party.

The Clintons and their surrogates would do well to remember that it is the Republicans who are their foes and not Senator Obama . Perhaps the GOP roots in Mrs Clinton has sprung new life and over taken her Democratic Party ideals. That would explain the peculiar alliance we see being put forth with John McCain. I urge all democrats to take note of this- we need to elect a leader who will put party before self and who is 100% committed to our brand. I for one, as a lifelong party loyalist am having second thoughts about the Clintons sincerity.

Let's just face it Hillary lied. Scary,what will she do as President?

You have to be kidding with this garbage report. This is why, if I were king,it would be a class A felony to start a sentence with the words :"I think".

you actually have the audacity to report that Clinton opposed the idea of introducing NAFTA before health care and you stupidly conclude that is evidence that she supported it? this is not only idiotic but judging from some of the comments here supporting this, appealing to the idiotic is good business. Or is that simply all thats left paying attention to main stream news?

I'm curious, how do the Clinton supporters ignore all the evidence? I am white, female, over 50 and should be supporting Hillary according to the polls. But for the life of me, I cannot support someone that cannot run her campaign without dissention, she is in the red financially with her campaign, she lies to the American public for her own gain. She is an embarassment to me as a woman. Please tell me is manipulation necessary for women to get ahead? Or would honesty and integrity be better. Am I just old=fashioned? I need a President that I can respect.

Respected journalist David Gergen(one of the few left!)has said many times that Hillary Clinton had many reservations about NAFTA when it was first proposed, and that's what she has been saying, if you listen. Did she support it when it was a fait accompli?Well, of course, she supported her President's decision, as she should have. I remember the Clinton years well, and for all you who can't remember or choose to forget, the Republicans were all over her for being the "co-president", for involving herself in the politics of the day instead of just decorating the Christmas tree or serving tea to Senate wives. So while you Obama fans may not want to give her any credit for her experience in the White House, let me tell you that the Republicans sure recognized it and continually tried to use it against Bill.

Dear mad Obama supporters,

Please stop attacking Hillary Clinton personally. You don't know her. Stop being desperate. Obama is not going to be president for many reasons. One of them is because he inspires people like you to be so hateful towards a woman who has made it her life's work to improve the lot of others.

Hate is not rewarded in this world. Please love your candidate, and stop hating Hillary.

Why has the US press been so reticent to report what the Canadian press has reported? The leak that tarred Obama and led to all sorts of scurrilous charges against him came from a long time ally of George Bush in the Canadian cabinet and was a complete distortion of the record.
According to a Canadian Broadcasting Company report, referenced in Huffington Post, "The Canadian government contacted Goolsbee to clarify Obama's position on trade, not the reverse. Although Goolsbee did meet with Canada's Chicago consul general George Rioux (not, as was reported in the original leak, Ambassador Michael Wilson), there's no evidence that he ever described Obama's position as mere political posturing. Instead, they met February 8, before NAFTA began to dominate the campaign, and discussion of the trade agreement took up just two to three minutes of the hour-long meeting. Goolsbee responded to Canadian questions by clarifying that Obama wasn't pushing to scrap NAFTA entirely, but that the agreement needed labor and environmental safeguards--basically what Obama had been saying in public. The memo was simply inaccurate, as even the Harper government now acknowledges after a firestorm of criticism by opposition parliament members, who've accused Harper's staffers of trying to help their Republican allies across the border by attacking the more likely Democratic candidate. In response, Harper called the leak "blatantly unfair," pledged to get to the bottom of it, and said "there was no intention to convey, in any way, that Senator Obama and his campaign team were taking a different position in public from views expressed in private, including about NAFTA."

I feel relieved to know that there are people out there in the blogosphere that believe integrity matters. Like so many disappointed ex-Clinton supporters, I feel that I've been duped by this insane pair for far too long. Finally awoken to their poisonous ways, I can see why the reich wingers despise them so much, perhaps they have different reasons to my own, however, they have revealed themselves as evil creatures willing to do whatever it takes to claw their way to power.

Whatever relationship Bill had with the black community it is now history. Next, because of Bill Richardson's non-support of Hillary, expect to see the Hispanic bloc jettisoned also. The Clintons are vengeful dispicable people.

The people who attended meetings on NAFTA should be asked about if Clinton is trustwothy. If they say she is not, then Ohio vote must be redone. DNC must INVISTIGATE.

here comes the clintons again trying politics as usual to return to wh,but i got somthing for them if JESUS sur name was clinton and am in hell burning and GOD ask me to called the name of clinton and go to heaven i will rather rot in hell than say clinton and go to heaven,liars thiefs show us you tax,earmax and all docs from the wh,faik old couples who ought to be more worried of a grand child,and sleep in church asking GOD to forgive thier sins so maybe they can have a place in heaven,instead go around and be lieing against a young man they can call a son.but clinton rem we are in the 21 st century liars.
dr rene we are in 21 st century and stop giving stupid excuses about clintons and be real you old people give us a break nonsense

here comes the clintons again trying politics as usual to return to wh,but i got somthing for them if JESUS sur name was clinton and am in hell burning and GOD ask me to called the name of clinton and go to heaven i will rather rot in hell than say clinton and go to heaven,liars thiefs show us you tax,earmax and all docs from the wh,faik old couples who ought to be more worried of a grand child,and sleep in church asking GOD to forgive thier sins so maybe they can have a place in heaven,instead go around and be lieing against a young man they can call a son.but clinton rem we are in the 21 st century liars.
dr rene we are in 21 st century and stop giving stupid excuses about clintons and be real you old people give us a break nonsense

Sen. Clinton likes to talk about do-over elections. The only do-over election we might want to consider is in Ohio, since Sen. Clinton misled the voters in Ohio about her support of NAFTA.

At least Clinton did not have her staff talking to the Canadian government and telling them that the Senator from Illinois speeches was only politics. Once he was in office he would ensure NAFTA would benefit his government.

At least Sen. Clinton from the start made it clear that she did not fully support NAFTA but once the President of the United States made his decision on NAFTA, like a good soldier she followed the nations leader. America should not blame her for her husband’s mistakes.

Regardless of the news media that hate the Clinton’s, Sen. Clinton should impress all Americans especially women. Not only was she standing by her husband, she was mostly standing by her daughter and family unit. Americans should not listen to the media that suggests that she solely stood by her husband during the Monica affair. Like every strong woman that has found her self in a similar situation, she didn’t give up and worked on her marriage to keep her family together. From what I seen in the media lately, other politicians that were caught had done much worst. Chelsea is the result of a strong family because of Hillary and Bill’s commitment to their marriage and family. As Sen. Clinton fought for her family, she will fight and stand by you through trying times and hardship. She will never give up and that is why she will continue to be a great American leader. This represents why she will be a great president and why all Hispanic and all American voters should always support Sen. Hillary Clinton.

That's just plain wrong. David Gergen is a well known presidential adviser -- his credibility beyond criticism. He stated during a recent interview that Senator Clinton spoke strongly against NAFTA in private.

In public, as First Lady, did anyone expect her to state strong objections to NAFTA when President Bill Clinton was for it?

Furthermore, is it forbidden for a politician to hold one view on a given program such as NAFTA in 1992-94 and then more than 10 years later find that a different view must be taken because that particular program needs to be changed?

Not to worry. Mark Penn will just tell us that NAFTA wasn't a big agreement and it's the BIG agreements that really matter.

James Carville will tell us Bill "Judas" Richardson of the Obama campaign is still into free trade trading in the Clintons for 30 pieces of silver.

No doubt Hillary will be ready to lie on day one.

And life in the Clinton campaign goes on.

These latest revelations -that Hillary Clinton was in the White House on the days her husband, Bill Clinton had his sexual liaisons with Monica Lewinsky, and the NAFTA affair, when juxtaposed with Hillary Clinton's public comments on these two issues, clearly show that she would do and say anything (perhaps, as one reporter once supposed, "pimp out" her daughter), just to gain political advantage and power. Americans should be suspicious of someone like her. She would sell this nation down the river, is it is politically expedient. This is not the view of only Republicans and other non-Democrats. Yours truly is a DEMOCRAT.

Hillary Clinton presented herself to the nation as a victim, when her husband's serial sexual liaisons became public. It may have been on the strength of that public sympathy that she won the senate seat in New York. From all the look of things (she was in the White House during the sexual liaisons, indicating, they may have an open marriage, where by the one does not care about what the other's private life is about), Hillary may be in this compact with Bill Clinton, inspite of the public humiliation for no other reason, but the political advantage of name recognition. Most women would have cared to find out earlier, and sent Bill Clinton packing, for humiliating them in such a historic manner. For Hillary, it may have been the political calculus -this nomination run for the presidency.

On the other revelation -NAFTA: Hillary Clinton has publicly talked about her opposition to NAFTA, even as late as Ohio, Texas and the other recent Primaries. From her records that have been made public, it is obvious that Hillary Clinton was not straight with the public on her involvement with, and position on NAFTA. She claimed during the televised Democratic debate in Nevada, that all she saw and remember from NAFTA were a bunch of charts she did not understand. However, by her own records of involvement on NAFTA, it is obvious that Hillary Clinton saw more than charts, and not only did she not oppose NAFTA, she, infact campaigned and lobbied for its passage.

