Hillary's press conference about Obama's Health Care and NAFTA flyers was perhaps the most ridiculous and dishonest displays of the campaign season. As Obama has argued at every debate in recent memory that Hillary's mandate necessarily penalizes those unable to afford it, I'll limit my remarks to the NAFTA issue.
As someone with considerable experience on the campaign trail, I can say in truth that the NAFTA flyer is one of the most responsibly cited direct mail pieces I have seen in a competitive race. Here's why.
The flyer headline says that Hillary believed NAFTA to be a "boon" to the economy, citing New York Newsday, Press International and Hillary's own book, Living History, in support. Obama's charge on NAFTA is carefully tailored to the New York Newsday report.
"Clinton thinks NAFTA has been a boon to the economy." [New York Newsday, 9/11/2006]
Of course, Hillary's support of NAFTA is hardly a fiction created by New York Newsday; it is a well-documented fact.
In Living History, Hillary wrote the following:
"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." (emphasis added)
Whereas Senator Hillary called NAFTA a victory and success for the Clinton administration, Presidential candidate Hillary claims NAFTA was "pushed through Congress in the Clinton administration."
According to the Associated Press, three years after President Clinton signed NAFTA into law, Hillary said . . .
"I think NAFTA is proving its worth" [and called it] "a free and fair trade agreement."
At the 1998 World Economic Forum in Davos, Hillary praised corporations for mounting . . .
"a very effective business effort in the U.S. on behalf of NAFTA."
And Bill Clinton recently said on the campaign trail that NAFTA "is basically fair" and that "a lot of people think that NAFTA’s a bigger problem than it is."
Senator Clinton's position on NAFTA has been unambiguous. In contrast, Presidential candidate Clinton's position has been, as the San Francisco Chronicle reported, "a flip-flip to unions and industry sectors" and a "bid to outflank . . . Senator Barack Obama."
If records do matter, as Senator Clinton repeatedly says, she's going to have to answer for hers with more than a temper tantrum if she hopes to compete in Ohio and Texas