Yeah, I noticed that, Tom. Also, it comes across as a little arrogant. She just figures is she complains against the flier once, it won't continue to be sent?

The telling thing here is I haven't heard anything specified about what is untruthful about them. I understand they include a Clinton quote that is supportive of NAFTA. Is she now saying she never made the statement?

Honestly, you Obama people are beyond belief. Yes, as stated on a previous ABC blog and checked out by the editors, she never said she supported NAFTA. Where do you guys get your informatio. Probably the Obama website because like your fearless leader, you do not have an original thought. You think that just because he says it, that makes it true. Boy are you gullible. Like him making the statement that he would run his election with public funds, but now that he has made so much money he is backing off of something he originally proposed??????????? Truthful? NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Okay, beachnan, if she never said she supported NAFTA, then I'll agree its not a fair flier.

Let me just google Hillary NAFTA for a second and see what I find. Be right back.

Sorry beachnan, but her previous support for NAFTA is easy to find. Here's one excerpt from a Bloomberg article:

At the 1998 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, she praised corporations for mounting ``a very effective business effort in the U.S. on behalf of Nafta.'' She added: ``It is certainly clear that we have not by any means finished the job that has begun.''

Clinton ``is committed to free trade and to the growing role of the international economy,'' said Steven Rattner, a Clinton fundraiser and co-founder of Quadrangle Group LLC, a New York buyout firm. ``She would absolutely do the right thing as president.''

I can no longer stand the word "personal" in connection to the calculating Hillary. This woman really makes me feel sick, and I'm a woman myself.

"This is personal to me...."

I'm afraid this 60 years old "girl" has been watching too many soap operas in her life. They have infected her use of language and blurred her sense of realism.

People that are voting for Obama, are just on the stage of enchantment by him. They will regret their vote.
He takes powerful words from other liders. What an original leader he is!!! Words but not substance, sound empty for my ears.
Countries that went from a radical right to a radical liberal or left are in turmoil,just look southamerican countries; but, the countries that opted for a moderate candidate are doig very well, example: Argentina, Chile, Brazil..
I don't understand the psychology of the Obama people. Why in the hell, they think he has the capacity to run a country like this?, Yes he has the audacity, but is he reliable and capable?
His campaign is run talking ONLY on big crowded places, where nobody is going to have the opportunity to ask direct and specific question... Why? because he doesn't have answers
About NAFTA, I don't understand what is wrong with that. Don't forget that because the opening of globalization, we have computers, high tech technology and other benefits. Yes, some manufacturer's are closing, but others are opening. The dynamics of the economy are just like that.
If we are suffering, is because BUsch, with 8 years, did not improve the education, the transition of employees, to educated workers to re-sharper their skills. Other experimented workers went to another countries as a managers and trainers.
So, a global economy is more beneficial than a bad thing.
Obama is accusing Clinton about NAFTA, Ok, but what is he going to do for workers?... That is the question that their supporters and big Unions should ask him, not just give their support.

Maria: "I don't understand the psychology of the Obama people. Why in the hell, they think he has the capacity to run a country like this?"

For starters, Maria, Obama supporters understand the president doesn't run the country. He or she doesn't even run the government.

The president runs the executive branch of the government - and even that line is arguable, because of the bureaucratic influences and semi-autonomous agencies that also play a role.

I am offended by her record. If Hilliary can claim to have "exectutive experience" as first lady, does that mean Eleanor Roosevelt was prepared to lead the country after the death of FDR??? I think NOT.

Her ranting and raving the other day about flyers is the exact reason I will never vote for her. Is that how she will handle opposition leaders from other countries by yelling and screaming? Campaigns get rough and she sure can dish it out but she sure can't take it.

First of all, NAFTA is a Democrat baby...it was launched in 1994, without any media inquiry, without any American REALLY knowing what it was really about...in short, NO public debate.
Republicans, if I can remind you, were VEHEMENTLY opposed to it, but Democrats in true neo-liberal fashion were all for it -- Clinton passed it!

Okay what's so funny about this, is that the fliers actually cited an incorrect quote which was actually retracted by the newspaper. And futhermore when Obama was asked if he would get rid of NAFTA? He said "no"! Okay, this guy is just a politician nothing more and nothing less!

Granmafromwisc, negative "attacks" are not bad, it's the ones that are made up in stump speeches, lies that are spread on paper while espousing a desire to change politics; that's bad. BO has a nerve deceiving people with a false message while practicing Karl Rove politics..The only change he is making, is bringing it into the Democratic Primary.

SPaul, supporting a strong global economy does not mean one supports the loss of American jobs. Hillary has already said NAFTA isn't working, so what's with beating the dead horse? Trying to get it up so BO can keep riding on the thin celebrity status that is currently slipping, now that a lot of people are realizing what an unproven record he really holds while mimicing everyone elses speeches, espousing a philosophy of change in politics while he practices the worst of politics. It's all about him and he'll do anything to win, it's obvious to more people now. top erasing my posts just because they're pro Hillary!

Paul, supporting a strong global economy does not mean one supports the loss of American jobs. Hillary has already said NAFTA isn't working, so what's with beating the dead horse? Trying to get it up so BO can keep riding on the thin celebrity status that is currently slipping, now that a lot of people are realizing what an unproven record he really holds while mimicing everyone elses speeches, espousing a philosophy of change in politics while he practices the worst of politics. It's all about him and he'll do anything to win, it's obvious to more people now.

Irma - like they say, its not the break-in that gets you; its the cover-up... and I suppose the tapes, too.

Hillary is now trying to argue she never was in favor of NAFTA. That certainly seems to be less than truthful.

If she acknowledges she was for it, and now has a revised position based on her recognition of unintended results, she would be much more forgiveable on this point. But she seems incapable of making such a point, and would rather try to recreate history.

It is pathetic that Obama people are tuning against NAFTA, even all other trade agreements. This is definitely not the politics of the future, itwas the politics of the past, oldstyled!

Why didn't he go against NAFTA while in California or NY where NAFTA and in general trade have brought so many benefits to Americans?

WHy don't you do a math counting how many export jobs (many in services sectors) that have been created by trade?

eRIC - I guess Hillary must now be an Obama person, too, because she certainly seems to have turned against NAFTA. In fact, she now claims she was always against it.

Paul, she's not arguing she was never in favor. She is arguing that she never thought it was the best thing. They thought there might be the possiblity of it helping Mexico's economy while solving some of the huge citizen exodus that we have to deal with from Mexico. I remember when the thing was being signed. We gave it a shot, it's not ideal and needs to be tweeked. That's it. Nothing sinister, no lies just a thing that only worked as we hoped, to a degree and other consequences need to be dealt with as Hillary plans.

Paul: No trade agreement is perfect for any single country, it is compromise.

Again it is pathetic to argue who did it wrong. After all, a trade agreement needs to be pased by bth houses and signed into law by the president.

Hillary may have the guts to fight to change it, but it is unlikely to succeed.

But I just feel it is pathetic to blame whoever did work to move forward, and only did it in a way to gain political advantages in OH.

So this is old-fashioned politics, isn't it!, What's new about this type of politics?

On the other hand, McCain said something like ... those jobs won't come back... but help to train for better jobs.... seems sincere to me...

So...

The fact that the Clinton campaign "obtained" a delegate list and cold-calls Obama delegates to try to change their minds isn't a problem for you?

The fact that from Bill to Ed Rendell, race-baiting is the norm for Clinton supporters.

The fact that every state that Clinton has lost is suddenly irrelevant in her eyes isn't a problem for any of you either?

Look, stop drinking the damned kool-aid and realize HRC is up to her eyeballs in Rove-style, old-style dirty politics. You are worried about the wording in a couple flyers and ignoring the obvious: that your candidate has done everything possible to insult, belittle, and marginalize anyone not with her in this campaign.

So when does she plan to start mending these fences if she wins the nomination? Late October? It is already too damned late for me. If she takes the nomination, I'll be sitting this out.

I don't vote GOP because I won't vote for racists. Same rule applies if the Dem candidate drinks from the same well.

She has already said she doesn't want my vote anyways.