WASHINGTON, April 9, 2008

Bill Clinton Supports Colombia Trade Deal

Hillary Clinton's Campaign Acknowledges Former President Disagrees With Wife On Free Trade Agreement Sent To Congress

  • Hillary Clinton's campaign acknowledged that former president Bill Clinton supports a free trade deal that the senator opposes. Photo

    Hillary Clinton's campaign acknowledged that former president Bill Clinton supports a free trade deal that the senator opposes.  (AP)

  • Play CBS Video Video Clinton Strategist Fired

    Sen. Hillary Clinton's communications chief, Mark Penn, left his post amid controversy over his meeting with Colombian officials regarding a trade agreement Clinton opposes. Jim Axelrod reports.

  • Fast Facts Colombia

    Learn about the people, economy and history.

  • Photo Essay Hillary Clinton

    A look at a life and career full of firsts.

(AP)  The presidential campaign of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday that her husband, the former president, supports a free trade agreement with Colombia that she strenuously opposes.

The acknowledgment adds new hurdles to the New York senator's bid to woo Democratic voters in Pennsylvania and elsewhere who believe free trade agreements have eliminated thousands of U.S. jobs. On Sunday, she demoted her chief campaign strategist for his role in promoting the Colombia pact.

Hillary Clinton told union activists Tuesday she would do everything in her power to defeat the Colombia Free Trade Agreement now before Congress.

Her campaign spokesman, Jay Carson, said in response to a query from The Associated Press that the senator's opposition is "clear and firm." He added: "Like other married couples who disagree on issues from time to time, she disagrees with her husband on this issue. President Clinton has been public about his support for Colombia's request for U.S. trade preferences since 2000."

Bill Clinton has been his wife's most prominent campaign surrogate and advocate for months.

A high point of his presidency was passage of the North America Free Trade Agreement, which his wife now criticizes at virtually every campaign stop. White House records show that as first lady Hillary Clinton attended several meetings designed to build congressional support for NAFTA in the early 1990s. She says she had reservations about the pact at the time, and made her feelings known in such gatherings.

Speaking about the Colombia trade deal Tuesday to a meeting of the Communication Workers of America, she said: "As I have said for months, I oppose the deal, I have spoken out against the deal, I will vote against the deal and I will do everything I can to urge the Congress to reject the Colombia free trade agreement."

On Sunday, Mark Penn left his post as top strategist for Clinton's campaign after it was reported that he had met with Colombia's ambassador to the United States to discuss passage of the agreement. Colombia was a client of Penn's large public relations firm, Burson-Marsteller.

Many labor unions, including the CWA, oppose such trade deals, saying they displace U.S. jobs and encourage abuses of workers and the environment in other countries.

As president, Bill Clinton's support of trade agreements with Mexico, Canada, China and other nations often put him at odds with fellow Democrats and labor leaders who backed a more protectionist approach. Mr. Clinton argued that Democrats should support lower barriers to trade because the nation, on balance, would benefit.

Many nonpartisan economists agree.

In 2005, the former president was paid $800,000 by Gold Service International, a Bogota-based business development group, for four days of appearances in Mexico, Colombia and Brazil. The group supports, among other things, the Colombia Free Trade Agreement.

Hillary Clinton's Democratic rival, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, noted his opposition to the Colombia deal Tuesday when he spoke to the CWA group moments after Clinton left the stage. He said he opposes the treaty "because when organizing workers puts an organizer's life at risk, as it does in Colombia, it makes a mockery of our labor protections."

President Bush on Monday sent the proposed Colombia deal to Congress, which has 90 days to ratify or reject it. The administration says it would help the United States by eliminating high barriers for U.S. exports to Colombia. Most Colombian products enter the United States duty free under existing trade preference laws, the administration says.

Obama did not mention Penn in his 25-minute speech to CWA activists. But in a conference call arranged by his campaign, Teamsters President James Hoffa called on Clinton to cut all ties with Penn, who continues to advise her campaign.

"This latest issue with Mark Penn really hurts her credibility," especially on trade issues, said Hoffa, who supports Obama.

In a separate conference call, Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson likened Penn to a newspaper editor who "plays an important role but isn't in charge" of the paper.

Earlier this week, aides said both Clintons were angry upon hearing of Penn's meeting with the Colombia's ambassador, which proved deeply embarrassing to the campaign.


© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Candidate Profiles & RSS Feeds


Video and Galleries from Politics

Add a Comment See all 41 Comments
by lorinkundert April 9, 2008 12:49 PM EDT
Who cares what Bill supports? we all have seen what damage NAFTA has done.
Reply to this comment
by blackspirit3 April 9, 2008 12:55 PM EDT
Mark Penn, Sen. Hillary Clinton''s chief strategist and longtime confidant stepped down from the presidential campaign late Sunday night.His resignation came after a politically embarrassing week during which it was reported that he met with Colombia''s ambassador to the U.S. to discuss passage of a bilateral free-trade agreement -- a pact Clinton opposes. WHICH CLINTON OPPOSES IT? I CAN''T TELL.

Reply to this comment
by jack3213 April 9, 2008 1:14 PM EDT
Democrats need to grow up. The war needs to be dealt with electing someone who is qualified to do so, a Democrat is not. A Democrat is nothing more than a losing viewpoint with empty and proposterous promises. It might be the case that Republicans are not well liked, but this isn''t high school and another Republican more qualified to lead is better than any Democrat with nothing more than bags of tricks and lies.

Reply to this comment
by questionnews April 9, 2008 1:30 PM EDT
"Hillary Clinton''s campaign acknowledged that former president Bill Clinton supports a free trade deal that the senator opposes."


She will only oppose it until she''s in office. Then it will be a good thing. Unless Bill is confusing his acronyms & thinks NAFTA means Another Afternoon %*#@ing That Asss.

Reply to this comment
by pepperp1 April 9, 2008 1:39 PM EDT
Protest the OUTRAGEOUS AND SEXIST MEDIA BIAS At NBC HEADQUARTERS in Rockefeller Plaza!

Hillary Supporters Speak Out!!
April 11, 2008 (Friday)
at 8:00 A.M.
NBC Headquarters
West 48th St. & Rockefeller Plaza
New York City

What the Protest is About!!

We demand an END to Media Bias!
We demand an END to Prejudice against Hillary!
We demand Florida & Michigan votes COUNT as cast!
We demand an END to Rigging of the Democratic Primary!












Dems are sooooooooooooo stupid what other Party couyld break their Party into with fraud
Reply to this comment
by gkc99 April 9, 2008 1:46 PM EDT
"another Republican more qualified to lead is better than any Democrat with nothing more than bags of tricks and lies. "--Posted by Jack3213


Sorry, but Republicans have the lead in the lies and tricks category. We were lied to and tricked into the war, which has been a big money maker for big money Republicans, while thousands die for their profits.

The Republicans offer nothing but more of the same old stuff in 2008.

If you''re tired of being tricked and lied to by the Cowardly Liar Bushit, vote Dem.

Most people will.
Reply to this comment
by blackspirit3 April 9, 2008 2:16 PM EDT
IN 1992 THE CLINTONS WENT TO THE WHITE HOUSE TO FIX THINGS

- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad
- First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court

IN 2008 LETS SEND THEM BACK TO FINISH THEIR JOB
Reply to this comment
by trishab4 April 9, 2008 2:23 PM EDT
(AP) The presidential campaign of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday that her husband, the former president, supports a free trade agreement with Colombia that she strenuously opposes.

-Another blow to the Lying-Senator-wannabe-president! This time it came form home, what more normal? The one who got bloowwed by a certain intern and who left DNA stains all along the blue dress.

- Life is not easy for Hillary, not easy... I still want to cast my voice for Obama, because YES, HE CAN!
Reply to this comment
by irliberal April 9, 2008 2:24 PM EDT
Posted by BLACKSPIRIT3 at 11:16 AM

* Greatest amount of whiney republicon rhetoric in one post!

Awarded!
Reply to this comment
by shutupnvote April 9, 2008 2:28 PM EDT
ALL true however Dean and Brazile fixing of the Primary by suppressing non Obama voters disqualifies that Dem argument and pulls them into the same subterranean rancid level...lets not try to paint Political Parties as noble the Progressives sect in the Dem Party and the CCR sect in the Republican Party behave in the same fringe extremist way hating groups of people in our communites.

Extremist
VS
We the People

And the People will not elect Obama we had enough of Party puppets we want someone tough who will demand the Congress act in the interest of the People and a tea party good riddance of earmark giveaways on the sweat and backs of Americans. If Dean Brazile Clyburn Kennedy and Pelosi want Obama we want anyone BUT him.

Reply to this comment
by irliberal April 9, 2008 2:28 PM EDT
Posted by trishab4 at 11:23 AM

Oh go troll in a bag of tootsie rolls. You''ll find it more rewarding and we''ll find you less annoying.

