Memo To Progressives: Hillary Clinton Is Lying To You - Salon

[WillyT]

Memo to progressives: Hillary Clinton is lying to you
All politicians flip-flop. But Clinton's TPP opposition marks one of the more brazen U-turns in recent history
Jack Mirkinson - Salon
Thursday, Oct 8, 2015 10:00 AM PDT


(Credit: Reuters/Scott Morgan

<snip>

Nothing says “election season” quite like politicians dumping their long-held policy stances overboard in a desperate gambit to gain votes, but you have to hand it to Hillary Clinton. With her recently-announced opposition to the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, she’s making one of the more brazen flip-flops in recent political memory.

What’s so amazing about Clinton’s newfound opposition to the highly controversial deal is the jaw-dropping transparency of the move. It’s such an open ploy to counter both the rise of staunch TPP critic Bernie Sanders and the possible entry of TPP supporter Joe Biden that it’s almost refreshing in its shamelessness.

Let’s be clear here: Hillary Clinton is lying when she says she’s opposed to the Trans-Pacific Partnership. There is absolutely nothing in either her political background or her political history to suggest that she has any real substantive problems with the deal. After all, she comes from the generation of Democratic politicians—the most prominent member of which was a certain other Clinton—who made their embrace of free trade deals like NAFTA one of the centerpieces of their efforts to yank the Democratic Party rightward. As First Lady, Hillary Clinton enthusiastically backed NAFTA. As Secretary of State, she pushed for trade deals with Colombia and South Korea and called the TPP the “gold standard” for such accords. (That would be the very same TPP that she’s now hedging on.)

The only times when Clinton has expressed any kind of ambivalence on free trade have come around the periods when she is running for office and needs to get votes from all those Democrats who have gotten the raw end of previous deals. This exhaustive roundup on NPR provides a damning portrait of Clinton’s slipperiness on the issue:

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/04/21/401123124/a-timeline-of-hillary-clintons-evolution-on-trade

When she was running for Senate, she suddenly decided that NAFTA was pretty flawed. When she was gearing up to run for president the first time, she voted against the Central America Free Trade Agreement, which had garnered significant opposition within the Democratic base. She also opposed those deals with Colombia and South Korea that she would magically come around on as soon as she joined the Obama administration. And now, with an unexpectedly robust challenge from Sanders on her left, she’s opposing the TPP.

<snip>

More: http://www.salon.com/2015/10/08/memo_to_progressives_hillary_clinton_is_lying_to_you/

[Armstead]

1. Ouch

[Fawke Em]

106. The truth hurts.

[lewebley3]

199. Salon is lying about Hillary: Hillary made room for Obama's out of respect for Obama

[Zorra]

2. Some of us can tell when people are lying before they even say a word. nt

[Scuba]

3. Hillary's not trustworthy? Who knew?

Oh, lots of people ....


http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/08/27/clinton-hits-lows-on-favorability-trustworthiness-in-poll/

[passiveporcupine]

51. Most of us who are not Hillary fans

have been saying this all along. This is no surprise, but I'm glad someone besides us is finally talking about it. And this isn't the only issue she is suddenly flaunting, but will suddenly fall silent when the elections are over.

The sad part is, those of us who see this so clearly about Hillary, are the same ones who saw so clearly through the lies that led to the Iraq war, and it's just so hard to understand how others cannot (or will not) see this too.

[Unknown Beatle]

88. I've often thought about that also.

She's on video flip-flopping on her opinions but people will refuse to see or are to strongly aligned with her positions, even though they are constantly changing, to even see the hypocrisy. It's very hard to understand.

[LuvNewcastle]

194. Oh, they see it. They just don't give a shit.

[lewebley3]

201. You have brought the coolaid from the GOP Benguzi committee!

[Scuba]

208. Hardly ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=586914

[lewebley3]

210. Just say no! to Sanders: Say yes to a real Dem Hillary!

[Scuba]

212. Pro-war, pro-Wall Street, pro-fracking, pro-Keystone XL, pro-H1B Visas, pro-TPP.That's a "real Dem"?

Oh wait, she "evolved" on a couple of those shortly after polls showed they are very unpopular. Maybe your definition of a "real Dem" is one without principles???

[lewebley3]

223. Hillary pro Dem, not socialism

[Scuba]

225. Socialism!!!!!!!!!! Yikes!!!!!!!

[truedelphi]

227. I know. Yikes is one good way to put it. n/t

[lewebley3]

204. Hillary is very trust worthy, her career has been very consistent

The Clinton's raised taxes on the rich, and rebuilt the middle
class in the 90's. We known what a Clinton administrations looks like, it will
be fantastic. I was able to build the only savings I have during the
Clinton's time. Bernie, sat in congress doing nothing but talking all
those years. He sat back an let other Dem's carry his water, he
didn't work for the party. I want a real Dem rep for the Dem party not:
a Johnny come lately.

Hillary and Bill actually got things done, and risk there lives on the line
for this country.

Go Hillary, a real Dem leader!

[blackspade]

213. Too funny.

"Lives on the line", huh?

I better get out the and for this one....

[azmom]

4. It is a total shameless move. No integrity

Whatsoever. The difference between her and Bernie could not be clearer.

[99Forever]

5. Of course she is.

It IS what she IS.

And that doesn't depend on what the meaning of is, is.

[hifiguy]

48. As tulare tom put it so well,

she's Richard Nixon in a pantsuit. She will say absolutely ANYTHING to advance herself, just like Nixon did. She's been running for the office for 20+ years, even longer than Nixon did. The unbridled ambition, ruthlessness, and truthlessness of the Clintons is a matter of historical record.

The sense of entitlement, overweening arrogance, paranoia and aforementioned willingness to doubletalk even the simplest questions reek of Nixon.

We've been down this disastrous road before. Why do it again?

No one who wants the presidency that badly should ever be allowed in the WH as anything but a guest, and even then, as sparingly as possible.

[marym625]

203. + a bazillion

[Vincardog]

58. Her plan is to have Obama get it shoved down our throats and then oppose it all the way to the WH

[hifiguy]

85. Thread winner.

[Docreed2003]

90. Spot on analysis

[SusanaMontana41]

97. I'd like to know what Salon means by "progressives."

Is this Salon's equivalent of Bush 41's smearing of "liberal"?

Just askin'.

[kenfrequed]

6. Not terribly surprising

I simply don't believe that she is suddenly and magically against the TPP when we have been talking about it for almost a year. Now, less than a week prior to the debate and just before a lot of the unions start endorsing, she suddenly decides she is against it.

She is lying.

[djean111]

7. Oh, we know that. We know that. Rest assured, we know that. n/t

[Matariki]

8. Let's face it

most politicians say what it takes to get elected, then do whatever serves the moneyed class once elected.

And in spite of this everyone here, myself included, will support Clinton when she's the Democratic candidate.

[tecelote]

11. if

[Fawke Em]

13. I don't have to.

I live in a reliably red state. It doesn't matter who I vote for, my state will not return anything but 11 electoral college votes to the Republican.

If Hillary is the nominee, I will vote my conscious: for someone to her left.

I hope to vote for Bernie (even if it still won't matter in my state).

[roguevalley]

16. the voting is over and the winners declared before we close up shop in my state

[Fawke Em]

20. You must be out west somewhere.

I'm in the east, but still in a solidly red state, sadly.

We really don't have much of a Democratic Party outside of the major cities. Ironically, all four of our major cities are run by Democrats. It's just that the cities are outvoted by the rural areas.

Edited to add: And the cities are just barely Democratic - 51 to 55 percent, so you have the other 40-something percent in the cities siding with the rural voters, which turns the state very red.

[roguevalley]

77. I hear you. I'm in Alaska. We're so unimportant that they don't have us on

most USA maps. Or, we're somewhere south of California.

[Fawke Em]

109. And some people, particularly Texans, don't recognize

you are the largest state.

[roguevalley]

118. isn't that great? We are 2.5 times bigger. :D:D:D

[Fawke Em]

119. Heck. I thought you were even bigger than that!

But, at least I know what the largest state is.

[roguevalley]

121. if it helps, from end to end, we stretch from New York to California in total length. :D:D:D

[marym625]

205. I love that Alaska is

The most western, eastern and northern state. My favorite little piece of geographical trivia about the USA

[Javaman]

25. right there with you. I'm in Texas.

I know my vote won't mean a fart in the wind chance of mattering, but I'm still voting for Bernie.

[hifiguy]

49. Same here, except I live in a state that is always sky blue

in presidential elections.

[sabrina 1]

19. You can only speak for yourself on that. I will be focusing on Congress

where we need an overwhelming number of non Corporate members because that is where the real power of the people lies.

Should a pro TPP candidate win the election, the power they will have to negotiate on our behalf will STOPPED by a Congress not made up Third Way Dems and Koch Bros Repubs.

And if Bernie should win, it will help HIM to curtail the TPP proponents, and work towards ending it and replacing it with Trade Policies that benefit the American People, not the Corps.

But no, I will no longer be doing any nose holding for people who lie to me during elections. And you can believe, those days are over for millions of Americans.

See the polls on the 'popularity' of our Reps in general.

So the way to avoid any need to hold noses, I intend to make sure Bernie Sanders wins the nomination, then on to the GE where he will wipe the floor with any one of the GOP's Koch Bros owned candidates.

Iow, you are wrong to think that 'everyone' here will repeat what has failed so badly in the past, and that message needs to be sent to the Dem Party leadership in case they think that if they work to destroy the candidate the people want, we will 'hold our noses' and vote for the Third Way, they could not be more wrong.

[Fawke Em]

23. I wish I had that choice, too.

Chances are, if a Democrat runs, it will somebody no one has heard of. We really don't have a very deep Democratic bench in our state.

Hell, half the time, we don't even have someone on the bench.

[MuseRider]

35. Sounds exactly like my state

Kansas. Democrats? Never heard of them, well almost that bad. If they are there they are very very right leaning or cowardly.

[Fawke Em]

110. I'm in Tennessee.

Was just invited to our Jackson Day Dinner.

Guess who the speaker is?

Debbie Wasserman Shultz.

Glad I won't be attending.

Ugh.

[MuseRider]

138. Ugh is right.

Wow. Dinner with Debbie. No thanks.

[marym625]

206. Debbie Does Dinner ;)

[blackspade]

214. Well, who else would you expect on 'Jackson Day?'

A day celebrating a genocidal anti-Constitutionalist.

No surprise DWS is showing up to that one. Will she be campaigning for the rethugs in TN?

[Pakid]

196. I don't think in the part of PA where I love the Democratic party even has a bench

Year after year no one even runs again the idiot the is my congress critter.

[restorefreedom]

38. speak for yourself, please

i will be voting my conscience in the ge. that is not with a lying, corporate war hawk.

besides, no worries....bernie will be the nominee

[Matariki]

69. I hope you are right.

about Sanders. I really do. I've supported Clinton in the past and I will in the GE if she's the candidate, but in the meantime I'm donating and volunteering for Bernie.

[restorefreedom]

70. i truly believe...

the momentum is there...the tides are turning big time in this country.

i believe this is bernie's time

politics as usual is over

change is a'coming.....

[Matariki]

72. Sadly I've become cynical

and expect sneaky tricks or worse, compromised voting machines

Again, I really really hope you are correct. I'd love to shed this cynicism.

[restorefreedom]

75. i am not uncynical

especially in light of hillary's shapeshifting. i just think there are sooooooooo many fed up people, we will have the numbers. like last time, when the Republicans pulled out all the stops, closing polling places early making the lines really long in districts with high minority populations, they did everything they could to try to block to vote. And it didn't work. And I don't think it'll work this time either

i'm not going to play Mary sunshine because you have a lot of good reasons to be cynical, and I have that tendency too. But I do think that this is Bernie's time, it's the peoples time and they've had enough.

[lewebley3]

202. No, American don't want the truth, they want Tumps lies

[ish of the hammer]

87. nope

[pangaia]

103. IF IF she wins.

And I will NOT vote for her. never in a million years.
fortunately, I don't have to. I live in NY.

[Motown_Johnny]

154. Voting against her opponent and supporting her are two different things.

If she is the nominee I will vote against whatever (R) is running against her. Do not mistake that for support. It isn't.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

226. I'm not voting Clinton.

I'm dead serious about this election. I've been told to hold my powder for election after election. I'm not doing that anymore.

[BainsBane]

9. She twice voted against CAFTA

She herself opposed NAFTA but did speak out for it on her husband's behalf.

Her earlier statements as SoS were about a hypothetical trade deal, not TPP as currently constituted. She is not opposed to any and all trade deals, so if that is your position you won't like her, but it is simply false to say she was for this particular deal with the terms were not known.

The idea that this is a flip flop depends on seeing any support of any trade deal as identical to support for this trade deal. I have a question for those who oppose all trade treaties. Does that mean you think international trade should be completely unregulated? What is the alternative you propose?

[Luminous Animal]

17. According to her own records, her stated opposition to NAFTA is a lie.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillarys-nafta-lie/

What is the proper word for the claim by Hillary Clinton and the more factually disinclined supporters of her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination - made in speeches, briefings and interviews (including one by this reporter with the candidate) - that she has always been a critic of the North American Free Trade Agreement?

Now that we know from the 11,000 pages of Clinton White House documents released this week that former First Lady was an ardent advocate for NAFTA; now that we know she held at least five meetings to strategize about how to win congressional approval of the deal; now that we know she was in the thick of the manuevering to block the efforts of labor, farm, environmental and human rights groups to get a better agreement. Now that we know all of this, how should we assess the claim that Hillary's heart has always beaten to a fair-trade rhythm?