Unfortunately, the public and voters in this country do not seem smart enough to learn about these lies and purposeful deception by Hillary Clinton.

The fact is: Hillary Clinton is a much more prolific liar than Bill Clinton is, and that may be the reason why, inspite of the scandals both of them have found themselves in, it Hillary always, escapes indictment and conviction, and Bill Clinton always gets caught. Americans should be awry of a prolific liar like Hillary Clinton for a president.

Those of us (and it's a huge percentage) who support Obama, oppose Hillary, and strongly support NAFTA, know that this trade agreement helped our economy permanently revive from 80s Reagan/Bush stagnation. By allowing transparent partnering with between Canada and Mexico, the U.S. effectively competed with the EU trading alliance and with China and the rest of the Far East. Not only was there no giant sucking sound, poor Mexico got the short end of the stick and we made out like a bandit according to every subsequent study. This was one of Bill's most important accomplishments (by requiring environmental and labor provisions). The "Fair Trade" big-union special interests no longer own our party. Unionism is good (great!) and we must protect the right to unionize. But individual unions and guilds (teachers, AMA, auto, teamsters) are by definition only concerned about themselves and will sell the Dems out every time. Always have. The auto workers conspired with the auto industry to take short term benefits that gave away our biggest market. The teachers unions let high-paid senior teachers sell out each generation of youth and young teacher who quit. Fair trade is a scam that will lead Dems isolation and insularity while blocking innovation and efficiency. Obama is right that the answer is to invest in research, infrastructure, training, and education that will raise our standard of living and let us once again out compete the rest of the world.

I don't support Hillary Clinton for President, for multiple reasons that I won't go into here. That said, I just watched the trailers for "Hillary The Movie" that was mentioned in a few of the previous posts. Yes Hillary has made the classic politician move of talking out of both sides of her mouth (lying) when it comes to NAFTA, but you know it's just an ultra-biased hit-piece when Ann Coulter is featured as one of her detractors.

I personally don't think NAFTA is the huge problem people make it out to be.
I think the big problem was when China was given Most Favored Nation trading status and allowed into the World Trade Organization. Most of our manufacturing jobs were sucked up by China who then dumps products back in our country, below costs when there's competition. Some were lost to Mexico and Canada, but a tiny fraction compared to China.

NAFTA affects the trading between the US, Mexico and Canada and has nothing to do with China.

I am getting more and more disappointed in Clinton saying one whopper after another.

China's most favored nation status lands at the feet of King George.

It has become more and more clear as the campaign goes on that I cannot believe in Hillary Clinton. Her duplicity and her husband's racist attacks on Obama as well as the latest salvo questioning his patriotism make me positively ill. She has put herself above the country and her party. Enough. She lied about her experience. She lied about her influence. What else is there?

Aren't you tired of the lies yet? Isn't telling the truth an integral part of character anymore? Hillary offers more of the same old "say anything to get elected" mentality. Doesn't look much like an agent of change to me.

I think it's time to give Hillary Clinton a televised public lie detector test on all her campaign BS; 35 years foreign policy experience (LOL), her support for the Black Panthers at Yale and with Robert Treuhaft's law firm, Webb Hubbell hush money, NAFTA, Family Leave & Medical Act, SCHIP, success of Arkansas Education Reform, Northern Ireland peace agreement, responsible for opening Kosovo borders, death-defying landing in war torn Bosnia (LOL),Obama did not support women's reproductive rights (she used this one in New Hampshire Primary), Paul v Clinton and the under-reported $750,000.

If she passes the test with 100% - she should be allowed to continue in the race - otherwise, throw her out, how can the U.S. have such a liar in the White House? America's future would be at serious risk.

As for her heartfelt mission on behalf of the disenfranchised voters of Florida and Michigan, she originally signed a pledge NOT to "campaign or participate" in the Michigan or Florida Democratic primaries. She then participated in both primaries and campaigned in Florida.

Why does the Media protect Hillary Clinton by covering her lies as fact? Really bothers me that they don't respect the voters' right to know the truth.

"Who cares? She said she would renegotiate it and if that doesn't work then she said she would end it. . . ."

Well, like, maybe care if what she says is true or not.

It's that simple. Does she tell the truth?

Memo to Bill and Hillary: Honesty matters. Integrity matters. Character matters. Quit the race and find a therapist, each of you. Hillary, dovirce Bill first. Live your drama, kids, but not on my tax dollar.

Who cares? She said she would renegotiate it and if that doesn't work then she said she would end it.. We can't keep living in the past...

