.jpg)
Supporters of Congress' proposed government takeover of health care, including Rep. Carol Shea-Porter, have taken to claiming that they are on "the right side of history."
If you've ever wondered just how out of touch university faculty can get, look no further than the behavior of the University of New Hampshire's faculty union during its recent contract talks.
More Editorials >>>
- > Right on rights: Obama gives hope in China (23)
- > How about spending? An elephant forgets (10)
- > Tobacco shakedown: It's not 'for the children' (19)
- > Social blunders: Our President the yokel (69)
- > Board benefits: Nix health coverage (8)
- > The KSM trial: War? What war? (51)
- > Owned: You belong to Nancy Pelosi (70)
- > Paying for officers: Gatsas gets it right (16)
- > No guarantees: Eagle Times subsidy is wrong (34)
- > Abortion extremism: Shaheen falls on the far left (48)
- > Culture clash: Old NH meets new NH (5)
- > Dump Hackett Hill: It's a public money pit (4)
- > Unsung citizens: They say 'thanks' for us all (8)
- > A new right: Access to abortion funds (55)
- > Default or pay? Arena rock and a hard place (16)
Andrew Cline has been editorial page editor of the New Hampshire Union Leader since October of 2001. His writing has appeared in more than 100 newspapers and magazines, including The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, and National Review.Clinton's 'experience:' Exactly what is it?
Print
Email
Mobile
Reader commentsSen. Hillary Clinton expects New Hampshire voters to believe her when she says she was a member of her husband's "White House team" who played an integral role in shaping policy during his eight years as President. Well, we'd like some proof, Mrs. Clinton.
"I was a member of the White House team that was involved with trying to make a lot of changes . . . I think that people who are running for President should lay out for Americans their record, their experiences, their qualifications, their vision, their plan, and their understanding of how to make it all happen, and that's what I'm doing," Clinton told Boston Globe columnist Joan Vennochi during a recent stop in Manchester.
A candidate with White House experience who really believes that would let voters examine the records from the period during which she claims she was such a vital part of "the White House team." But Mrs. Clinton's actions show that she does not believe what she says.
Her husband is keeping secret many of those records -- 2,600 pages worth, a National Archives official told The New York Sun. The Clintons have claimed that the National Archives won't release the records, but the Archives official in charge says Bill Clinton has not authorized their release.
This is not a trivial issue. Among those records is Mrs. Clinton's schedule, which would help show just how involved she really was in her husband's administration.
Because she has made her "experience" her primary qualification for the presidency, the people deserve to see exactly what experience she really has. Which policies did she help shape? Which did she oppose? Did she serve as a de facto staff member or did her role primarily consist of whispering suggestions into her husband's ear? That history is blackened out, and she is keeping it that way. Why?
She has said that releasing the records is Bill's decision, not hers. But if she cannot convince her husband to release some White House documents for public scrutiny, how does she expect us to believe she will be able to convince Congress or foreign heads of state to follow her lead?
If Mrs. Clinton cannot prevail upon her husband to release the records, there is another option. She could parade his former Cabinet members and staff members to vouch for her. If she were as involved as she claims, surely they would happily share stories of how she helped shape policy and get things done. But she has not done that. We wonder why not.
Sen. Barack Obama is right when he says Mrs. Clinton is simultaneously laying claim to her husband's successes as President while keeping the public in the dark about just how much credit she really deserves.
That's not going to work, Mrs. Clinton.
Either prove you were truly a part of "the White House team" or stop making the claim.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. © 1997-2009.
YOUR COMMENTS
Unfortunately, many Americans fail to educate themselves and hear "35 years of experience" over and over; the media and fellow debators don't question her; and before you know it, she is viewed as "the most qualified, experienced candidate." I am a bit frightened about this but glad to see many of the previos posts on this site; very reassuring.
- Linda Kinney, Olympia, WA
Very well written. To me, this is a job interview, and she has no resume. Not only has she not showed us relevant proof of the superior experience she has based her campaign on... but her campaign strategy has changed so many times I can't keep up. In Iowa NOW she is for "change" after a poll showed Obama ahead of her. Hilary is nice enough... but she is now feebly clinging to her husbands record to pull through for her... after starting this campaign as just "Hilary". Is this flip-flopping to and fro trend something we really want to have in the White House. Don't we have that NOW?
- Tommy Allen, Manassas, VA
The experience Hillary Clinton is talking about is her many years she has been taught by political experiences in her early life. She is also talking about the lack of experience Senator Barrack Obama has in his years which everyone knows will lack progress, in everything you can imagine, if he were ever elected. Senator Clinton has the quickness in accomplishing all her goals, because she knows why and who to contact fastest because of the experience she has unlike Senator Obama. These and her relationships with many political leaders around the world make her always the best candidate for the democratic candidate and this type of experience she has acquired is the experience that Senator Hillary Clinton is talking about. She is also saying that many like Senator Obama lack the relationships with Major political leaders around the world and the quickness to guide the slowly suffering world of accomplishing anything, unlike Senator Clinton who knows what is going on. This type of experience is what Senator Hillary Clinton is talking about.
- Lee, Jun, Ft Irwin, CA
Please, no third term for the clintons.
- w.j. campbell, keller, tex
One should not be able to claim to have experience and not substantiate it. Senator Dodd is correct in asserting that as nice and charming a woman as Mrs. Bush is, being first lady does not qualify her to be President. Hillary's claim to be an agent of change, without specific examples is ludicrous. Voters deserve specifics, while Hillary prefers ambiquities. Voters must hold her to the highest standards.
- Steven Stronge, Newburyport, MA
poll after poll shows hillary has BY FAR the highest negatives of any dem candidate and between 50 to 55% already say they will NEVER vote for her. she will drive out the gop base, lose independents,and a large % of whie male dems. have democrats lost their mind? cant they see she will lose badly while edwards or obama have a great chance to win?
- dennis graff, newport beach,ca
Hillary's supporters see only what they want to see. She had some influence in 1993-94, making a complete mess out of health care and getting involved in the trashing of the Travel Office employees. After the Dems lost Congress, Bill had the good sense to ignore her. As Patrick Healy has pointed out in the NY Times, Hillary has greatly exaggerated her influence. As a senator, despite being one of the biggest earmarkers, she didn't turn around the economy of Western NY as she promised. She voted for war and then blamed Bush for misleading her when it went bad. Never mind that her colleague Bob Graham was warning everyone about the dissents in the NIE. Somehow, the All-Knowing Hillary never heard a word of it.
If she's done so much, why is this Feminist Icon running largely on her husband's record and not her own? Those White House papers are in the hands of Bill's longtime pal, Bruce Lindsay. You can bet that if they backed up Hillary's claims, they would have been released a long time ago.
- Gary Mottola, Brooklyn, NY
This article hits the issue right on the mark: what is Hillary Clinton's claimed 35 years of experience? This claim is not only void of substance, but is offensive. How many persons would be able to apply for any responsible position by claiming the knowledge, work and experience of their spouse as somehow their own?
I hope we in Iowa gives Mrs. Clinton a clear and loud message. She wants the job? She must make a case on her own merits. If Iowa doesn't get it right....I hope New Hampshire will.
- Alfredo Alvarez, Des Moines, Iowa
Hillary's experience includes:
1. The 1993 Health Care initiative which was so messed up that even the Democratic-controlled Congress refused to pass it.
2. An education initiative in Arkansas that led to the expression "Thank Heavens for Mississippi", as Arkansas dropped from 35th to 49th.
3. The establishment of a Rape Crisis Center in Arkansas while her husband was Governor (enough said).
- Nick Andrelli, Alexandria, Va
The questions raised about Hillary Clinton in this article, are the same questions that I and I believe many around the country would like answered. But to date Hillary has yet to provide us with any specific detailed accounts of her involvement in shaping policy as a member of the "White House Team". Until she does, it will be difficult to believe that her proclamations are anything more than hot air...
- Rodney Seel, Waimanalo, HI.
very well written. this reminded me of what i read earlier today - that Hillary is now claiming she had no knowledge of bill cheating on her at any time in their marriage. Bill's cheating on Hillary for so many years has been the rule - not the exception. If she is that freaking dumb she needs to shut her pie hole. She has no dignity and teaches nothing to our young female teens other than turn your head and look the other way - oh and yes if you do happen to see something - LIE LIE LIE
- paula doule, wichita ks
Can anyone realistically imagine the mainstream media allowing any Republican to avoid scrutiny regarding claims of experience or anything else? The double standard continues...
- Peter Anderson, Warner, NH
The UL will have to try that line in a few years. People who didn't live through the Clinton Administration and actually watch Hillary very hard at work in that administration are too young to vote.
The UL can't have it both ways. They can't fuss as her health care initiative while First Lady, and then pretend they didn't notice her White House contribution.
Hillary not only votes in the Senate to return our country to the Clinton surplus trend, she voted against the REPUBLICAN INTEREST EXPENSE PORK PROGRAM that almost all the Republican candidates, including the UL endorsed American hero, John McCain, support. Republicans lowered tax rates below the REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED CONGRESSES' APPROVED EXPENDITURE. creating huge deficits, debt, and interest on that debt.
But not Hillary. She voted against wasting our hard earned tax money on interest that we get nothing - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING - for.
- Bob Jean, Northwood, NH
NOTE: If you have visited this page before, newer comments may be hidden. Press F5, or hold down the Ctrl key while reloading or refreshing the page. (Another option for Firefox users is the Clear Cache add-on.)