Now that we know from official records of her time as First Lady that Clinton was the featured speaker at a closed-door session where 120 women opinion leaders were hectored to pressure their congressional representatives to approve NAFTA; now that we know from ABC News reporting on the session that "her remarks were totally pro-NAFTA" and that "there was no equivocation for her support for NAFTA at the time;" now that we have these details confirmed, what should we make of Clinton's campaign claim that she was never comfortable with the militant free-trade agenda that has cost the United States hundreds of thousands of union jobs, that has idled entire industries, that has saddled this country with record trade deficits, undermined the security of working families in the US and abroad, and has forced Mexican farmers off their land into an economic refugee status that ultimately forces them to cross the Rio Grande River in search of work?

[BainsBane]

41. This is where I read of her opposition to it

Voting Record

Though Bill supported it, Hillary opposed NAFTA. (Oct 2007)
Voted against CAFTA despite Bill Clinton’s pushing NAFTA. (Oct 2005)
Voted YES on free trade agreement with Oman. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade. (Jul 2005)
Voted YES on establishing free trade between US & Singapore. (Jul 2003)
Voted YES on establishing free trade between the US and Chile. (Jul 2003)
Voted NO on extending free trade to Andean nations. (May 2002)
Voted YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam. (Oct 2001)
Voted YES on removing common goods from national security export rules. (Sep 2001)
Build a rule-based global trading system. (Aug 2000)
Rated 17% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record. (Dec 2002)
Extend trade restrictions on Burma to promote democracy. (Jun 2007)

http://www.ontheissues.org/Hillary_Clinton.htm#Free_Trade

I grow increasingly tired of the way some here like to use the term lie. We have two secondary accounts, neither of which are Clinton's own records. If you don't like a statement, it's a lie, regardless of whether it actually is. It is clear to me that many neither know nor care what the word lie means. Moreover, that excerpt does not in fact contradict the statement in the source I posted. It shows she advocated for NAFTA, not that any suggestion she herself initially opposed it was a purposeful attempt to deceive--which is in fact what a lie is. There are different accounts, and naturally you will chose the one that feeds into the notion of Clinton as the source of all evil on planet earth. If her position on NAFTA was a central issue for me, I would look into the issue myself and consult sources in their full rather than excerpts of news articles posted by people claiming they are Clinton's own records. However, given that this is 2015 and not 1992, I have more pressing concerns, such as the gun fire that plagues my community, damages my property and threatens my life.

[Luminous Animal]

79. Perhaps you should ask your co-Hillary supporter, journalist Steve Leser about Hillary's lies.

In 2008, he reported this:

Hillary Clinton's Released White House Records show she Lied about Opposing NAFTA

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_steven_l_080320_hillary_clinton_s_re.htm

In fact, the documents released today show a meeting that Hillary chaired at the White House on November 10, 1993 where she promoted the passage of NAFTA to 120 people. Reports are coming out in every news agency pointing out the contradictions between her stated positions since announcing her bid for the Presidency and everything before that.

One of the things you would expect of someone who really has good experience and judgment is that they can articulate a basic set of principles and positions on issues that they can run on and defend and that stay relatively static. I'm not saying you have to stick to them in the face of overwhelming evidence that one of your positions has been proven to be wrong, like George W. Bush does, even someone who has good experience and judgment occasionally changes their mind. That is not what we have with Hillary. Hillary gives a different opinion on the same subjects every couple of weeks depending on her audience and what she thinks it will net her. As evidence of this is now coming out and is going to be presented to the American people in the starkest terms, how can one be expected to trust her to do anything that she says she is going to do? How can one really know what she believes or intends to do about anything? The only things Hillary's experience seems to be good for is perfecting how to talk out of both sides of her mouth, engaging in the politics of personal destruction and other aspects of her ruthless pursuit of power that remind one of what a Karl Rove might do. That kind of person ought not to be the Democratic nominee.

[cherokeeprogressive]

120. This should be posted in an OP of its own, along with someone ELSE'S takedowns of Hillary...

Wow. This was a great find.

[NealK]

127. Another one who made a 180 about her.

[A Simple Game]

140. One of my proudest moments was when I got banned from the Hillary group for pointing out some

of their most vocal supporters were opposed to her back in '08. One of the hosts said, yes we know that now delete your post or I will ban you. I am banned from the Hillary group for telling the truth in a respectful way and having the host that banned me agree with me. Go figure.

[NealK]

143. Wow, that's so weird.

They really are kind of... special. And it's even worse at their echo-chamber hateful site.

[A Simple Game]

148. No it makes sense, evolving seems to be their norm, at least for their leader. n/t

[nyabingi]

198. I just got banned from the Hillary group too

even though I didn't know I was ever a part of it and would never join such a group.

Hillary can't defend her tendency to lie all the time and that Hillary Fan Club can't defend her either, so they just stick their fingers in their ears and pretend not to hear the criticism.

One even suggested I should be banned from this site because I said if Hillary became the nominee I wouldn't vote for her.

[hifiguy]

215. As I noted above, she has a Nixon-like chameleonic ability

to be on all sides of any issue without ever saying anything of substance.

It's a gift. A very minor gift, but still a gift.

[DhhD]

95. How about consulting the union workers in Mexico after Clinton worked to priviatize the

Mexican National Oil Industry by 2012? The working people of Mexico hate TPP and NAFTA which destroyed their worker's rights. There are protests all of the time in Mexico. In the past century, there were years where Mexicans were in a revolution to nationalize and/or unionize the control of rights and working conditions in Mexico. Private businesses have kept Mexico a third world country.

Clinton has gotten Mexico ready for TPP to be forced on its people. Same here except Obama is the head enforcer. Another bad trade agreement will be Obama's real legacy. Clinton is looking forward to walking in to the White House with TPP already in place. So for now she can lie about it with her supporters remaining in the Dark.

[senz]

168. To me, that's a Republican. Screwing latinos, workers, the poor. Deceiving the electorate.

How can anyone trust her?

[DhhD]

197. Screwing Latinos, workers and the poor:

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Wikileaks-Hilary-Clinton-Pushed-Mexicos-Oil-Privatization-20150810-0011.html


After helping the Mexican 1% and the US Oil Industry 1%, the Clinton team seemed to go through the insider revolving door. Seems like Clinton hopes to slick and slide, into the White House, through the Dark.

[senz]

220. Wow, thank you! More proof she serves oligarchs, not people.

WikiLeaks: Hillary Clinton Pushed Mexico's Oil Privatization

While serving as U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton led a series of actions to promote the privatization of Mexico's energy industry, documents revealed by Wikileaks show.

According to the website DesMog, the U.S. democratic presidential hopeful and her staff at the State Department were actively promoting the privatization of Mexico’s oil industry after then-Mexican President Felipe Calderon began speaking about possible reforms in 2008.

The controversial energy reform was passed by current President Enrique Peña Nieto in 2014.

The website identifies three U.S. officials as being key in this process of pushing for an opening of Mexico’s energy sector: David Goldwyn, the first U.S. International Energy Coordinator who was named by Clinton in 200; Carlos Pascual, Goldwyn's successor and former U.S. ambassador to Mexico; as well as Neil Brown, a former top-level staffer for Senator Richard Lugar.

Clinton's former collaborators now work in the private sector and stand to gain financially from the energy reforms they helped create, DesMog said.

Hillary Clinton is a Republican. It doesn't matter what "political party" she belongs to; ideologically, she is a Republican.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This content was originally published by teleSUR at the following address:
"http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Wikileaks-Hilary-Clinton-Pushed-Mexicos-Oil-Privatization-20150810-0011.html". If you intend to use it, please cite the source and provide a link to the original article. www.teleSURtv.net/english

[still_one]

102. "if you don't like a statement, it's a lie". No more truer words spoken.

[rhett o rick]

18. First of all HRC has been all over the map on the TPP.

"We need to keep upping our game both bilaterally and with partners across the region through agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP. ... This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field."

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/04/21/401123124/a-timeline-of-hillary-clintons-evolution-on-trade

All along progressives here have been trying to enter discussions with HRC supporters about how she stands on this important issue. Never once have I seen a Clinton supporter in any way discuss what her stand was. Now we are hearing what her stand was back then. The reason HRC supporters wouldn't commit then is to allow them later to go back and say what her stand has been all along. She has been a strong supporter of most Free Trade Agreements and called the TPP "the gold standard". Now she is back-tracking.

[BainsBane]

55. Clearly you didn't read my post

She didn't call TPP the Gold standard because it wasn't negotiated at the time. She talked about the potential that it would be a gold standard. You clearly are more interested in quotes you can use as gotcha comments than actual positions on issues. Your argument isn't even logical. You are claiming a statement she made years ago expresses support for a agreement that did not exist at the time, the terms of which would only be negotiated years in the future. As I said in the previous post which you didn't bother to read, that suggests an opposition to all trade agreements. I myself oppose TPP because it replicates Chapter 10 of NAFTA, but I don't oppose all trade treaties, which you clearly do, since you consider the actual terms of the agreement inconsequential. I take that to mean you are for entirely unregulated trade, with corporations able to move capital, labor, and goods without limits. I disagree. I believe there should be some limits on the movements of capital and goods.

As for supporting most previous trade agreements, I suggest you actually look at her voting record. I know such a thing is unpopular around here than people prefer to project rather than deal with actual votes, but how our representatives vote is the best indication of their views. They show she voted against CAFTA, voted against the Andean trade deal, and voted for some others. It would seem that unlike you Clinton is concerned with the terms of the trade deals rather than a general opposition to any trade treaties, leaving trade entirely unregulated. She isn't a libertarian. Nor has she ever pretended to be.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Hillary_Clinton.htm#Free_Trade

Though Bill supported it, Hillary opposed NAFTA. (Oct 2007)
Voted against CAFTA despite Bill Clinton’s pushing NAFTA. (Oct 2005)
Voted YES on free trade agreement with Oman. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade. (Jul 2005)
Voted YES on establishing free trade between US & Singapore. (Jul 2003)
Voted YES on establishing free trade between the US and Chile. (Jul 2003)
Voted NO on extending free trade to Andean nations. (May 2002)
Voted YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam. (Oct 2001)
Voted YES on removing common goods from national security export rules. (Sep 2001)
Build a rule-based global trading system. (Aug 2000)
Rated 17% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record. (Dec 2002)
Extend trade restrictions on Burma to promote democracy. (Jun 2007)

Now, if you insist on ignoring these votes and my points in this post, as you did for my previous post, I will not engage further.

[hughee99]

81. A little curious on this one...

It's in the "voting record" section:

Build a rule-based global trading system. (Aug 2000)

Was Clinton voting in congress as First Lady, or is this just in the wrong section?

[rhett o rick]

117. Regarding her calling the TPP "the gold standard", there are a number of sources available that

disagree with you.

"We need to keep upping our game both bilaterally and with partners across the region through agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP. ... This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field."

http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/04/21/401123124/a-timeline-of-hillary-clintons-evolution-on-trade

[NealK]

135. So she was against it before being for it and now (supposedly) against it again.

Hillary Clinton Promotes the TPP in Singapore 11-17-2012

A few days before that, she was in Australia, where she described the TPP as the Gold Standard of trade agreements:

So it's fair to say that our economies are entwined, and we need to keep upping our game both bilaterally and with partners across the region through agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP. Australia is a critical partner. This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field. And when negotiated, this agreement will cover 40 percent of the world's total trade and build in strong protections for workers and the environment.

http://www.state.gov/secretary/20092013clinton/rm/2012/11/200565.htm

[lewebley3]

209. Hillary was working on Obama behalf, a Dem president: She did her job!

Hillary was supporting a Dem President, this why cannot support Sanders
etc.: because you bash Dem's and Obama. If the Dem's are going to win
they will need team work. The Sanders bashing of Obama and Hillary are hurting
the only chance to keep the white house out of Trumps hands.

[NealK]

222. Wut?

Err, fascinating theory. Really.

[arcane1]

30. Why would she speak out in favor of something she opposes?

[BainsBane]

34. Because as First Lady her role was to support her husband

She was not a politician at the time. You can check On the Issues for her views on NAFTA.

[arcane1]

39. So instead of simply saying nothing, she lied to the public about supporting it.

She put her husband's career over her genuine concerns for the American people.

Has Michelle Obama spoken out about the TPP?

[BainsBane]

43. Another person who tosses around the word lie

If you want to check the veracity of the candidate's statements, I suggest you consult Politifact. It certainly is eye opening. I myself don't like lies from candidates, particularly when it comes to comments about Super Pacs and promises to do things no president can possibly do. That is why I don't support such candidates. Others lap them up. We all have our priorities in life.

You can revisit the 1990s to your hearts content. I actually care about 2015 and the state of my community, particularly in regard to the gun violence plaguing it. I am far more interested in what the candidates offer today, who deals seriously with the issues and who talks about what they can actually accomplish.

[arcane1]

50. You said she opposed it privately but supported it in public.

I'm just going off your own words. And yes, if I say I like onions when I really don't, I'm lying.

[Duckfan]

66. Yesterday she said she just learned about it.

Source: Huffington Post

WASHINGTON -- Hillary Clinton came out against the Trans-Pacific Partnership Wednesday, breaking with President Barack Obama on the 12-nation trade deal that is set to become a key part of his legacy.

"As of today, I am not in favor of what I have learned about it," Clinton told Judy Woodruff of PBS "Newshour."

[floriduck]

78. As blatantly obvious as it was to us

that she was hedging and leaving open a way to flip back for TPP, Bernie still handled his response about her decision with class and integrity. I'm sure down deep, he saw through her act.

[cui bono]

137. That's an interesting take coming from a self-proclaimed feminist.

Yikes.

[NealK]

150. Unreal!

[Ed Suspicious]

10. .

"The only times when Clinton has expressed any kind of ambivalence on free trade have come around the periods when she is running for office and needs to get votes from all those Democrats who have gotten the raw end of previous deals"

[WillyT]

130. Yep...

[HooptieWagon]

207. ^^^this^^^

[Snotcicles]

12. Wow, that title is a real chain jerker. nt

[AzDar]

14. K & R

[ibegurpard]

15. if she expects anyone to believe her

She needs to expend some political capital lobbying for defeat of the upcoming up or down vote. Lobbying that would put her at serious odds with the moneyed class funding her camaign. Then I will start to believe this a serious policy shift for her.

[Bradical79]

21. Did she give a specific reason for the change in stance?

After getting past the fact that she flip flopped so suddenly, I'm more curious what the reasoning is. Is it something so minor that she would be able to justify flip-flopping again to support near identical deal, or is she now committed to going against this type of "free trade" agreement in the future?

[magical thyme]

22. salon is just a rw rag that hates Hillary

[840high]

32. We hate her and that's why she lies. Poor woman.

[cui bono]

167. Bwahahaha...

[senz]

169. lol -- especially Joan Walsh

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. In July, sunshine is likely in the Sahara.

[Bernblu]

26. I agree, but

I would have been more inclined to believe her had she came out forcefully when it was being fast tracked and told her legions of supporters in the Democratic caucus to vote against fast track. But she was busy raising money from her donors and nowhere to be seen. She didn't say one peep about whether she was for or against.

Now the fate of the TPP rest in the hands of the Republicans and we know that in the end they will they follow the dictates of their corporate masters. If Bernie loses the nomination, I'd like to say that I will vote for the Democrat but I feel my vote will hardly matter because with the TPP we will have a corporatocracy either way

[Duval]

27. K&R eom

[leftofcool]

28. Hillary is a liar! Hillary is a liar! zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Laser102]

33. Agree. These types of posts are sooo boring. YAWN!!!

Every day something equally vile to spew hate. I can't wait until she wins. Whatever will they say then? I wish the repug had won? Probably.

[clamshells]

46. What would I say if Hillary wins?

It's a bad day for the country. Well, a bad 4 to 8 years.

[leftofcool]

116. Yep, 20 years of spew and hate and she is still ahead.

[restorefreedom]

36. do you have any substantive info to counter with?

would love to see a link on how she always opposed it.

[Luminous Animal]

83. Stever Leser, in 2008, concluded that Hillary lied about her stance on NAFTA

Hillary Clinton's Released White House Records show she Lied about Opposing NAFTA

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_steven_l_080320_hillary_clinton_s_re.htm

In fact, the documents released today show a meeting that Hillary chaired at the White House on November 10, 1993 where she promoted the passage of NAFTA to 120 people. Reports are coming out in every news agency pointing out the contradictions between her stated positions since announcing her bid for the Presidency and everything before that.

One of the things you would expect of someone who really has good experience and judgment is that they can articulate a basic set of principles and positions on issues that they can run on and defend and that stay relatively static. I'm not saying you have to stick to them in the face of overwhelming evidence that one of your positions has been proven to be wrong, like George W. Bush does, even someone who has good experience and judgment occasionally changes their mind. That is not what we have with Hillary. Hillary gives a different opinion on the same subjects every couple of weeks depending on her audience and what she thinks it will net her. As evidence of this is now coming out and is going to be presented to the American people in the starkest terms, how can one be expected to trust her to do anything that she says she is going to do? How can one really know what she believes or intends to do about anything? The only things Hillary's experience seems to be good for is perfecting how to talk out of both sides of her mouth, engaging in the politics of personal destruction and other aspects of her ruthless pursuit of power that remind one of what a Karl Rove might do. That kind of person ought not to be the Democratic nominee.

[darkangel218]

107. OMG!!!

I had to check the link to make sure is not from some satirical site (sorry LA)

Hillary gives a different opinion on the same subjects every couple of weeks depending on her audience and what she thinks it will net her.

This is from Steven Lesser back in 2008!!!!!!!!!

[NealK]

139. And now he worships her!

[darkangel218]

157. Yep.

[senz]

170. Wonder what happened to him?

He knows how dishonest she is, and yet he supports her? It doesn't make any sense.

[cherokeeprogressive]

122. There are some AWESOME quotes in this article from the Fox Contributor... some of my favorites:

"how can one be expected to trust her to do anything that she says she is going to do?"

"How can one really know what she believes or intends to do about anything?"

"The only things Hillary's experience seems to be good for is perfecting how to talk out of both sides of her mouth..."

"other aspects of her ruthless pursuit of power that remind one of what a Karl Rove might do."

"That kind of person ought not to be the Democratic nominee."

Man oh man those are some serious statements; every bit as good as those Cha made about her back in the day.

[NealK]

142. All these quotes are still relevant today.

[A Simple Game]

146. From the reading up thread Steve Leser could answer those questions for you. n/t

[cherokeeprogressive]

149. If he knows about this thread... he's avoiding it like the plague.

Cha said some even more extreme things about Hillary Clinton in 2008.

Let them both roll in it.

[NealK]

153. Here's a sample provided by BMUS:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6017420&mesg_id=6018254

Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Sun May-18-08 01:08 PM

7. Yeah, her negative shit came back to bite her in the ass and

Obama soared. Thanks hilary for being such a lying, pandering fighter for yourself when you didn't fight against bush one fucking iota.

We wouldn't be in Iraq if hilary and the Dems fought against bush like hilary LIED against Obama. All these people wouldn't be DEAD.

[darkangel218]

155. HOLY CRAP!!!

[840high]

173. +1

[HooptieWagon]

211. What we're seeing...

They continue to support Hillary despite her daily flip-flopping on the issues. Was DU not swarmed with enthusiastic support for TPP for 6 months, telling us what a great deal it was? And now it doesn't matter? Seems to have the earmarks of a personality cult...they'll support her no matter what positions she espouses on a particular day.

[hifiguy]

216. That last cartoon is literally a moonshot home run.

So much truth in one cartoon.

And bmus screencapped so much stuff from that "other" site before it was scrubbed it's silly. She has all the facts at her beck and call.

[neverforget]

151. Once a weathervane, always a weathervane.

[Oldtimeralso]

189. Some of us...

"don't need a weathervane to know which way the wind blows."

https://vimeo.com/72540087

[Live and Learn]

185. Checkmate! nt

[840high]

29. Anyone with an ounce of brains knows

she's lying.

[Duckfan]

68. And it's going to be stuck to her through the primaries.

It'll be like a bad cold. Can't shake it off in the next few days. Actually, rubber cement is must more stickier than a cold.

[darkangel218]

105. +1

[CharlotteVale]

31. LOL, so what else is new.

[Enthusiast]

37. Kicked and recommended!

No TPP!

[restorefreedom]

40. that is gonna leave a mark

and just when i had given up on salon.i notice it is not joan walsh's byline.

my fave line...

It’s such an open ploy to counter both the rise of staunch TPP critic Bernie Sanders and the possible entry of TPP supporter Joe Biden that it’s almost refreshing in its shamelessness.

refreshing in its shamelessness indeed.

[merrily]

42. In fairness, media is making a bigger deal of this than Hillary's words warranted.

Reminds me of how they overblew the Pope's "Who am I to judge?" comment about homosexual Catholic priests, who are supposed to be celibate, anyway.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/128059879

[hifiguy]

44. Obviously.

Obvious lie is incredibly obvious.

I do not believe one word that woman says. Not a one.

[Plucketeer]

45. Dear prospective voters

Just what song would you like me to sing for you? I may not agree with the lyrics, but I have no problem vocalizing them to make you feel good.

[Jack Rabbit]

56. We know it's a charade

Her opposition comes too late to be meaningful. If she had come out against the TPP when Congress was about to vote on trade promotion authority, it might have made a difference.

Instead, she comes out now when it's all but a done deal. Congress will pass it appropriately with Republican votes, and Mrs. Clinton will be President when it time to implement the deal. That only makes it more imperative that Bernie Sanders be the next president and that "New" Democrats be defeated in primaries and replaced by people who represent The People.

We don't need four to eiight more years of a government where Republicans and New Democrats have a working majority with another corporate compliant president to push the corporate agenda.

Enough of that steer manure is enough!

[Tommymac]

159. She did it for the debate next week. Now she can say on National TV...

that she is against the TPP, just like Bernie.

The scary part is that I believe she really thinks the American People are so stupid that they will trust her.

[Bluenorthwest]

47. DUers are stone cold ignorant about trade policy politics, the records and views of the official

involved and this makes discussion of these issues here utterly pointless. The OP is a person who spent the entire TPA ramp up lavishly praising Ron Wyden, only to claim shock at Wyden's TPA yes vote. Wyden who voted for NAFTA and for CAFTA. 6 of the Democratic Senators who voted for TPA also voted for both CAFTA and NAFTA and this website seemed utterly unaware of those things.

I'm an actual long time follower of trade policy. Lifelong Union member. Therefore all along I have known that Clinton voted against CAFTA and hoped she would also oppose TPP. Because she's not as consistently opposed as Bernie, nowhere near as trade hawkish as Wyden or the other Senate trade hawks, nor as candidate Lincoln Chafee, CAFTA yes voter that he is.

So basically, DU makes use of trade policy discussion as nothing more than yet another banner to wave, both opponents and proponents here have very little idea of the actual politics, nor the actual policies those politics expedite.

Myself, I think DU activist would have done better during the TPA vote to pressure the Senators in our Party with long, consistent free trade support records to reverse their positions, but what DU did was talk about Hillary.
Had we halted the TPA, we'd not even be talking about this now. That would be better.

[stonecutter357]

52. I am voting for Hillary Rodham Clinton....

[katmille]

156. Me too, stonecutter357, but these hate-filled

Posts are amusing. . Oh, look, the rain delay is over. Back to baseball.

[Thinkingabout]

53. Why not post the truth about NAFTA when she did not llike the deal before it was passed?

[TM99]

57. Here is Hillary Clinton before and after on NAFTA.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/hillary-clinton-nafta/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/feb/25/barack-obama/clinton-has-changed-on-nafta/

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillarys-nafta-lie/

Now that we know from the 11,000 pages of Clinton White House documents released this week that former First Lady was an ardent advocate for NAFTA; now that we know she held at least five meetings to strategize about how to win congressional approval of the deal; now that we know she was in the thick of the manuevering to block the efforts of labor, farm, environmental and human rights groups to get a better agreement. Now that we know all of this, how should we assess the claim that Hillary's heart has always beaten to a fair-trade rhythm?

Now that we know from official records of her time as First Lady that Clinton was the featured speaker at a closed-door session where 120 women opinion leaders were hectored to pressure their congressional representatives to approve NAFTA; now that we know from ABC News reporting on the session that "her remarks were totally pro-NAFTA" and that "there was no equivocation for her support for NAFTA at the time;" now that we have these details confirmed, what should we make of Clinton's campaign claim that she was never comfortable with the militant free-trade agenda that has cost the United States hundreds of thousands of union jobs, that has idled entire industries, that has saddled this country with record trade deficits, undermined the security of working families in the US and abroad, and has forced Mexican farmers off their land into an economic refugee status that ultimately forces them to cross the Rio Grande River in search of work?

As she campaigns now, Clinton says, "I have been a critic of NAFTA from the very beginning."

But the White House records confirm that this is not true.

Her statement is, to be precise, a lie.

This is just how she rolls. She supports the neoliberal social & economic policies UNTIL she is running for president. Then she needs the progressive left vote, so she lies and comes out against the very things she once supported. Whether it is LGBT marriage and civil rights OR free trade deals like NAFTA & TPP, Hillary Clinton is a pontificating panderer for progressive positions when it suits her presidential ambitions. Period.

[Thinkingabout]

60. Thank you for posting about Hillary being a critic of NAFTA from the very beginning.

[TM99]

63. You obviously did NOT read the linked articles.

She was a cheerleader for NAFTA and then she changed her tune while running against Obama in 2008.

You can not spin that in any way. It is a lie to suggest otherwise.

[redstateblues]

177. The viciousness of this thread is disheartening

It's gonna be a dark day on DU when Bernie loses. Can't wait. I always enjoy FOX and Rush the day after the Rs lose big.

[Oilwellian]

54. Poor Hillary

She was better off being mysterious. LOL

[darkangel218]

59. "Poor" is not really a proper word to describe her.

I bet 99% of the country would love to be as "poor" as she is!

[YabaDabaNoDinoNo]

61. Why is it a memo to progressives? I don't think there are any in her camp. All the progressives and

Liberals I know are not voting for her and they already knows she lies hence that is is one of the many reasons we will not vote for her

[zeemike]

62. It's not really lying, it's pragmatism.

If you need to say something to get elected the pragmatic thing to do is say it.
Morality can be sacrificed for it.

Now there don't you see?...it can be rationalized.

[shenmue]

64. Let's just get rid of the idea that GD:P is a thing anymore.

It's just anti-Clinton smears.

[olddots]

94. there is a reason why GDP became anti Hillary "smears"

its Hillary and I am not snarking out , Hillary is writing her own ticket out of the White House

[cherokeeprogressive]

123. Yeah... might as well go back to her group, or that other site, and let them know people are talking

about THIS:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=657650

[valerief]

65. We know. nt

[SoapBox]

67. There is NO denying her Flip-Flopping around.

And she is going to get nailed for it in the debates!

How can Camp Weathervane be so stupid...she's got a trail of history miles long. She even glows with support of TPP in her own book, that she sent out to Pukes...what did she do, redact that part?

What mess she is.

[Jester Messiah]

71. I'm well aware.

It's honestly insulting.

[HooptieWagon]

73. .

