A short diary since I have to go to bed, but our good friend David Sirota has caught Hillary in a game changing lie. She asserts that she publicly supported NAFTA as First Lady but held private reservations. She claims upon becoming a Senator she felt that the program needed to be drastically overhauled. Sadly, this now appears to be not exactly true.
In 2002, Hillary, as a Senator spoke for the DLC. You know, that centrist, Liebermanesque, anti-Dean wing that would have has play 50% + 1 until the end of time. Her remarks to that group included the following:
"We all know the record of the DLC, the Progressive Policy Institute and, of course, the Clinton-Gore Administration. The economic recovery plan stands first and foremost as a testament to both good ideas and political courage. National service. The Brady Bill. Family Leave. NAFTA. Investment in science and technology. New markets. Charter schools. The Earned Income Tax Credit. The welfare to work partnership. The COPS program. The SAFER program. All of these came out of some very fundamental ideas about what would work. The results speak for themselves. Those ideas were converted into policies programs that literally changed millions of lives and, I argue, changed America."
Her full remarks are here: http://www.ndol.org/...
Mr. Sirota notes:
Yes, this Hillary Clinton praising NAFTA as a successful idea that changed America is the same Hillary Clinton who now claims she never supported NAFTA.
Again, it's one thing if she said she had been for NAFTA and then admitted that was the wrong position. It's an entirely different thing for her to deny that she was ever for NAFTA.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
Al Giordano from The Field calls this a game changing moment here: http://ruralvotes.com/...
Tell me, Senator Clinton. You tell us that Senator Obama is Rovian for pointing out problematic areas of your record, and now we catch you in a flat out lie about said record? Who's really the Rovian one here.