Clinton Lie Kills Her Credibility on Trade Policy

John Nichols
The Nation -- 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?
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.
When it comes to the essential test of the trade debate, Clinton has been identified as a liar -- a put-in-boldface-type "L-I-A-R" liar.
Those of us who covered the 1993 NAFTA debate have frequently expressed doubts about the former First Lady's recent statements. We never heard anything at the time about her dissenting from the Clinton Administration line on trade policy. And we knew that she had defended NAFTA in the years following its enactment. But fairness required that we at least entertain that notion--promoted by the lamentable David Gergen, himself a champion of free-trade policies while working in the Clinton White House--that Hillary Clinton had been a behind-the-scenes critic. We had to at least consider the possibility that, at the very least, Clinton had been worried that advancing NAFTA would trip up her advocacy for health care reform, that she had made her concerns known and that she had absented herself from pro-NAFTA lobbying.
This was certainly the impression that Clinton and her supporters sought to create as she campaigned in Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana--states where worried workers want to know exactly where the candidates have stood and currently stand with regard to trade issues.
But that impression was a deliberate deception.
And we must all now recognize that when Hillary Clinton speaks about trade policy, she begins with a lie so blatant--that she's been "a critic of NAFTA from the very beginning"--that everything else she says must be viewed as suspect.

Obama's lead over Clinton narrows: Reuters poll

By Steve Holland

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrat Barack Obama's big national lead over Hillary Clinton has all but evaporated in the U.S. presidential race, and both Democrats trail Republican John McCain, according a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday. The poll showed Obama had only a statistically insignificant lead of 47 percent to 44 percent over Clinton, down sharply from a 14 point edge he held over her in February when he was riding the tide of 10 straight victories.
Illinois Sen. Obama, who would be America's first black president, has been buffeted by attacks in recent weeks from New York Sen. Clinton over his fitness to serve as commander-in-chief and by a tempest over racially charged sermons given by his Chicago preacher.
The poll showed Arizona Sen. McCain, who has clinched the Republican presidential nomination, is benefiting from the lengthy campaign battle between Obama and Clinton, who are now battling to win Pennsylvania on April 22.
McCain leads 46 percent to 40 percent in a hypothetical matchup against Obama in the November presidential election, according to the poll.
That is a sharp turnaround from the Reuters/Zogby poll from last month, which showed in a head-to-head matchup that Obama would beat McCain 47 percent to 40 percent.
"The last couple of weeks have taken a toll on Obama and in a general election match-up, on both Democrats," said pollster John Zogby.
Matched up against Clinton, McCain leads 48 percent to 40 percent, narrower than his 50 to 38 percent advantage over her in February.
"It's not surprising to me that McCain's on top because there is disarray and confusion on the Democratic side," Zogby said
Obama gave a speech on Tuesday rebuking his pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, for sermons sometimes laced with inflammatory tirades but said he could not disown him and it was time for Americans to bind the country's racial wounds.
The poll showed Obama continues to have strong support from the African-American community but that he is experiencing some slippage among moderates and independents.
Among independents, McCain led for the first time in the poll, 46 percent to 36 percent over Obama.
He was behind McCain by 21 percent among white voters.
Zogby attributed this to a combination of the fallout from Clinton's victory in Ohio earlier this month and the controversy over Wright's sermons.
"And, just the closer he gets to the nomination, the tougher questions whites ask about an African-American candidate," Zogby said.
The March 13-14 poll surveyed 525 likely Democratic primary voters for the matchup between Clinton and Obama. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.
For the matchup between McCain and his Democratic rivals, 1004 likely voters were surveyed. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.2 percentage points.
(To read more about the U.S. political campaign, visit Reuters "Tales from the Trail: 2008" online at http://blogs.reuters.com/trail08/
(Editing by Todd Eastham)

Clinton, Obama backers tone down rhetoric

By Andy Sullivan
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Backers of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama toned down their rhetoric on Sunday for fear party infighting might turn voters against Democrats and deliver their votes into the hands of Republican John McCain.
All over the Sunday TV talk show circuit, journalists tried to get supporters for Clinton and Obama to attack the other side, but time and time again they would not take the bait and tried to stay on the high road.
But away from the TV studios, campaign aides continued the aggressive back-and-forth that for several weeks has dominated the battle to win the party's nomination for the November election.
"What is Senator Clinton hiding, and what is lurking in those documents that she believes voters don't have a right to know?" Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs asked in a conference call with reporters, referring to Clinton's tax returns and records of spending projects she has championed as a New York senator.
Those in Clinton's camp said Obama turned to personal attacks whenever his campaign suffered a setback.
"This is a tried and true technique of the Obama campaign that has repeatedly shifted 'negative' when they find momentum working against them," strategist Mark Penn said on a conference call.
Clinton officials went on to say that Obama did not have enough experience to be commander in chief and called on him to release all tax returns and other documents since taking office in the Illinois legislature in 1997.
Both candidates took the day off.
The man either candidate will face in November, Arizona Sen. John McCain, was in Baghdad. With no Republican competition, the Arizona senator was able to take trips such as this to bolster his foreign policy credentials.
NEW TONE
Democrats had no such luxury. They were still being questioned about remarks made by Clinton supporter Geraldine Ferraro and Obama's pastor Jeremiah Wright that many considered inappropriate. Clinton and Obama, an Illinois senator, have disavowed the statements and their supporters wanted to avoid discussing the comments.
Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, an Obama supporter, told "Fox News Sunday" his candidate had repudiated Wright's remarks damning America and "guilt by association here is something we've got to stay away from in this country."
An effort to get Sen. Charles Schumer of New York to go on the attack over the issue failed when he responded, "I agree with Chris here. Look, each campaign is wide-ranging. Supporters are all over the place."
Dodd returned the favor after Schumer was asked to explain Ferraro's comments that were considered racially insensitive. Schumer said the remarks were wrong and she had left the campaign, and Dodd agreed.
Democrats still have more than five weeks until their next nominating event in Pennsylvania on April 22 so the unpredictable campaign could take many more twists and turns.
Nine more contests follow but after those it is still impossible for either Obama or Clinton to have enough pledged delegates to be nominated for president at the party's convention in August.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is neutral so far, said on ABC's "This Week" the Democratic party could be hurt if leaders do not abide by the results of state primary contests when they pick a candidate.
Obama, who would become the first black U.S. president, claimed he picked up 10 more delegates in Iowa on Saturday to add to his lead in pledged delegates, which now is around 150.
McCain, a former Navy pilot and prisoner of war in Vietnam, was to meet Iraqi leaders and U.S. officials in Baghdad as part of what his campaign calls a nonpolitical fact-finding mission for the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Still his meetings with leaders in the Mideast and France and Britain were certain to be used by his campaign to bolster his image as the man best ready to lead the United States and give those foreign leaders a chance to evaluate him.
(Additional reporting by David Wiessler, Jeff Mason and Andrew Stern, Editing by Jackie Frank)
(To read more about the U.S. political campaign, visit Reuters "Tales from the Trail: 2008" online at http://blogs.reuters.com/trail08/)