[img]http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=&imgrefurl=http://weknowmemes.com/2012/11/does-a-bear-shit-in-the-woods/&h=412&w=550&tbnid=VC27P8hrJbsDwM:&docid=IECTKqv12QPAnM&ei=yM4WVuGhFYG7ePG1jdgF&tbm=isch&client=safari&ved=0CBwQMygAMABqFQoTCOGlgqbYs8gCFYEdHgod8VoDWw[/img]

[99th_Monkey]

74. Great find WillyT. Certainly has the ring of truth.

Let's hope voters aren't as stupid and easily manipulated as Team Hillary
obviously assumes they are.

[darkangel218]

114. Look at Luminous Animal's link!!!

One of Hillary's most avid supporters now pretty much described her as a liar back in 2008!!!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=657650

Hillary gives a different opinion on the same subjects every couple of weeks depending on her audience and what she thinks it will net her.

[99th_Monkey]

124. Hillary's "Liar Factor"

also hasn't escaped notice by politico either:
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/hillary-clinton-liar-factor-2016-213100

[Luminous Animal]

125. That quote in darkangel's post is from Steve Leser in 2008

Hillary Clinton's Released White House Records show she Lied about Opposing NAFTA

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_steven_l_080320_hillary_clinton_s_re.htm

In fact, the documents released today show a meeting that Hillary chaired at the White House on November 10, 1993 where she promoted the passage of NAFTA to 120 people. Reports are coming out in every news agency pointing out the contradictions between her stated positions since announcing her bid for the Presidency and everything before that.

One of the things you would expect of someone who really has good experience and judgment is that they can articulate a basic set of principles and positions on issues that they can run on and defend and that stay relatively static. I'm not saying you have to stick to them in the face of overwhelming evidence that one of your positions has been proven to be wrong, like George W. Bush does, even someone who has good experience and judgment occasionally changes their mind. That is not what we have with Hillary. Hillary gives a different opinion on the same subjects every couple of weeks depending on her audience and what she thinks it will net her. As evidence of this is now coming out and is going to be presented to the American people in the starkest terms, how can one be expected to trust her to do anything that she says she is going to do? How can one really know what she believes or intends to do about anything? The only things Hillary's experience seems to be good for is perfecting how to talk out of both sides of her mouth, engaging in the politics of personal destruction and other aspects of her ruthless pursuit of power that remind one of what a Karl Rove might do. That kind of person ought not to be the Democratic nominee.

[99th_Monkey]

126. Yes, I saw that. Thank you

At least Hill's consistent about one thing: lying.

[WillyT]

133. Thanks !!! - It Needed To Be Said...

[raindaddy]

76. It' was completely predictable

She'll say anything to become President..

[darkangel218]

113. +1

[mhatrw]

82. She is all for it, but the wind is against it.

[a2liberal]

86. Also, the sky is blue. (nt)

[Ms. Toad]

89. The only that surprises me

Is the pants-on-fire response to this (in at least two articles I've seen today). It is who she is. Why is anyone even batting an eyelash? Those who support her don't care/will rationalize it away. And it is entirely consistent with the observations of everyone else for years.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

91. Waiting for someone to claim Salon is a Right Wing rag.

[EEO]

92. She totally hates TPP now... despite negotiating portions of it and promoting it for years...

Either she is lying or under the influence of something. She is definitely Feeling the Bern.

Hillary Ingested Shrooms Prior to Statement Opposing TPP
http://www.theniladmirari.com/2015/10/hillaryclintontpp.html

[Go Vols]

217. lol

[Kokonoe]

93. Listen Now. Lets just PLEASE give her a chance!

There is NO WAY, OR ANY possible way to know what she will stand up for.
You will find out after she is elected.


Hillery Clinton for president is a gift.

[arcane1]

96. Schrodinger's Candidate?

[Utopian Leftist]

112. More like the Forrest Gump Candidate:

"Life is like a box of chocolates; you never know what you're going to get."

[Motown_Johnny]

152. Heisenberg's maybe.

No thing (that Hillary has stated) has a definite position, a definite trajectory, or a definite momentum.

[arcane1]

162. LOL indeed! n/t

[hifiguy]

218. Excellent.

I love a geeky joke, the geekier the better.

[Thespian2]

98. I couldn't possibly vote

for the 1%er...

[JDPriestly]

99. K&R. She has been talking out of both sides of her mouth on a number of issues for years.

I cannot ever vote for her.

She has no principles.

Just ambition. Outrageous, unprincipled AMBITION.

For herself, not for you, me or the country.

She appears to be mostly out to prove that, yes, she can, get herself elected.

But for what purpose, we have to ask, since she changes her mind on the issue as soon as she thinks that the opposite position is more likely to get her elected.

Sheer opportunism.

I do think she cares about women and children's issues. She cared about those fairly early on, but even there . . . . she is so ambitious, she herself may not know what it feels like to care about anything else.

[billhicks76]

100. Get Rid Of The Liar

[still_one]

101. wow, another Hillary bashing article from salon. Salon media group, not worth the 13 cents a share

it sells for.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

104. Oh no! Do you mean Wall Street isn't impressed with Salon? Heaven forfend!

But thanks for letting me know your metric for judging these sorts of things.

[neverforget]

115. The message sucks so attack the messenger.

Hillary's changing TPP positions makes it hard to know where to stand.

[still_one]

128. nope, they are a bunch of inept folks who are going bankrupt, and have been losing their good

personal. I guess that leave the inept ones

[DisgustipatedinCA]

129. Good thing you were around to get to what's important.

[still_one]

132. yeah, an anti-hillary asshole who works for Salon, and get attention by calling her a liar.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

134. 168 recs suggests that most here disagree with you.

And it's not because EVERYONE is a secret teabagger.

[NealK]

158. 185 Recs now. And there's this:

The numbers in a new Quinnipiac University poll are striking: More than 3-in-5 voters, 61 percent, think Clinton isn’t honest and trustworthy. Overall, Clinton’s favorability ratings slipped to 39 percent — her lowest rating since Quinnipiac began polling on Clinton after she and her husband left the White House.

When voters were asked the first word that came to their mind about Clinton, the top three replies were indictments of her trustworthiness. The No. 1 response was “liar,” followed by “dishonest” and “untrustworthy.” Overall, more than a third of poll respondents said their first thought about Clinton was some version of: She’s a liar.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/hillary-clinton-liar-factor-2016-213100

[DisgustipatedinCA]

164. I think she brought that on herself.

And as much of a Sanders supporter as I am, I realize he has a real uphill battle to win the nomination. He may not win it. And god help us all.

[still_one]

175. most posts slamming Hillary on DU get recs. When a DUer said President Obama was a "POS"

along with a number of expletives, that thread received a lot of recs also
Same as when a DUer referred to Hillary as a female anatomical organ. In fact justifications on that one went as far as saying that it was common practice in the UK to use that word against someone, there should be no problem using that here.

So if you standard is the number recs a thread gets here, that is an interesting criteria

You are doing Bernie real proud

[DisgustipatedinCA]

176. It is interesting criteria.

You, of course, want to leave dark insinuation about the motives of this majority of DUers. I think it says something more about our changing reactions to the same old corrupt system. But either way, as you say, the implications are interesting.

