Hillary Rodham Clinton said emphatically Wednesday night that Barack Obama can win the White House .

[kevinmc]

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton said emphatically Wednesday night that Barack Obama can win the White House this fall, undercutting her efforts to deny him the Democratic presidential nomination by suggesting he would lead the party to defeat. "Yes, yes, yes," she said when pressed about Obama's electability during a campaign debate six days before the Pennsylvania primary.

Let SD avalanche for Obama begin


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g8-DEMtAE9q4i4ySQ0eV_qZefmRQD903FF4O0

[quantass]

1. So she can speak the TRUTH!! Who would've thunk

[jobycom]

2. The one time she really does blatantly lie and Obama supporters believe her.

She's Cassandra.

[quantass]

5. Because for the 1st time it is supported by undeniable facts

[Spider Jerusalem]

6. She was actually telling the truth for once.

You want a blatant lie, try this:

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.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=300860

[CakeGrrl]

3. Cool. She contradicted her own argument to the SDs, proving what a double-talker she is

and unfit to earn their endorsements.

And they'll probably recognize that ridiculous Right-Wing three-way pile-on for what it was.

Hillary throwin' down with the Hannity talking points. Not a smart way to try to win the endorsement of Democratic superdelegates.

Obama already got one SD to cross over from HRC tonight. Keep it going.

[2rth2pwr]

4. I smell fear.

[PBS Poll-435]

8. I love that picture!

[ORDem]

7. K

:kick: