Hillary hit piece in NY Times online: "Clinton’s Altered Iowa Speech"

[oberliner]

SIOUX CITY, Iowa – Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton left a couple of things behind in New Hampshire this morning when she left for Iowa: Her vocal support for abortion rights and gay civil unions, both of which she touted in the Granite State but left out of her stump speech here today.

She said yesterday in New Hampshire that she would never compromise on a woman’s right to choose, and she also praised the state’s Democratic-led legislature and Democratic governor for recently enacting a civil union law. To be sure, those two issues may be more popular there than with in Iowa, where some Democrats are more socially conservative. And this event today was essentially a Labor Day celebration, though Mrs. Clinton did deliver much of her new stump speech intact.

There were other differences between the Iowa and New Hampshire speeches as well. (One possible reason: Unlike Sunday, Mrs. Clinton delivered her stump in Sioux City without any notes – a quick study!)

<snip>

If Iowans were with her “from the very beginning,” she predicted that she would end up in the Oval Office, and promised “to pick up the phone and invite people” from Iowa to talk to her about their problems and about policies she should pursue.

She did not make the same offer to New Hampshire voters on Sunday. As it happens, she is well ahead in the polls in New Hampshire, while she is in a tight race in Iowa with Senator Barack Obama of Illinois and former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/03/clintons-altered-iowa-speech/?hp

[JeffR]

1. How this passes for political reporting is beyond me

Amazing that someone gets paid to grind out these inedible sausages of prose.

[Netbeavis]

2. are you sure they were paid?

remember, many blogs, are free and open to the public. No where in that link did I see a bi-line or author's name. It would be no different than a GOP'er reading any of the threads in here and asking the same thing.

[JeffR]

4. Author's name is Patrick Healy, an NYT staffer since 2005

He might not deserve to get paid for this kind of superficial analysis, but I'm betting he does get paid.

[JeffR]

7. Just want to add:

TPM had a rather insightful piece about this guy's reporting:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/horsesmouth/2007/02/post_46.php

I'm no HRC fan (by a long shot) but this sort of disingenuous pseudo-coverage just fries my ass. If it had come from an independent blog somewhere, so be it. But from the NYT? They should know better, IMHO.

On edit: Welcome to DU.

[oberliner]

8. More on Patrick Healy from Media Matters

Author of NYT tabloid story on Clintons has checkered record (May 24, 2006)

Summary: Patrick Healy, the author of a New York Times article purporting to examine the married life of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) and former President Bill Clinton, wondered in a 2004 report whether Teresa Heinz Kerry, wife of Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John F. Kerry (MA), was "a bit kooky" and openly questioned "what kind of marriage the Kerrys have" while filing other erroneous stories on the Democratic nominee that fueled Republican attacks. By contrast, Healy has let another prominent New Yorker and possible presidential contender, former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, escape similar personal probing in three recent stories.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200605240005

[JeffR]

10. Thanks

So he's an even bigger jerk than I thought.

[Netbeavis]

29. Thanks. Ask a good question and get good answers

Glad to be here.

Been reading the articles and blogs for years and decided to finally post away.

[karynnj]

13. Not a Hillary fan, but that reporter is not fair or good

He wrote the hit piece on the Clinton's marriage - that in the title spoke of how it was n't an issue, but made the point of resurfacing EVERY Bill Clinton infielity, old and new, proven or specualated.

Per the MA people on DU JK, he was from the Boston Globe and did the same snarky reporting on Kerry and others there.

[TwilightGardener]

3. So now candidates are being judged for what's NOT in their speech? Stupid.

They all tailor their speeches for their audiences.

[surfermaw]

5. Shouldn't you have said John Edwards is ahead in Iowa

According to Tim R. Edwards is leading the pack in Iowa, and off the cuff some say he is leading in N. H no proof of the NH prediction.

[Adelante]

26. Just because Russert says something doesn't make it true

The statement in the OP is what is actually true:

"she is in a tight race in Iowa with Senator Barack Obama of Illinois and former Senator John Edwards"

[BeyondGeography]

6. Something tells me they aren't this strict with Republicans

No fan of HRC but this is ticky-tack BS.

[Forkboy]

9. Pretty weak piece.EVery candidate tailors their daily message for that day's audience.

"Pretty weak piece" is actually being generous.

[illinoisprogressive]

11. Doesn't matter if Gay rights and abortion play better in NH. She never takes a stand.

she won't stand by anything. It is always pandering.
the journalist is probably sick of her doing this. Not standing by any belief.

[Broke Dad]

12. Actually, Gay marriage is super hot in Iowa now . . .

This last week, an Iowa District Court struck down Iowa's "Defense of Marriage" law which proclaims marriage can only be between a man and a woman, as unconstitutional. The Republican leadership (Chris Rants from Sioux City) is calling for a special session to pass a constitutional amendment immediately!!!! Our Governor, Dem Chet Culver, has said that he is against gay marriage, but will wait for the appeal process to play out.

So, by omitting any reference to gay rights in Iowa, Hillary effectively let Chris Rants and the other Republican state leaders in Iowa be the only voices (anti at that) on gay rights this Labor Day weekend. No civil unions, nothing. Thanks for letting some of most committed activists out in the cold Hillary. At least Edwards responded opening on the record at Tipton, Iowa (where I got to introduce him to 200+ people) that he supports civil unions. We had a fair number of gay activists at the event, and they applauded Edwards position, especially in light to the Republican furor after the court ruling this week.

[Skittles]

23. interesting!

thanks for that Broke Dad

[Forkboy]

24. Thanks for the report.

We're hoping to start a trend here in Mass that sweeps the country.We're Ground Zero in the "Gay Agenda". :)

[flpoljunkie]

27. Yes, Hillary dodged this "super hot" issue, but she did use the word "change" 26 times in her speech

[CTyankee]

28. The Clintons have disappointed us before on gay rights.

I supported Bill Clinton but I put the "don't ask, don't tell" policy as one of his biggest mistakes in his presidency (the other being the abandonment of Ruwanda during the genocide there). I'm not gay but I am truly disappointed that Hillary has followed down this path. I am now supporting John Edwards.

[creeksneakers2]

17. Hillary takes lots of stands

and everybody knows she defends civil unions and advocates protections for gays. She said so in debates. She may not bring it up where its less popular, but she'll answer honestly if asked.

[jgraz]

20. Exactly -- she has a different one every day

Sorry, that pitch was just too fat not to swing. ;)

[Imagevision]

14. Duh,hello! - Hillary will say or NOT say whatever it takes to get over - Like Romney...

although Hillary could be awaken in the middle of the night and still run circles around any of what the GOP have to offer.

[rodeodance]

16. no, just shows what a smart chick she is.

[rodeodance]

15. The blogger just pointed out very smart she IS.

[SaveElmer]

18. Funny...Hillary does what every politician does, but somehow its turned into news...

During the Lincoln-Douglas debates, Lincoln would play up his support for stopping the move of slavery westward, and talk about his moral revulsion of it, when he was speaking in the northern part of Illinois...

But said not a word about it in southern part...

Every politician tailors their stump speech for their audience...

What a ridiculous criticism...but not surprising...

[Forkboy]

25. I agree .

Though if you read Broke Dad's post above the criticism isn't what I would call ridiculous.What is ridiculous is singling her out for something that we all know everyone does.That's why I think it's a BS piece.

Look at the bright side,she gets more stuff like this because she's the front runner.It's the nature of the beast.

[zulchzulu]

19. The report reads like an unedited blogblurt from a bar

I would take this "report" with a grain of salt. It said nothing more than being a checked item for a blogger to send to the boss back in NYC.

Have another pint, Patrick. Yeesh...

[avrdream]

22. Hey, thanks for your support.

It's nice to see Democrats rallying together about this.

Here, here!

:grouphug:

[AtomicKitten]

21. ah, okay

:shrug: