blueollie

Hillary Clinton’s Orchestrated Temper Tantrum

Barack Obama had said that this is “silly season” in politics and Hillary Clinton did her best to demonstrate this:

Interesting. Here are just a few thoughts.

1. These mailers aren’t new; they were sent out many days, if not weeks ago. Proof: check out my fact check sources below. Yes, these were long out prior to the last debate from Austin, Texas.

The reason I bring this up is because she did say one thing that was true: one of the NAFTA attack sources was based on an accurate quote of a newspaper article that turned out to be mistaken.

Ohio blogger Jeff Coryell has posted images of a flier he received in the mail from Barack Obama slamming Hillary Clinton over NAFTA, a direct appeal to Democratic voters who blame globalization for the state’s economic woes. But is the mailer a fair shot or a cheap shot?

The flier says, “Hillary Clinton believed NAFTA was ‘a boon’ to our economy.” But as The Politico’s Ben Smith and others have noted, Clinton never used the word “boon” to describe the trade deal. The word comes from a paraphrase of her position in a 2006 Newsday piece laying out policy differences between Clinton and her 2006 Senate challenger, Jonathan Tasini.

Here’s all the Newsday piece says:

FREE TRADE

JONATHAN TASINI: Tasini favors scrapping the Bill Clinton-backed North American Free Trade Agreement, saying it drives down domestic wages.

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: Clinton thinks NAFTA has been a boon to the economy, but voted against the Central American-Dominican Republic Free Trade Agreement, saying it would drive jobs offshore.

So while Clinton may well have expressed support for NAFTA, the word “boon” is not hers, at least not in this context. The Obama campaign is clearly trying to suggest otherwise to Ohio voters. See the Obama campaign’s take on the issue here, and the Clinton campaign’s take here.

The Obama health care mailer was vetted by factcheck.org on February 4!!!!!

2. The mailers are substantially accurate. Yes, one can argue that Obama is too pro-free trade, but to argue that Hillary Clinton was not pro NAFTA is patently absurd. I’ll provide references at the end; the only legitimate beef is over the use of the word “boon” which she might not have used.

Geeze, remember this (video from the 1992 debate)

As far as the health care mailer, fact check points out that O touts his own plan while not pointing out the corresponding virtues in HRC’s. Note: this link provides a pdf file of the mailer. But again, the fact that her plan has mandates and that, in mandated plans, some people end up getting penalized and being left without insurance is an indisputable fact.

Who’s correct? It’s hard to know. So far, the Massachusetts experiment suggests Mr. Obama. Massachusetts is the only state to require that every resident purchase health insurance. The penalty for failing to do so could reach $4,000 next year, but the state has already exempted almost 20% of its current uninsured from the requirement. Massachusetts is concerned they can’t afford a policy, even with subsidies similar to those in all the Democratic plans. So far, about 50% of Massachusetts’s uninsured have complied with the mandate.

That is from Robert Reich, Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Labor!

So, what was her temper tantrum all about? My guess is that this is all about fundraising. It is no secret that the Clinton campaign didn’t use its money wisely and that people are reluctant to support a moribund campaign. So I think this is a “let’s show ‘em that there is still some fight left in her” show.

But I have a few more points to make:

Do you remember Obama blowing up over this:

Uh, no. :) What about Obama being called a Reagan lover or a Muslim? How did he react?

Very different reaction, indeed. :)

Now if someone wants to talk about how one runs their campaign, maybe she should look a bit more at her own?

Yes, Hillary, pay your small vendors. Ones who trusted that their check would be there on time, ones who run small businesses with small staffing and must pay them, ones who are wondering if you will ever pay!!!

Yes, Hillary, instead of screaming about, “Shame on you, Barack Obama. It is time you ran a campaign consistent with your messages in public. That’s not what I expect from you. Meet me in Ohio — let’s have a debate about your tactics.”

Why not, shame on you for bailing and not paying for services, Hillary? Yes, we will see you in Ohio, with your new Mark Penn attitude.

* icebergslim’s diary :: ::
*

It was just $2,492.63, a pittance, really, alongside million-dollar television buys and direct mail drops.

But with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s bid for the Democratic presidential nomination enduring a rough patch, Peter Semetis, the owner of a deli and catering business in Lower Manhattan, had been following the news and growing increasingly worried that he was not going to be paid for the assorted breakfast trays, coffee, tea and orange juice he had provided the campaign for an event in mid-December.

“I’m afraid of her dropping out of the campaign and me becoming a casualty,” Mr. Semetis said.

Yes, I would be concerned, TOO. She can drop out, walk away and straight up STIFF Mr. Semetis. And if it is happening to him, do you think he is the only one?

