Blame NAFTA on the Clintons

[George_Bonanza]

Obama wins Ohio. Simple as that.

[Thrill]

1. Its the final nail for them

Barack will pound it in Wisconsin and Ohio

[LisaM]

2. Back when Hillary was co-president?

By all accounts, Hillary was against it anyway.

We ran into a little of that at our caucus, people holding Hillary accountable for Bill's actions.

[babylonsister]

12. But she wants the recognition when it suits her, she wants to

absorb Bill's experience as her own. Other times, like admitting to knowing anything about Marc Rich's pardon, not so much. She cannot have it both ways.

[lurky]

14. She's running on his record...

Her "35 years of experience" include her time in the White House. While she may well have been against NAFTA at the time, it's going to look like she is being dishonest if she tries to distance herself from it.

[bigtree]

16. She was against it, and apparently argued with Bill

Carl Bernstein: Hillary Clinton and NAFTA

Bernstein: "Hillary Clinton’s economics, the ones she preached to her husband in the White House are much closer to John Edwards then you would think. She argued with Bill Clinton when she was First Lady, her husband, she said ‘Bill, you are doing Republican economics when you are doing NAFTA.’ She was against NAFTA. And if she would somehow come out and tell the real story of what she fought for in the White House and failed in a big argument with her husband she would end up moving much closer to those Edwards followers."

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/01/31/carl-bernstein-says-hillary-clinton-fought-against-nafta-when-bill-implemented-it

[lapfog_1]

18. You can't have it both ways

Either she is the candidate with 35 years of experience, including 8 years in the White House and "Ready on Day 1" to be President OR she is just the junior Senator from New York who barely has any experience at all, certainly no more than her opponent.

And if you decide that she HAS all that experience, then the decisions made in those years can be attributed to her. She either lives with the decisions that were made or she repudiates the Clinton Presidency.

So... which is it?

[George_Bonanza]

22. Well said

She's either a rookie just like Obama, or an ineffectual longtime insider with "experience" (aka the name we give to our mistakes).

[truedelphi]

25. Plus with her bragging to CEO's in SIlicon Valley

About her desires to help them obtain even more HB 1 Visas - Jeesh! If that doesn't indicate she is not really committed to the idea that Americans need jobs too, I don't know what does.

This isn't ancient history - it is something that occurred two or three months ago.

[Stephanie]

23. She wants the credit, she has to take the blame as well.

Was she co-president when SCHIP was passed? She's taking credit for THAT.

[Recursion]

28. "35 years of experience"

If she claims that (which I think is ludicrous), she has to take responsibility for the mistakes during that period too (which I also think is ludicrous, but it was her choice to make).

In simple fact she has slightly less experience than Obama, and shouldn't be held responsible for things Bill did. But since she's claiming it, she has to take both sides of that coin.

[JackORoses]

36. Hillary wants all the benefits of Bill but none of the accountabilty

If she wants to claim the 90's as her Executive Experience then she should be held partly responsible for the mistakes that were made.

[KittyWampus]

3. And Banking Deregulation

[Captain Hilts]

4. How many items in your house are made in Mexico? China? Do the math. nt

[LisaM]

20. Mookie, you are one of my faves....but China

Is not part of NAFTA!!!!


However, all those trucks speeding out of British Columbia and tearing up Washington roads on their way south ARE. Clogging up our highways, stressing our infrastructure, you name it....

[Captain Hilts]

24. We're losing manufacturing jobs to China, not Mexico. And...

if Mexicans were gaining jobs, they wouldn't still be coming here in such large numbers.

Canada exports TONS of items to the US - lumber, as you know, but a great many cars from Ontario and Quebec. But both of these patterns were already in place before NAFTA.

[truedelphi]

29. I'm sorry but what you are saying is just not true

We are losing jobs in manufacturing to Mexico.

Rolling Stone had an entire article on it a while back.

And the other dismal thing about it is that the Mexican workers have no protections - the young man in the article who was pulling hot rubber out of an oven was not even given heat resistant gloves to wear, as his counterpart in Michigan had been entitled to have by our OSHA laws.

[Captain Hilts]

34. We are losing FAR more to China. Especially high-profit high tech.

But clothes, shoes, ALL toys also. As someone who tries to avoid buying products from China, I've found it very difficult.

I'd rather lose jobs to the neighbors.

[truedelphi]

37. It is almost impossible to avoid buying from China

Unless you start using the internet to connect to mom and pop industries here in the USA.

People who make clothing out of organic cotton etc.

But then it is very pricey - far more so than when we had our textile mills running full force with workers at union wages.

[Recursion]

32. The immigration is the other half of NAFTA

In a nutshell:

American textile mills and light manufacturing got to move their plants to Mexico (and did, and still are)
American agribusiness got to dump their crops on Mexico and keep per-crop subsidies (Mexico was only allowed to subsidize farmers rather than crops)

Result: American industrial workers lost their jobs. Small American farmers lost their subsidies and had their prices undercut by Monsanto, et al. Mexican farmers lost their jobs. Former Mexican farmers immigrated to America, where they have better chances to find work (including at the former small farms Monsanto bought up).

[lurky]

27. In case you don't remember, Bill Clinton

worked with Newt Gingrich to ram through several trade deals with China and push for entry in the WTO, over the objections of many Dems including Dick Gephardt.

By the way, my last car was made in Mexico (a Ford). I doubt that would have been true without NAFTA.

[George_Bonanza]

5. Many are voting for her b/c of Bill, so they should also be allowed to vote against her b/c of him

It's an undeniable truth that many people, especially Latinos and Asians, are voting for Clinton mainly because they "remember the Clinton years fondly". If Hillary can gain by Bill, then she should be able to to lose by him as well. That's only fair.

[Dinger]

6. 9-11 Attacks Too, Right?

Just quit already.

[AtomicKitten]

7. I do.

He will.

:toast:

[Alhena]

8. Obama is proving himself a brilliant political tactician ...

let me be frank upfront- I support Obama but have a general distrust regarding policy positions taken at convenient times during political campaigns. Including this one, to be honest.

Nevertheless, as a political junkie I respect someone who knows how to play the game, and watching Obama's campaign at work has been a treat to behold the last few weeks. He has known *exactly* when to be substantive (and with regard to which issues) at various times in the campaign, and he has known when to be inspirational.

Obama's performance makes me more confident he is up to handling John McCain in the fall.

[Meshuga]

35. He is running a smart campaign against Clinton

I think he will do fine against a McCain if he does win the nomination. He has to play Hillary in a certain way and change strategy against McCain. Obama is smart not to focus on policy against Clinton because she has a slight edge. "Inspirational Obama" is perfect for the primaries. Once going against McCain, he will be able to distinguish himself from Republican policies and become the inspirational Obama and the Obama with the plan at the same time. For now Hillary can ask "where is the beef?" all she wants because Obama is waiting to deliver the beef when he runs against McCain.

The toughest road block for Obama is the nomination. Beating Clinton will be tougher than beating McCain.

[aquarius dawning]

9. GHWB is responsible for writing that piece of legislation & Al Gore is responsible for its passage

or did you miss the Larry King Live debate between Gore and Perot.

[Bread and Circus]

26. Wow, I didn't know VP's could sign bills into laws.

[aquarius dawning]

33. True enough but it also took the votes of 129 congressional Democrats to make it to his desk

and the rabid enthusiasm of the Democratic party's golden boy certainly helped. so let's give them some blame for that piece of crap agreement too. Who did you vote for in 1992 BTW? I voted for Perot. I agreed with him. I'll admit it. It was my first election too.

[Recursion]

38. One of his three Constitutional duties was casting the tie-breaking vote

And he did that for NAFTA

[Fovea]

10. The other edge of the blade

She cannot say "This will not be the third bite at the apple for Bill."
Nor can she say that "this will be the third Clinton administration."

It is an essential dilemma, and it is part of her baggage in flyover America.
I think it is why she lost Missouri. While NAFTA has brought some money to Kansas and Missouri, it has also brought other changes that are not seen as good, like unemployment at auto plants.


Which is why I think her blue collar support is not immune to Rovian tactics.

[surfermaw]

11. Blame NAFTA on a loaded republican house and senate

Which was the idea of the first BUSH

[adabfree]

13. It passed under her hubby..who's record she's running on...

Nail her on it.

[tritsofme]

15. It passed Congress before the Republican takeover.

nt

[Recursion]

30. It was before the GOP takeover... and was one of 3 bills responsible for it

NAFTA, the AWB, and the FY94 budget were the bills most responsible for us losing Congress. Why? Because in all three cases, Gingrich cornered Clinton into passing Republican bills, then let his rank and file give Clinton the heat for it.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

17. Reagan and Bush Sr who are Obama's heros are the architects...nice try tho

[George_Bonanza]

21. You're taking him far too literally

Obama admires Reagan's ability to create mass change. It does not mean he's an extreme conservative.

For example, if I say that I admire Napoleon, I'm most likely referring to his tactical genius and leadership abilities, and NOT his tendency to engage in battles that killed thousands of people.

[sandnsea]

31. The Clintons implemented their policies

which is Obama's entire point. Reagan put the country on a trajectory that Clinton didn't change. NAFTA is proof of that. Clinton also implemented the military strategy of Cheney, for another example. When Obama talks about needing a transformation, he's talking about a transformation away from all of that, a totally new trajectory of real progressive politics.

[Barack_America]

19. Who else could you blame it on? n/t