Clinton v. Clinton re: Magnequench

She is definately a shark.

A NC and an Indiana plant both shut down.
Why would she bring that up?
Oh yea, they're voting there next week

but seriously,

To quote my ancestors,
"better the devil you know"
"than the devil you don't know"

At least she has a record! Obama has none to speak of and that is probably more frigthening. Senator Clinton cites her White years because that is the way she was educated into the world of the presidencey. Many politicians cite their role as chief of staff or advisor to the president because it puts them in an inner circle. Since she is the first former first lady to run, there are a lot of jokes about her role as first lady and tying her to every decision made during Bill's 2 terms. What most critics fail to do is give her credit for poise under fire, strength of character to surive Bill's problems, and finally the ability to use her experience and be her own person. What does Obama have to offer in response. Oh, he did not support the war when he was a state rep? He lies all the time about his big decision to oppose the war! He states he came out and made a boldcontroversial speech during a heated senate race. No way! It was 4 months before he was a candidate and he was such a nobody at the time, there isn't even a video or audio recording of the speech given at the time. He has "recreated" it for TV ads. Maybe you call her shark, but I would rather have a shark on my side than a person that sat in a church for 20 years but didn't know the pastor was making anti-American sermons.

definitely trends to watch out for - the Bush administration has done many of things like this - I am going with the devil I know: Billary.

Linda - I was going to agree with you that Clinton has a right to take credit for what she accomplished during Bill's administration, but then you started making up stuff about Obama. Which unfortunately is where Clinton went wrong. Rather than take credit for what she did do, and cite actual accomplishments, she took credit for everything popular Bill ever did and then went a step further and started to make up stuff she did that she didn't. It's ironic that you mention her "poise under fire" since her fabrication of the non-existent sniper fire in Bosnia was one of the more overt abuses of reality she offered.

With regard to your advocacy of Clinton being a "shark on [your] side" I might remind you that shark's tend to be on their own side, and when it benefits them they tend to eat you alive.

The "devil you know" idea has popped up in several comments with regard to Hillary Clinton. The concept is fallacious in that it assumes that Obama is "the devil" you don't know when all evidence says that he is not the devil. So they choice is between the devil you know and the unknown. It is xenophobia pure and simple. Call it what it is.

Diana - good article. It does seem that we all tend to align with the good and disalign (is that a word) with the bad. She has built her campaign on her "experience" and thus it is valid to evaluate what experience she has had. As I've said elsewhere, she does have substantial experience in Washington politics, both as the target of typical smear attacks during her husband's administration and as the source of typical smear attacks during her own candidacies for Senate and now President. She is adept at misdirection and manipulation. She is adept at the "kitchen sink" strategy as her own advisors admit they have employed. She is adept at using and benefiting from the political machine that she inherited from Bill's administration and furthered by her own and Bill's post-Administration connections. Meanwhile, despite starting from scratch in building support and battling xenophobia, Obama is leading the nomination and is likely to beat McCain in the general election. How can this be? How can the Clinton machine have lost it's presumed "inevitability?" Well, perhaps most of us see Obama as a chance to elect someone who will work for us instead of the typical party politicians who work for their party or the personal politician who works for herself.

Keep in mind that many Clinton supporters have switched to supporting Obama. No Obama supporter has switched to Clinton. Perhaps they see the future.

This is a Clinton habit of blaming others in order to wash their hands of a choice made that they don't want following them.

Clinton Criticizing Closure of Indiana Factory That Clinton Helped Close Hotlist
by davidsirota http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/4/28/12049/2577
"Clinton is airing this advertisement in Indiana, bemoaning the closure of a defense contractor Magnequench's manufacturing plant in Valparaiso " "And then comes the kicker: She tells viewers that "George Bush could have stopped it, but he didn't."

Clinton is certainly right that it is a tragedy that 200 American jobs were killed in a corporate deal that also exported sensitive military technology to China. But she forgets to mention that it wasn't George Bush who was in the key position to stop it - it was Bill Clinton."


http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-14878916.html

EAST LIVERPOOL, Ohio - Four year-old Alex Estell has one of the world's largest toxic-waste incinerators at the bottom of his garden. Its smokestack is about 600 feet from his bedroom window.