By the way, here is more documentation, with sources. This is from the Obama campaign:

Everything in those mailers is completely accurate, unlike the discredited attacks from Hillary Clinton’s negative campaign that have been rejected in South Carolina, Wisconsin, and across America. We look forward to having a debate this Tuesday on the facts, and the facts are that Senator Clinton was a supporter of NAFTA and the China permanent trade treaties until this campaign began. And she herself has said that under the Clinton health care plan, she would consider “going after the wages” of Americans who don’t purchase health insurance, whether they can afford it or not,” said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.

HILLARY CLINTON ON ENFORCING HER MANDATE: “And the reason why I think there are a number of mechanisms, going after people’s wages, automatic enrollment, when you are at the place of employment, you will be automatically enrolled, whatever the mechanism is.” [ABC’s This Week, 2/3/08]

CLINTON’S CAMPAIGN ON COMPARING A DEMOCRAT TO BUSH: “If you want to talk about tactical political maneuvering, it’s about one Democrat comparing another Democrat to George Bush. That’s the worst kind of tactical political maneuvering.” Clinton Spokesman Howard Wolfson [AP, 12/20/07]

CLINTON ON TRADE WITH CHINA:
Hillary Clinton Claimed China’s Entry Into The World Trade Organization Would Be Good For American Workers Despite The Already Massive Trade Deficit With China. “I know many people, here in Western New York in particularly and Erie Country, are concerned about this vote, and I share the concerns that many of my supporters in organized labor have expressed to me, because I do think we have to make sure that we improve labor rights, we improve environmental standards in our bilateral and our multilateral trade agreements. But on balance, I’ve looked at this, I’ve studied it, I think it is in the interests of America and American workers that we provide the option for China to go into the WTO.” [CNN, 4/26/2000]
Hillary Clinton Supported Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) For China, Claimed It Would Create Leverage. “Senate candidate Hillary Clinton said Thursday she supported permanent normal trade relations for China, but slammed Beijing’s restrictive birthrate policies.” [AFP, 5/25/00]

SOME FACTS ON CLINTON’S SUPPORT FOR NAFTA:
2006/2008: Newsday Reviewed Clinton’s Statements, Concluded She Supported NAFTA. According to a Newsday issues rundown, “Clinton thinks NAFTA has been a boon to the economy.” Newsday wrote in 2008, the word “boon” was their “characterization of how we best understood her position on NAFTA, based on a review of past stories and her public statements.” [New York Newsday, 9/11/06; Newsday blog, 2/15/08]

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 [NAFTA and health care]. I argued that we could and that postponing health care would further weaken its chances.” [Living History, 182]

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.” [Living History, p.231]

Clinton Said “I Think Everybody Is In Favor Of Free And Fair Trade. I Think NAFTA Is Proving Its Worth.” A questioner pointed out that UNITE opposes the North American Free Trade Agreement, backed by the Clinton administration, on grounds it sends American jobs to Mexico. In March 1996, three years after President Clinton signed NAFTA into law, Hillary Clinton said, “I think everybody is in favor of free and fair trade. I think NAFTA is proving its worth,” she said, adding that if American workers can compete fairly, they can match any competition. “That’s what a free and fair trade agreement like NAFTA is all about,” she said. [AP, 3/6/96]

Clinton “Vowed That Her Husband Would Continue To Support Economic Growth In South Texas Through Initiatives Such As The North American Free Trade Agreement.” AP wrote, “Mrs. Clinton vowed that her husband would continue to support economic growth in South Texas through initiatives such as the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Rio Grande Valley empowerment zone, which allows tax breaks to businesses that relocate to the border.” [AP, 11/2/96]

Hillary Clinton “Touted” President Clinton’s Support for NAFTA, Saying it Would Reap Widespread Benefit. On a trip to Brownsville, Texas, Clinton “touted the president’s support for the North American Free Trade Agreement, saying it would reap widespread benefits in the region.” [United Press International, 11/1/96]

COMMENTATORS AGREE CLINTON HAS SUPPORTED NAFTA AND FREE TRADE
Sirota: “What A Total Joke” That Clinton Camp Tries to Argue She Did Not Support NAFTA, “Clinton Has Made Statements Unequivocally Trumpeting NAFTA.” In response to Barack Obama’s attack on NAFTA, the Hillary Clinton campaign has gone into meltdown mode…The Huffington Post has followed along with a laugh-out-loud piece in which the chief architects of NAFTA (many who are now wealthy corporate lawyers and lobbyists) are now saying, no, no, Hillary Clinton was really opposed to it. These are the same people, of course, who are looking for jobs in the Hillary Clinton White House. What a total joke, really. This campaign clearly thinks we are all just a bunch of fools. Hillary Clinton has made statements unequivocally trumpeting NAFTA as the greatest thing since sliced bread.” [David Sirota, 2/14/08]

Bloomberg: Clinton “Praised” NAFTA, Friends Said She Was “A Free-Trader at Heart.” Bloomberg News reported, “Clinton promoted her husband’s trade agenda for years, and friends say that she’s a free-trader at heart. ‘The simple fact is, nations with free-market systems do better,” she said in a 1997 speech to the Corporate Council on Africa. ‘Look around the globe: Those nations which have lowered trade barriers are prospering more than those that have not.’ Praise for Nafta 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.’ There was little evidence of a protectionist tilt to Clinton’s trade views during either her 2000 campaign or first years in the Senate. She stressed issues such as homeland security and children’s health care, and wasn’t a major voice in trade-policy debates. As she began to gear up for a White House run, Clinton became less of a free-trade booster and more skeptical about the payoff of globalization.” [Bloomberg News, 3/30/07]

Ø Clinton’s NAFTA Rhetoric Is Not Driven By Policy. Bloomberg News reported, “Clinton’s positioning on trade reflects the changing nature of the debate in the U.S., which increasingly focuses on concerns over outsourcing and the shift of jobs to other nations such as China and India rather than on the benefits of tariff reductions. It also — as with Republicans grappling over illegal immigration — demonstrates the extent to which grassroots sentiment can alter candidates’ platforms. A Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll conducted in January found 39 percent of Democrats believe free trade hurts the economy; only 18 percent say it is a benefit. Both parties agree that a backlash on trade helped Democrats in the 2006 elections. West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller, a Democrat, said U.S. workers have been ‘so decimated’ by unfettered competition that ‘I think the American people understand they will be hit by it.’ Clinton promoted her husband’s trade agenda for years, and friends say that she’s a free-trader at heart.” [Bloomberg News, 3/30/07]

SF Chronicle: “Add to this Democratic front-runner Sen. Hillary Clinton’s coolness to the idea. Her husband moved earth and sky to win passage of the NAFTA trade pact with Mexico and Canada in 1993. Now she favors periodic reviews to continue such deals, a “timeout” on new ones, and more federal officials to oversee complaints. It’s clearly a flip-flop favor to unions and industry sectors hit by layoffs and cheap imports and bid to outflank her rival, Sen. Barack Obama, who is more favorable to free trade.” [San Francisco Chronicle, 10/12/07]

BILL CLINTON CONTINUES TO ARGUE FOR NAFTA
JANUARY 2008: Bill Clinton Says “A Lot Of People Think NAFTA’s A Bigger Problem Than it Is.” During an event in Las Vegas, Clinton said “She [Hillary Clinton] believes that NAFTA, she believes that all our trade agreements should be reviewed in the first 90 to 120 days of taking office. She would have a total moratorium on all new trade deals until we conducted a review. And one of the things that we have to examine is the point I made earlier. That is, is the trade agreement basically fair, but we just don’t enforce it. A lot of people think that NAFTA’s a bigger problem than it is. Our problem with Mexico, our trade deficit with Mexico is mostly because we buy oil from them.” [Bill Clinton, 1/18/08]

February 23, 2008 - Posted by blueollie | hillary clinton, obama, politics/social | | 3 Comments

3 Comments »

  1. [...] Clinton’s Orchestrated Temper Tantrum February 23rd, 2008 Jill Miller Zimon wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptSirota: “What A Total Joke” That [...]

    Pingback by Presidential election 2008 |Republicans Vs. Democrats » Hillary Clinton’s Orchestrated Temper Tantrum | February 23, 2008 | Reply

  2. Ollie

    Doesn’t it pain you at all to see the democratic nominees running away from free trade? Trade has arguably done more than anything else to raise the living standards of millions of desperately poor people worldwide, and one both Clinton and Obama are running as hard as they can away from it. I find this disheartening.

    X

    Comment by Dr. Andy | February 24, 2008 | Reply

  3. Actually, I have mixed feelings. Truth be told, O’s and HRC’s actual voting records on trade isn’t that different.

    Personally, I am a bit less of a free trader than you are; to me there is a place for things like the Patriot Employer Act to encourage businesses to hire American workers.

    Also, I think we should play a role in strengthening the economy of places like Mexico; if we can do that, they have more jobs for their citizens (thus helping the illegal immigration issue) and a bigger market for our goods.

    Yes we need trade, and yes, I am probably somewhere midway between Obama and Zakaria on this issue.

    But the trade issue itself isn’t the point of this post: it is HRC’s theatrics.

    Comment by blueollie | February 24, 2008 | Reply


Leave a comment