What is it about Ohio and Florida that makes them so easily fooled? They've got(at least officially for Florida) every election wrong in the past 8 years.

OHIO you HAVE BEEN HOODWINKED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Here is a FACT Hillary is leading by 245,884 in states that held primarys.
If it were not for the causus voting
IT would be over now and Hillary would be the winner.

Once again Hillary has proven that she cannot be trusted with virtually any claims she makes. She has lied about her role in White House and misled American's into believing she had VAST experience to qualify her as THE one to answer the red phone. Sure! Having tea parties is really a good way to prepare. And, it has been proven that she did indeed support NAFTA. It is in the White House records. ON RECORD! I can't wait to see her tax records! When will people see that the Clinton's (who I once really respected) will do or say anything to win. I cannot imagine what a fiasco it would be to have the two of them in the White House. Her entire campaign has been nothing short of a disaster already!

In this campaign HRC stated that she did do things to support her husband as President. That she did inwardly feel as though she was worried about some the content of NAFTA. It has also been noted that while NAFTA has been very good in some cases, it has not. With respect to job loss.

So, the papers are nothing new. A lot of us who read this can't see the news in this. She had made it clear, and now I guess we are to believe that since it is in print it is new?

To the question about the hillary movie..it's not. another spin.

Yes, the first lady should not know about what's going on in foreign policy.
Are you sure? Would she be able to be as involved in anything concerning these countries without knowing what's bbehind the curtain.

Ask M. Albright.

Hillary was always against NAFTA.
Her main concern was lost of jobs.
A very reliable source who had a position in the Clinton Administration and interviewed by numerous members of the media; vehemently supports the position Hillary had on the NAFTA bill - concern about lost of jobs ( as he phrased it - she was unenthusiastic) Her position as First Lady does not enable her to push this bill. Your sources are inaccurate. Her meetings with people in certain industries were to get a sense of what their position would be on NAFTA.
The only reason NAFTA bill was passed; it was a bipartisan vote and the only bill which was passed successfully on a bipartisan level during the Clinton Administration. The important word is - bipartisan.
Not passed by Hillary.
Her main concern was health care.
It's amazing, a few former members of President
Clinton Administration are now re-writing history.
Get your facts straight by researching not on a partisan stance.

Has anyone SEEN the Hillary Movie? Watch and THEN vote...scary...

IT IS NOT THE FIRST TIME MS. HILLARY WILL MAKE A BOGUS CLAIM. SHE ALWAYS DOES. SOON, AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL STOP BELIEVING HER EVEN WHEN SHE SAYS HELLO BECAUSE THAT 'HELLO' MIGHT BE A LIE.

Harley, I totally agree about NAFTA being a good thing for the US. However, the point is that Clinton is lying about it, not that she is in support of it. That's what bothers me -- it makes me doubt anything else that comes out of her mouth and does not allow me to evaluate her true positions.

I don't know about yall but the 90's were freaking awesome compared to the past 8 years. Anyone ever think that Nafta isn't to blame but the administration. Bill Clinton created 23 million jobs during his 8 years with Nafta and Bush says he created 6 million but then this month we lost 63,000 jobs. Oh and just to show you how stupid the Bush Administration is. We lost those 63,000 jobs this month but unemployment went down in the same month. They call people and poll them to get the unemployment rate and if you are "looking" for work. Then you get counted as "employed" I think the problem is a little more than Nafta. But it's simple to use that on the campaign trail for both candidates.

You have to get in touch with reality people. Connect the dots. I defended the Clintons' before the contest started and I just keep learning more and more about them and I don't like it. I don't trust her or Bill with his swinging fingers and suspicious eyes.

Jack,

YOU NEED TO SEE THIS MOVIE ABOUT SENATOR CLINTON. Could you explain this movie to me? I’m 23 and I don’t know whether or not to believe it. I guess I wasn't paying attention to things like this when they were happening. It’s all over the internet and it’s really scary. I voted for Senator Clinton but this really does scare me. Is it true or not? It’s called “Hillary, The Movie.” PLEASE let us know if any of this is REAL

But I thought you were all on the bandwagon that she is lying about having any experience because as first lady she had no role in anything?

Make up your minds people, either she IS experienced and then you can attack her on her record fair and square, OR take the stand that as first lady her role was nothing more than a yes monkey for her husband. But it can't be BOTH.

I don't think Obama opposes the entire thing either, they are both stating they want to revisit it and change some things, but even Obama did not say it is all hogwash and needs to be wiped out. He says he wants to change the things in it that is hindering jobs in America, he did not say he would wipe out the entire thing. And hindsight is always 20/20 isn't it? Now that it has run for a while and people see its faults BOTH candidates are wanting changes in it.