[still_one]

178. Alert on me, if you believe that is what I was doing. You are doing Bernie real proud

[DisgustipatedinCA]

179. Climb down from your cross, S_O.

Interesting is very commonly used as a euphemism for all manner of things. If you don't want me to draw my own conclusions, apply some specificity and say what you mean.

[still_one]

182. What does S_O mean. I don't know all the acronyms. Is it "Shout Out"? Not trying to be snark on

this just want to know what it means. Thanks

[DisgustipatedinCA]

186. I was just shortening "still_one"--being a lazy typist.

[still_one]

187. thanks. I appreciate it. We may not see eye to eye on some things, but

at least we have a dialog

Take care

[DisgustipatedinCA]

188. Have a good night, still_one.

[NealK]

147. Clinton's 1993 NAFTA Meeting

March 20, 2008
By JENNIFER PARKER

Two attendees of that closed-door briefing, neither of whom are affiliated with any campaign, describe that event for ABC News. It was a room full of women involved in international trade. David Gergen served as a sort of master of ceremonies as various women members of the Cabinet talked up NAFTA, which had yet to pass Congress.

"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.

...

And what is this attendee's response to Clinton today distancing herself from NAFTA? "For people who worked hard to pass NAFTA and who support the importance of markets opening for the economy in the long term, they're very upset. A number of the women who were there are very upset. You need to have some integrity in your position. The Clintons when Bill Clinton was president took a moderate position on trade for Democrats. For her to repudiate that now seems pretty phony."

Recalls a second attendee, "they were looking for women in international trade who supported NAFTA. Senator Clinton came by at the end. And of course she asked for our support and help in passing NAFTA."

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

[cheapdate]

108. Well Fuck You, Jack Mirkinson of Salon, I take her at her word.

In her speech in Iowa, Clinton said, "In my time, eight years in the Senate, I voted for some trade agreements and I voted against others" She said she’s worried “about currency manipulation not being part of the agreement” and that “pharmaceutical companies may have gotten more benefits and patients fewer...As of today, I am not in favor of what I have learned about it.”

Establishing trade policy is a legitimate function of our national government. I have a very different outlook from Clinton on what constitutes ethical and proper trade policy.

We can have these disagreements and have these discussions without me having to call anyone a "Liar!"

I'm so sick of this.

[jeff47]

136. Uh, how'd she learn something new about it?

The text is still classified.

The last leak was months ago.

So...either she didn't really learn something new about it, or she's mishandling classified again.

[cheapdate]

160. I don't know...maybe she just Googled it

and read what economists have said about the subject in recent articles from US News, Market Watch, Rueters, and many, many more.

For example : http://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-the-tpp-is-better-off-without-currency-manipulation-protection-2015-10-06

Bunch of fucking liars, though.

[jeff47]

163. Which would only reveal what was known months ago

at least when it comes to the TPP itself. Which leads to the question, "what took so long?"

[cheapdate]

165. Sure, man. What is she not telling us? That's the Real question, eh?

[left-of-center2012]

131. MSNBC showed her saying:

"The TPP is the gold standard for all future treaties".
Not so much now, eh?

[840high]

174. ...+1

[ucrdem]

141. Alex Cockburn did this better and his shtick got stale while Bill was still in office.

[cherokeeprogressive]

145. Did he do it as good as the Fox Contributor did in 2008?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=657650

[irisblue]

190. alert results

What's over-the-top and rude is calling Stephen out as a Fox Contributor when the post has nothing to do with FOX and appeared in DU. Misleading, dishonest, and clearly meant to personally insult a current DU member, a violation of DU Community Standards. Please hide, thank you.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Oct 9, 2015, 12:53 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: who the hell alerted on this? lame
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[MoveIt]

191. alert stalkers suck

Thanks for posting the results of the alert!

Fuck Fox News Contributors, and their army of alert-stalking goons.

[cherokeeprogressive]

195. Almost 1 a.m. when it was alerted.

Guess they didn't get the jury they hoped for.

Thanks for this.

[Paka]

144. Let her flip flop.

It just highlights the very reasons for supporting Bernie. Everytime she waffles, he shines.

[katmille]

161. It's obvious to me that most people here

Don't even how trade agreements work. Some are good, some not so good. Terms change, are renegotiated, revised and sometimes abandoned. You can be for a trade deal one day then against it another day. It's sad that you Bernie supporters feel the need to spew negative, hateful rhetoric to make your guy look good. You don't like Hillary? Don't vote for her. It's that simple.

[cherokeeprogressive]

166. k

[senz]

171. Except Salon reported this.

It wasn't invented by "people here."

Plus, this forum exists for political discussion.

[Fumesucker]

193. We have a Fox pundit on DU who is a big Clinton supporter these days..

He wrote this about Clinton in 2008...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251658816

Hillary gives a different opinion on the same subjects every couple of weeks depending on her audience and what she thinks it will net her. As evidence of this is now coming out and is going to be presented to the American people in the starkest terms, how can one be expected to trust her to do anything that she says she is going to do? How can one really know what she believes or intends to do about anything? The only things Hillary's experience seems to be good for is perfecting how to talk out of both sides of her mouth, engaging in the politics of personal destruction and other aspects of her ruthless pursuit of power that remind one of what a Karl Rove might do. That kind of person ought not to be the Democratic nominee.

Even Hillary supporters know she's a liar and they are cool with that.

[brentspeak]

200. Yes, you are the Trade Expert

As well as being a brilliant debater.

[solar Max]

172. NastyRiffraff is Right

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251648723

[Scootaloo]

180. Memo to Salon; No shit, Sherlock

[grahamhgreen]

181. Noncommittal: "I don't believe it's going to meet the high bar I have set."

[colsohlibgal]

183. Flip Then Maybe Flop

Hillary loyalists who try to defend trade deals are either closet oligarch supporters or confused.

Bernie's inroads are making her at least pretend moving left. Never forget Obama campaigned like Alan Grayson but went hard Neo once in.

I don't trust her.

[Lunabell]

184. I wonder what else she'll change her mind about when Bernie's numbers continue to creep up?

It was not until 2013 til she "came out" for gay marriage. Bernie was against DOMA and has been a friend to the gay community for years. Bernie didn't have to "change his mind".

[eridani]

192. I like it that she is hedging her bets here--it gives me hope that maybe we can--

--beat the damned thing.

[kenfrequed]

219. Yup

I don't believe her on Keystone or on TPP.

[JRLeft]

221. Hillary has a fan club, they would support her if she took up Ted Cruz's positions on the issues.

[MrMickeysMom]

224. In other words...

Some politicians are willing to say anything to win...

And I see that this has worn thinner than a pair of jeans passed down to 3 generations.... That's about how long we've seen ourselves lied to for the "good of it all".

"Enough is Enough" is more than a recently repeated chant.

We frankly are at the point where we either stay true to values or we fuck future generations over. I can't live with that and think most Americans (regardless of their roots) can't either.