The incinerator is down on the Ohio River bank flood plain; the house is on a bluff overlooking it. Standing in his back yard, little Alex is eye-level with the 150-foot stack's 60-foot mark. (snip)

Even so, in July 1992 in Weirton, W.Va., vice presidential candidate Al Gore told WTI protesters that a Clinton White House would mean a presidency "on your side for a change, instead of on the side of the garbage generators."

In December 1992, the incoming administration reaffirmed its safety-first decision to block the WTI incinerator. Those promises turned out to be clouds of political emissions, smoke quickly blown away when Clinton and Gore apparently discovered that an original financier for WTI was Jackson Stephens, an Arkansas investment banker. It was Stephens who, at the last minute, provided the rapidly emptying coffers of Clinton's presidential campaign with a $3.5 million line of credit.

The White House referred NCR to Vice President Gore's office and to the Environmental Protection Agency regarding WTI and the timing of Clinton's discovery that Stephens was involved. By press time, Gore's office had not responded to faxed questions or phone calls.

Clinton washed his hands of WTI by dumping responsibility for the WTI decision back on President Bush. Then, as Clinton and Gore looked the other way, the company received permission for the trial burn.

The Environmental Protection Agency appointee responsible for public liaison on WTI was Deputy Administrator Robert Sussman, a Clinton law school classmate and former legal counsel to the Chemical Manufacturers Association.

Sussman's role is an indication "that the process is so corrupt," said EPA whistle-blower and engineer Hugh Kaufman, that he petitioned Attorney General Janet Reno to open a criminal investigation. No action was taken. WTI's incinerator is now in "limited commercial" operation, said Bill Omohundro, spokesperson for the EPA in Chicago. The final phase of a WTI health-risk assessment study will probably be made known by August or September, he said.
(snip) In a June 24, 1993, letter to Clinton, experts in the fields of public health, toxicology, environmental health and medicine said "the facility is located in a flood plain on the banks of the Ohio River - source of drinking water for millions downstream - in a valley with frequent air inversions that can concentrate airborne pollutants."

This is Catholic territory, the Youngstown diocese. Youngstown Bishop, James Malone in November gave congressional testimony against environmental racism (NCR, Jan. 14) and for years fought "big steel" over Youngstown closures. East Liverpool's 500 African American live in the immediate vicinity of the WTI incinerator.


Bayh memo bashing Clinton re:Magnequench hits papers tommorow! (Oops, guess Howard Fineman underestimated Bayh because the story never appeared today)
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/2/19192/52275

Hillary Clinton is a shark in a sheep's pant suit. Swim in her pond and lose whatever is left that actually belongs to America and the American citizenry.

I might add to my post the Rose Law Firm connection of the wealthy Jackson Stephens to Hillary Clinton while she worked there.

How can one expect two politicians who are so far apart in age to have an identical record numerically? Frankly, the less "politicking" a candidate has engaged in, the better.

Besides, it's not the duration of one's experience that counts; it's the content of the experience that matters. Is a 90-year-old person's life more important because they lived longer than the unfortunate young woman who died of cancer of 28? I think it's what they each did with the years they had that matters.

David K., you've made a good point regarding the candidates' supporters.

Thank you for that link, Elaine.

Diana - I agree with your point about the "experience" value of age for any particular job, including the Presidency.

There is a balance between experience and innovation. Some experience is necessary to allow the person to see all viewpoints, or more accurately, to be willing to listen to all viewpoints and respect their right to have viewpoints that differ from your own. Obama's entire life history has given him vast experience in this regard, as shown by his ability to think. The other candidates appear to have settled into their professional politician role, which is to say that they think so highly of themselves that they have stopped being open to new ideas.

We need new ideas. We need new thinking. We need the future, not the past.

David, I applaud the way you have framed the experience issue. I couldn't have said it any better.

If there is one glaring fault with the Democratic party, it is protectionism. Both parties have taken this hot potato over the years. Speeches by Ted Kennedy can find him in favor of it now, and railing against it in past campaigns.

I don't expect to vote for a perfect candidate. I will vote for Hillary despite protectionism, but if she doesn't make it, I will vote for McCain despite other issues.

I don't believe in protectionism either, Tim. But that's not the issue here.

Ok, Bill was right, and Hillary is wrong.

Anyone but Obama.

Diana,
Perhaps Hillary "has found her voice." Obama's problem is that he hasn't found his. He won't do it by going on about race. He did what he could in Philadelphia.

One of many. She publicly endorsed NAFTA, worked tirelessly to recruit people who support it. Now, she tells us she was just supporting the President as a civil servant. I did not know we paid the first lady a salary.
This lady will say anything on an ad. She jumped on McCain's gas tax because it reminded her that her low information voters will be pleased. Yet she understands probably better than any candidate that this gimmick will costs people their jobs according to the Federal Highway Administration.

Hillary Clinton is all SMART POLITICS, STUPID POLICIES.

Hillary:"And now America's defense relies on Chinese spare parts.
George Bush could have stopped it, but he didn't."

Senator Evan Bayh, Clinton supporter and superdelegate, complained to the Clinton admnistration about doing that - not stopping it. His memo did it the papers is in route.

"A memo prepared for Bayh by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service earlier this year stated that the Clinton administration could have objected to the sale under CFIUS, but it did not, and that the consortium promised to keep those Anderson, Ind., jobs in the U.S. only until 2005. An Oct. 6, 2005, press release from Bayh noted that he asked for the Government Accountability Office to study "concerns over foreign takeovers of American companies with national security implications & after an Indiana company called Magnequench closed thanks to a 1995 decision by CFIUS to approve a Chinese consortium's takeover. At the time, Magnequench made 85 percent of the magnets used to guide U.S. smart bombs." Said Bayh, in the release: "The committee responsible for providing this protection does not have a good track record, as I saw myself when it allowed an Indiana company that made smart bomb magnets to be purchased by a foreign business. When it comes to protecting our national security interests, we should be doing more, not less."

Alan,

The Federal Highway Administration are public sector jobs, jobs that are paid for by taxpayers. Automating public sector jobs, as farming and manufacturing has done in the private sector, would be a good idea. Enabling the car culture is not progress.

No one should believe that using most of the worlds resources is sustainable. Our days as a world power are numbered.

Kathryn, I agree. We can find many negatives about all the candiates. No one is perfect and they are put under a microscope. I know what I am getting with mrs. Clinton.

They all have faults but, as voters, we get to choose which faults we can live with. Lyndon, I daresay you are right about Kucinich.

Interesting piece....lots of food for thought here. No matter how much I try to find something I like about her, I still can't bring myself to vote for Hillary.

if we are to decide which faults we can live with, wouldn't it be a good idea if we really understood what those faults are. I keep hearing Hillary supporters say they know what they are getting with Hillary. I don't buy it. I think they believe they are getting a Clinton restoration. It will be more of the big spending lobbyists of the 90's controlling them as now. The WTI plant approved by Clinton for Jackson Stephens generosity when his campaign's money chest was low is an example about charater in that Clinton blamed Bush. Now Magnequench, caused by Clinton who has no problem with telling everyone to look at Bush for that as well. She has never had an issue of misleading and outright lying to voters. So if anyone believes they are aware of what they are getting with Clinton, WTI and Magnequench would seem to disprove that notion. If you took her at her word that Bush caused Magnequench you were lied to.

Frankly, I do not know what I'm getting with Hillary - really - I think the Clinton's covered up a great deal of whatever and I frankly can't believe anyone would want to revisit that time or character - I know that I surely think we'd be going backwards by putting another Clinton into the White House - I'm voting for Obama - I like the way he has handled himself despite what he has been put through by dirty politics - plus he makes more sense and appears far more intelligent than Hillary. She depresses me and I do not think I could listen to that aggravating voice of hers for four years. SAlud.

A 501C3 group in DC heavily staffed with former Clinton staff ,Joh Podesta, Joe Goode etc,and Maggie Williams, she left the group recently when she became Hillary's campaign chair, is being investigated for voter suppression in NC by the NC attorney general who has sent them a cease and desist order. 10 other states have complained about the groups misleading voter reg and robo calls which have violated state laws in a few states including NC. Its all in the link at Facingsouth, the blog for the Institute of Southern Studies. Virginia state police also investigated them. While no clear connection or coordination between the Clinton campaign and this groups activities is evident, the ties are very strong, people, money and work done for the Clinton campaign, and raise serious concerns. Today the NAACP filed a complaint and put the DOJ on notice of the facts found thus far.

http://southernstudies.org/facingsouth/2008/05/nc-naacp-files-formal-vote-suppression.asp

http://www.npr.org/news/images/2008/may/01/wvwvchart.html

Sorry I left off the NPR story on WVWV done this week, its much easier to follow than the link above.

Group with Clinton Ties Behind Dubious Robocalls

by Peter Overby

Listen Now [3 min 55 sec] add to playlist

Chart: Track Women's Voices, Women Vote's political and financial connections
Track Women's Voices, Women Vote's political and financial connections





* Listen: to the North Carolina robocall.


All Things Considered, May 1, 2008 · Thousands of North Carolina residents answered their telephones last week to hear this message, delivered in a deep, soothing voice:

"Hello. This is Lamont Williams. In the next few days, you will receive a voter registration packet in the mail. All you need to do is fill it out, sign it, date and return the application. Then you will be able to vote and make your voice heard. Please return your registration form when it arrives. Thank you."

In fact, the deadline to register for the May 6 Democratic presidential primary had already passed. The robocall went to many registered voters who were expecting to vote that day. The call and follow-up mailings left many wondering whether they were registered for the primary or not.

This sounds like a classic example of voter suppression — sowing confusion in order to drive down turn-out. The calls seemed to be aimed at African-American communities, places where Illinois Sen. Barack Obama is expected to run well ahead of New York Sen. Hillary Clinton.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90114863


So I would ask anyone to evaluate the politics being played knowingly and unknowingly on the Clintosn behalf. This is what surrounds them this is what we saw in the past, its what we see now, its what we will see in the WH again should she win. I have had enough of it. And though many will argu they all have faults, I doubt that this brand is as pervasive as some want to believe. We have to demand a standard of behavior we would expect of our kids and our spouses and our parents. The behavior many seem willing to excuse is behavior they would never accept from their spouse, kids, parents. It has to start somewhere. this is the first time in decades we have had this chance.

I have to agree and say interesting article...I will still be supporting Clinton, but realize that Obama will get the nomination

Thanks for the links Elaine. I'll check them out before making any judgments on this.

I'm a Hoosier, and I'm paying attention! (Valparaiso? Hey, my cousin goes to school there!) But you already knew that, Diana, because you read MY article first.

elaine b.

Hillary supporters, such as myself, are increasingly comfortable voting for Hillary or McCain. Be careful what you wish for.

Tim,

Be Careful what you wish for? Really Tim, neighborly? 100 years of old mens politics again. 100 years of war, campaign promises that can't be kept instead of trying to move us toward a direction that is achievable. Guam elected two new leaders yesterday, one stated she remembered promises made to Guam by the Clinton's around 1995 and 98 when Bill and then Hillary visited. None of their promises were ever fulfilled. And when they talked to voters there they reminded them of these unfulfilled promises and that Hillary had done this once before. Succumbing to strategies of the expedient is just like old man bomb bomb McCain. My dad served under General Curtis LeMay and I recall many dinner conversations of LeMays thinking. Its very much laced through Hillary's Iran "nuclear umbrella' policy. Had Lemay had his way in the Cuban Nuclear standoff we would have had a nuclear exchange.

If in fact you see no difference between Hillary and McCain "Be careful what you wish for". Bush's third term, prepare to see your daughters drafted. Oh and just a note of personal interest, my husband graduated higher in his class than did McCain at the Naval Academy, and sometimes I think my husband is a bonehead so whats going on with McCain. Although his pow status makes him special, we have known plenty of fellow pilots and Naval Academy fellow grads who knew nothing about strategy.

This morning Hillary defended her threat of nuclear obliteration of Iran and its 70million mostly under 30 population. (ABC's This Week)I have to admit this does make me wonder about what her intentions were with the Iraq vote, she never read the NIE report then and seems to ignore the latest NIE assessment of Iran.

The following link are photos of Iran today and its mostly under thirty population.
http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/iran240707.html

Is threatening to "totally obliterate" a nation of 70 million people, more than two-thirds of whom are under the age of 30, a responsible way to address a serious foreign policy challenge?
An answer may have arrived today with the release of 10 photos taken in the immediate aftermath of the bombing of Hiroshima. [CAUTION: EXTREMELY GRAPHIC IMAGES.]

http://yawoot.com/post/415

These photographs, taken by an unknown Japanese photographer, were found in 1945 among rolls of undeveloped film in a cave outside Hiroshima by U.S. serviceman Robert L. Capp, who was attached to the occupation forces. Unlike most photos of the Hiroshima bombing, these dramatically convey the human as well as material destruction unleashed by the atomic bomb. Mr. Capp donated them to the Hoover Archives in 1998 with the provision that they not be reproduced until 2008.

Yes, Senator Clinton, a nuclear Iran would pose a threat. But is alarmist and irresponsible rhetoric about "totally obliterating" another nation a rational means to deal with this potential threat? Frankly, I think we've heard enough "cowboy talk" the last seven years to last us two or three lifetimes.

Pandering and posturing about something as serious as launching a nuclear strike is a grievous error in judgment for someone seeking to be the next President of the United States. (At least in the Democratic Party.)

Senator Clinton, if you want to know what "totally obliterate" really looks like, click on the photos linked above and see "totally obliterated" men, women and children.

Hillary's words about obliterating Iran have already put Iran on notice, the minute they escaped her mouth. Both she and McCain are loose cannons.

Diana- Magnequench is an important and underreported story. Thanks for posting it here. Clinton played the China card with this story, but it is coming back to bite her. Not only could Bill Clinton have stopped the sale, Hillary deliberately misrepresented the intellectual property issue in order to appeal to Indiana voters. Read the transcript of the ABC News investigative report, which has been largely buried, here.

Andy Albers, a former Magnequench vice president, said he was contacted by someone from the Clinton campaign in advance, but Albers said he wasn't asked to be part of the campaign event because his version of what happened -- that the closure was not a threat to national security -- wasn't what the campaign wanted to hear.

One thing for sure, "the devil we know" is a devil all right.

I want a president who is honest and forthright, someone who is not afraid to tell you the truth, even when it's something you don't want to hear.

Lisa,
Interesting about Albers. Have you heard of any Indiana papers carrying the Bayh memo story on Magnequench? How is he able to stay quiet about his outcry concerning the sale and movement to China.

The Merrillville Post-Tribune published a story about Clinton and Obama on jobs just today. Earlier this month there were some letters to the editor. Perhaps the actual memo will show up, too.

Lisa, some are reporting a possible intellectual property issue concerning the smart bomb technology as well.

I like the fact that Obama can think! How refershing that is!!!!

Hillary Failed to disclose $24 Million of Bill's Income

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/35929.html

I must confess, I am astonished at the balance in this piece. I have grown accustomed to seeing wild eyed claims and empty accusations from the left-- but this article is done well.

Hilary is the ultimate coldblooded pragmatist. Reading your most excellent article here made me recall my reading of Joe Klein´s brilliant PRIMARY COLORS many an election season ago. I guess you could call Hil´s book, SECONDARY STRIPES.

John - that's hilarious!