So in essence it makes this story a little silly! Unless its purpose is to insinuate another negative connotation towards Clinton, to take the Wright story heat off Obama.

Kind of makes Obama and his staff look a little silly too, seeing as they were demanding these "secret" documents get released, accusing her of hiding things, and they get released and low and behold, this and the Monica story is the BEST they could do? The smoking guns were not so smoking were they? Oh wait... wasn't this the kind of politics Obama did NOT want to engage in?

Laughable!!! Completely Laughable!! One is as bad as the other!! I don't like republican philosophies but this is getting to be a vote for them in protest of the double standards, and utter silliness these people are engaging in just to win. The media pumping it for all its worth, and people actually standing for it!

Yes, + China and money from China for Clinton's dirty campaing

Zoey, when NAFTA was passed into law, I don't believe any of the "players" ever invisioned a "China" player. This is where NAFTA really got stonewalled. IMHO. No one saw it coming.

Frankly, I see China in the same situation as Japan was 30 years ago. Our country revolted successfuly against "cheap" "Japanese" products thereby forcing them to compete in a "humane" way. They are now a model of both quality and integrity. U.S. consumers don't alway realize the power they truly have over "rouge" nations. We are one of the largest consumers on earth. And as such, bestwoing others the right peddle their products in our market should come with very strict guidelines. It's really very simple. If the products that large corporations present to us are not useful, enviromently safe, do not meet the most basic guidelines for safety and effectiveness, then they are not good enough to be in our market supply. Period.

Carson says the fifth meeting was the November 10, 1993 pro-NAFTA meeting for businesswomen that we reported on earlier this week, where Clinton was something of the keynote speaker. He says that was just a "drop by" -- which is how it was described in her schedule. But people who attended say it was more like she was the headliner.

And the Clinton campaign will not concede that she was advocating for NAFTA in the meeting.

"That's ludicrous," said Laura E. Jones, executive director of the United States Association of Importers of Textiles and Apparel, who was there. "There was no question that everyone who spoke including the First Lady was for NAFTA, it was a rally on behalf of NAFTA to help it get passed. It's unquestionable. And there are many people out there who were there who remember the incident who work in this industry."

Next time Hillary opens her mouth, watch for a combustible chain reaction that will start at the bottom of her pants-suit.

I own a small manufacturing company. Everything we make is made right here in the USA. We cannot compete in the market on most of the products we'd like to make because the RAW MATERIALS are more expensive than the RETAIL PRICE of Chinese finished products.

So, Hillary Clinton publicly supported NAFTA, but personally opposed it.

But wait...didn't she also publicly vote for other legislation as NY Senator that she now says she was happy to see not pass because she did not personally support it?

So, which Hillary Clinton should we go with when deciding who she is: her private words or her public actions?

I'm confused...Would the REAL Hillary Clinton please stand up?

Jake, you are so eager to force the point it is transparently pathetic. Don't you have serious reporting to do?

You distorted Gergen's words and you cited all these pro-Nafta types as proof of what happenend. Of course these people are going to say everyone was on board. An association of textile importers -- what do you think they would say?

Dogsoldier,

I think I can give you the gest of NAFTA since KathyF won't. (This is only my simplistic understanding) I'm one of the few "manufacturers" left in the country. NAFTA, (North America Free Trade Agreement) was designed to allow the free flow of trade between the countries in North America. Namely, between Canada, Mexico and the U.S. However, regulatory roadblocks were inacted in Mexico and Canada. Therefore, U.S. products encountered tremendous roadblocks in acheiving approval in order to sell in those counties. I beleive the U.S. signed this agreement in good faith, however, Mexico and Canada used it as an opportunity to sell to the U.S. (which is one of the largest consumers) while keeping U.S. products "out" of their countries. Therein lies the "Flaw". I believe that had there been an even playing field, we would have become THE strongest continent in the world.

Is that your take????

I'm really have to smile watching these democrats go after one another. ;>)

GS, You are wrong about illegal immigrants in relation to NAFTA. NAFTA caused more illegal immigrants to come here! Look it up.

DISTORTION, DISTORTION, ISN'THAT WHAT ALL THE SEN, AND REPS. DO ALL THE TIME? WHEN WILL THEY WORK FOR ALL THE PEOPLE NOT FOR THEIR OWN SELF GAIN. MAYBE WE SHOULD PAY THEM AN HOURLY WAGE, AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR THEIR OWN INSURANCE[HEALTH], AND SET TERM LIMIT. MAYBE THINGS WILL GET DONE.