Both Obama and Hillary are excellent candidates with nearly identical platforms. Take your nastiness somewhere else.
Reply to this comment
by pepperp1 April 9, 2008 2:28 PM EDT
ALL true however Dean and Brazile fixing of the Primary by suppressing non Obama voters disqualifies that Dem argument and pulls them into the same subterranean rancid level...lets not try to paint Political Parties as noble the Progressives sect in the Dem Party and the CCR sect in the Republican Party behave in the same fringe extremist way hating groups of people in our communites.

Extremist
VS
We the People

And the People will not elect Obama we had enough of Party puppets we want someone tough who will demand the Congress act in the interest of the People and a tea party good riddance of earmark giveaways on the sweat and backs of Americans. If Dean Brazile Clyburn Kennedy and Pelosi want Obama we want anyone BUT him.

Reply to this comment
by pepperp1 April 9, 2008 2:28 PM EDT
ALL true however Dean and Brazile fixing of the Primary by suppressing non Obama voters disqualifies that Dem argument and pulls them into the same subterranean rancid level...lets not try to paint Political Parties as noble the Progressives sect in the Dem Party and the CCR sect in the Republican Party behave in the same fringe extremist way hating groups of people in our communites.

Extremist
VS
We the People

And the People will not elect Obama we had enough of Party puppets we want someone tough who will demand the Congress act in the interest of the People and a tea party good riddance of earmark giveaways on the sweat and backs of Americans. If Dean Brazile Clyburn Kennedy and Pelosi want Obama we want anyone BUT him.
Reply to this comment
by irliberal April 9, 2008 2:28 PM EDT
Posted by trishab4 at 11:23 AM

Oh go troll in a bag of tootsie rolls. You''ll find it more rewarding and we''ll find you less annoying.

Both Obama and Hillary are excellent candidates with nearly identical platforms. Take your nastiness somewhere else.
Reply to this comment
by pepperp1 April 9, 2008 2:28 PM EDT
ALL true however Dean and Brazile fixing of the Primary by suppressing non Obama voters disqualifies that Dem argument and pulls them into the same subterranean rancid level...lets not try to paint Political Parties as noble the Progressives sect in the Dem Party and the CCR sect in the Republican Party behave in the same fringe extremist way hating groups of people in our communites.

Extremist
VS
We the People

And the People will not elect Obama we had enough of Party puppets we want someone tough who will demand the Congress act in the interest of the People and a tea party good riddance of earmark giveaways on the sweat and backs of Americans. If Dean Brazile Clyburn Kennedy and Pelosi want Obama we want anyone BUT him.
Reply to this comment
by pepperp1 April 9, 2008 2:28 PM EDT
ALL true however Dean and Brazile fixing of the Primary by suppressing non Obama voters disqualifies that Dem argument and pulls them into the same subterranean rancid level...lets not try to paint Political Parties as noble the Progressives sect in the Dem Party and the CCR sect in the Republican Party behave in the same fringe extremist way hating groups of people in our communites.

Extremist
VS
We the People

And the People will not elect Obama we had enough of Party puppets we want someone tough who will demand the Congress act in the interest of the People and a tea party good riddance of earmark giveaways on the sweat and backs of Americans. If Dean Brazile Clyburn Kennedy and Pelosi want Obama we want anyone BUT him.
Reply to this comment
by pepperp1 April 9, 2008 2:29 PM EDT
ALL true however Dean and Brazile fixing of the Primary by suppressing non Obama voters disqualifies that Dem argument and pulls them into the same subterranean rancid level...lets not try to paint Political Parties as noble the Progressives sect in the Dem Party and the CCR sect in the Republican Party behave in the same fringe extremist way hating groups of people in our communites.

Extremist
VS
We the People

And the People will not elect Obama we had enough of Party puppets we want someone tough who will demand the Congress act in the interest of the People and a tea party good riddance of earmark giveaways on the sweat and backs of Americans. If Dean Brazile Clyburn Kennedy and Pelosi want Obama we want anyone BUT him.

Reply to this comment
by winchesterla April 9, 2008 3:10 PM EDT
Hillary''s campaign continues to intrigue everyone. When she is advised to end it so far to save face, she accuses you of pushing her out of the race. Anything goes so long as she wins vote. What a shamble
Reply to this comment
by suet123-2009 April 9, 2008 4:18 PM EDT
It seems like having a spouse of an ex-president running for president poses special problems. Bill Clinton is such a powerful figure. People are buying his influence by paying him millions of $$$ for "speeches". It sounds like he is basically a lobbiest now. I''m not sure having a lobbiest in the White House is a good idea.
Reply to this comment
by likeitis5050 April 9, 2008 4:18 PM EDT
A house divided...as usual. She spent 8 years watching Bill do as he pleased, make decisions she didn''t agree with, didn''t have security clearance to be involved in things she wanted to be in (regardless what she says about all her ''experience'' while in the White House under Bill and Monica)...so now she has a chance to turn the tables on him and people think she has a level she WON''T stoop to in order to get there? Wake up!!! This woman wants it bad!!!!
Reply to this comment
by jedi08 April 9, 2008 4:56 PM EDT
She takes credit for everything Bill did except things that he messed up like Nafta and now this. NO BODY BELEIVES YOU BILLARY. You are a

Liar Liar Suit pants on fire
Reply to this comment
by chrishh April 9, 2008 5:20 PM EDT

Oh - HOW CREDIBLE. You go to the Obama camp for your news and opinions ????

This is such a sick election cycle. If this guy gets the nomination I hope Rove eats him alive.

Reply to this comment
by stn_sage April 9, 2008 5:56 PM EDT
Well, we know BOTH Clintons worked FOR NAFTA!
We know Penn---of the Clinton campaign---had to step-down recently because he represented the Colombians in their attempts to promote it.

We know Hillary Clinton---like Mitt Romney---has this terrible affliction toward ''campaign conversion'' when it comes to the issues!

So, NOW we''re supposed to seriously believe she''s against the Colombian free trade pact!? Baloney.
She''s against it alright---until she''s elected, then she''ll have a hundred reasons why it''s a good thing to do!

The Clintons have had a pretty good life selling influence to domestic and foreign business interests at the expense of the American public.
The public needs to decide whether or not they want this situation to continue!
Reply to this comment
by DCropp April 9, 2008 6:11 PM EDT
Didn''t Hillary say that Bill is her leading adviser?

Bill also supported Dubai owning ports in America.

The Clinton taxes show Bill was paid millions for speaking. Was any more of this money from other countries working on trade deals with America?
Reply to this comment
by pepperp1 April 9, 2008 6:25 PM EDT
"[F]oreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain."

--Barack Obama


Barack Obama exhibits conceit, arrogance, poor judgment, and naiveti too with the laughable assertion that he knows the most about foreign policy because he lived in Indonesia from ages 6 to 10!
http://guerillawomentn.blogspot.com/



too funny.......Pelosi is swooning no doubt
Reply to this comment
by whitepicks2 April 9, 2008 6:45 PM EDT
John McCain and his campaign continue to put politics ahead of a responsible way forward in Iraq. Instead of outlining his plan for the future, explaining whether his vision of a decades long troop presence in Iraq includes permanent bases there, or saying how he plans to pay for a war that now costs $12 billion a month while making Bush''s tax cuts for the wealthy permanent, McCain continues to advocate a stay the course strategy.

McCain has consistently gotten the basic facts on the ground wrong throughout this campaign....

- McCain said on the Hugh Hewitt radio show ''As you know, there are al-Qaeda operatives that are taken back into Iran, given training as leaders, and they''re moving back into Iraq.'' Wrong!

- ''We continue to be concerned about Iranian [operatives] taking al-Qaeda into Iran, training them and sending them back,'' he said in comments after meeting with Jordan''s King.

- McCain Referred To Al Qaeda As A "Sect Of Shi''ites" MCCAIN: Do you still view al Qaeda in Iraq as a major threat? PETRAEUS: It is still a major threat, though it is certainly not as major a threat as it was say 15 months ago. MCCAIN: Certainly not an obscure sect of the Shi''ites overall?...Al-Qaeda is a Sunni militant org.

Is the problem (1) He can''t keep it straight in his head? (2) He doesn''t care for details? (3) He is lying to make his case for a preemptive strike on Iran? (4) All of the above?.....And pepperp1 thinks he learnt more about world affairs from the trailer park.
Reply to this comment
by stn_sage April 9, 2008 7:58 PM EDT
Personally, I''m curious how much money the Colombians have given---or promised to give---to the Clinton campaign or the Bill Clinton Library Fund?!
Does anyone in America really believe they HAVEN''T discussed it with the Colombians?! If so, how nice you haven''t lost your naivete!
Reply to this comment
by thepentangle April 9, 2008 10:21 PM EDT
The Clintons Sold Out America
Print This
Email This
Forum
Comments
Digg This!
Del.icio.us
Facebook
News RSS
By Diane Alden

In 2004, two powerful members of the U.S. Senate instituted something called the India Caucus. New York Sen. Hillary Clinton and Texas Sen. John Cornyn put together an alliance giving special status to foreign interests including what appears to be sale of U.S. visas (student and work) in exchange for favors, campaign contributions, and God only knows what else.

This association and Gingrey''s vote in favor of CAFTA suggests whose interests far too many Democrats and Republicans now represent and it rarely includes their district or America''s long term future.

Does your representative belong to India? Visit these Web sites to find out:

http://www.usinpac.com/members_house_caucus.asp
http://www.usinpac.com/members_senate_caucus.asp

In 2006, the New York Daily News reported Bill and Hillary Clinton''s financial statement including their associations with Indian government and American business interests.

Without question it is a corporate inspired replacement of Americans, including workers on all ends of the spectrum.
Reply to this comment
by leef531 April 10, 2008 1:44 AM EDT
Finally "the Party''s over" for the Clinton''s. Finally.
Thank you, journalist, newscasters, bloggers and media outlets for doing your job. Exposing the Clintons to America for what they are. Just think...if this had happened to "weapons of mass destruction" before we invaded Iraq? If the issue was pressed just a little harder... No debt to China and Japan. Maybe the last 4 years No Bush. Imagine a different day.
Reply to this comment
by kansas1946 April 10, 2008 3:16 AM EDT
LOL. I bet she would like to tie Bill up in a sack!
Reply to this comment
by kansas1946 April 10, 2008 3:19 AM EDT
Oh - HOW CREDIBLE. You go to the Obama camp for your news and opinions ????

This is such a sick election cycle. If this guy gets the nomination I hope Rove eats him alive.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by ThinksFast at 02:20 PM : Apr 09, 2008
****************************************

I''m curious. Why do you think this is a "sick" election cycle?
Reply to this comment
by trishab4 April 10, 2008 4:23 AM EDT
Posted by trishab4 at 11:23 AM

Oh go troll in a bag of tootsie rolls. You''''ll find it more rewarding and we''''ll find you less annoying.

Both Obama and Hillary are excellent candidates with nearly identical platforms. Take your nastiness somewhere else.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by IRLiberal at 11:28 AM : Apr 09, 2008

-IAintLiberal, name it tootsie roll or Oreo; makes no difference, but he''s gonna be the first black and white (mulato) president of the USA. I wished it could be a black woman, but hey Whoopie Goldberg or Oprah Winfrey are busy educatin'' America.
Reply to this comment
by b-easy63 April 10, 2008 4:26 AM EDT
Hillary is for CAFTA--watch. She''s got her husband as front man getting the bucks--while she says she is not for it and panders to the unions. Yeah. She''s not for it, but the man she is married to takes 800,000.00 to try to influence someone for Columbia. If Pennsylvania is stupid enough to believe Hillary cares about them and will not give them the shaft--they deserve her, Bill and the rest of the jobs that Hillary will move out. The NAFTA lie should have taught the blue collars--there is a HUGE difference between what Hillary says and what she actually DOES--and her words are cheap and often lies--watch what she does.

She and Bill took the money..the chief strategist for her campaign was down there to deal and the Columbians are not sure if he came as his firm or representing her--but when it came to criticism on the CAFTA deal--they only criticized Obama. Wonder why? LMAO
Reply to this comment
by b-easy63 April 10, 2008 4:27 AM EDT
Oh - HOW CREDIBLE. You go to the Obama camp for your news and opinions ????

This is such a sick election cycle. If this guy gets the nomination I hope Rove eats him alive.




------------------------
----------------------------------------
----------------

Posted by ThinksFast at 02:20 PM : Apr 09, 2008
**********************************
******

I''''m curious. Why do you think this is a "sick" election cycle?

Posted by kansas1946 at 12:19 AM : Apr 10, 2008


because Hillary is a certified loser and her supporters don''t know what to do about her or that fact. LOL
Reply to this comment
by jockh April 10, 2008 8:15 AM EDT
Hillary says she is in the race to win. Just one problem. She''''s already lost.

Obama holds an insurmountable lead in what matters most: the pledged delegates, the popular vote, number of states won and money raised.

She needs superdelegates to overturn the will of the voters. If they nominate Hillary, the Democratic Party will be no better than Bush and Rove were in the 2000 election. It will be a stolen nomination and all credibility will be lost, taking them decades to recover. It would devastate thousands of loyal voters, the party''s new fund-raising base, and would destroy an opportunity to strengthen a new generation of Democrats.

Clinton''s scenario for victory requires splitting her own party. It is a divisive strategy, but she doesn''t care. Her personal ambitions are more important than the party winning. Her campaign adopts a bizarre "insult-40-states strategy," which belittles states small, liberal and Red. Apparently, the only states that matter are the ones she coincidentally happens to win.

Hillary agreed in writing that the votes in Fl and Mi would not count and she did not speak out in their defence because she thought she had the nomination in the bag. Her new found support for Fl and Mi is because she needs to scrape the bottom of the barrel for support.

As a democrat, I am ashamed that a greedy, desperate woman is hijacking and sabotaging the Democratic party.
Reply to this comment
by jockh April 10, 2008 11:48 AM EDT
The Clintons are tight fisted money grabbers. Despite lining their pockets with 109 MILLION, Hillary merely LOANS her campaign 5 MILLION. Why doesnt she GIVE it to her campaign instead of LOANING and put her money where her mouth is? After all, other candidates like Mitt Romney put millions of their own money into their own campaigns.

That way she would be showing that she has complete confidence in her campaign and this in turn would encourage other donations.

However, she loans instead of gives to her own campaign because she knows she is going to lose so she would rather waste donors money in her futile campaign and keep all her millions nice and safe; so she can sleep in a solid gold bed with a mattress stuffed with 100 dollar bills. And solid gold pant suits for herself and Chelsea !!
Reply to this comment
by b-easy63 April 10, 2008 4:10 PM EDT
Hillary supports CAFTA too. She just can''t tell her suckers...er... I mean voters that, until after she is elected. LOL
Reply to this comment
by b-easy63 April 10, 2008 4:12 PM EDT
If Dean Brazile Clyburn Kennedy and Pelosi want Obama we want anyone BUT him.


Posted by shutupNvote at 11:28 AM : Apr 09, 2008


We sure as he11 don''t want lying scheming NAFTAGATE Hillary and her Dubai port, Columbia 800K making hubby. Do you really think Hillary operates in a vacuum? 800K for Bill is also 800K for Hillary--because who do you think lobbyist want to influence--lawmakers or Presidents? Or ex-Presidents.

Hillary is a sell out--only her 17% of Dems want her---a loser through and through.
Reply to this comment
by b-easy63 April 10, 2008 4:15 PM EDT
Both Obama and Hillary are excellent candidates with nearly identical platforms. Take your nastiness somewhere else.

Posted by IRLiberal at 11:28 AM : Apr 09, 2008


Obama does not have a spouse and chief strategist cozying up to CAFTA delegates--and Obama nor his wife got 800,000.00 to try to gain support for CAFTA. Bill and Hillary did and the rabbit hole is most certainly deeper than that. Great candidate my azz, she can''t tell the truth and she won''t pay her campaign bills and she can''t manage her people.
Reply to this comment
by b-easy63 April 10, 2008 4:17 PM EDT
Hillary Supporters Speak Out!!
April 11, 2008 (Friday)
at 8:00 A.M.
NBC Headquarters
West 48th St. & Rockefeller Plaza
New York City

What the Protest is About!!

We demand an END to Media Bias!
We demand an END to Prejudice against Hillary!
We demand Florida & Michigan votes COUNT as cast!
We demand an END to Rigging of the Democratic Primary!
Finally, we demand that the SuperDelegates discount all primaries and let them disenfrachise the rest of the voters so Hillary can win. We withdraw this request, if they don''t plan to vote for Hillary!!!











Dems are sooooooooooooo stupid what other Party couyld break their Party into with fraud

Posted by pepperp1 at 10:39 AM : Apr 09, 2008
Reply to this comment
by termtex01 April 10, 2008 8:35 PM EDT
More proof from Dems that if you can''t play by the rules, change the rules:

:House changes rules to put off vote on Colombia trade agreement




Associated Press - April 10, 2008 2:03 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Democratic-led House of Representatives has changed its rules to put off a vote on a free trade agreement with Colombia and thwart President George W. Bush''s effort to reward a key South American ally.

The 224-195 vote to eliminate a rule forcing House action on the agreement in all likelihood kills consideration of the Colombia pact this year.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats argue that the free trade deal should not be considered until more is done to revive the American economy and help American workers hurt by trade.
:
Reply to this comment
See all 41 Comments
  • MOST POPULAR
  • Viewed
  • Commented
Latest News
Featured Blogs