ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



Clinton's choice record questioned

Posted: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 10:45 AM by Mark Murray

From NBC/NJ's Aswini Anburajan

DES MOINES, Iowa -- Describing it as a press conference gone awry would be putting it mildly. Before the start of the NPR debate yesterday afternoon, the Clinton campaign arranged for Ellen Malcolm, the head of Emily's List, to hold a press conference with reporters.

Malcolm took the podium and argued that Clinton was the only candidate in this race who had stood up when it was tough, especially on women's issues. She said that Clinton -- standing up to the Bush Administration -- had led the fight to get the FDA to approve the Plan B contraceptive. She also cited the nomination of Chief Justice John Roberts as a time when Clinton had been the strongest voice against his nomination, taking the floor and giving a passionate speech on why his nomination threatened Roe vs. Wade.
 
But the minute Malcolm stopped speaking, she was hit by questions from reporters armed with info sent out by the Obama campaign. Malcolm hadn't mentioned Obama by name, but she said that those who vote "present" at tough times don't show a true commitment to leadership -- referring to Obama's "present" votes on some anti-abortion measures while serving in the Illinois state Senate. But reporters asked Malcolm why the head of the Illinois Planned Parenthood had said in the Los Angeles Times that Obama was getting in trouble for a "present"-vote strategy that the pro-choice group had devised. Malcolm repeated the quote from the Chicago Tribune, which said that Obama's seat had not been in jeopardy unlike other vulnerable Democrats.

But she didn't have an answer for what came next.

Referencing the battle Planned Parenthood had waged in South Dakota to repeal a law that had banned all abortions in the state, Malcolm was asked why Clinton had done nothing to help support that effort. Obama had sent money and written a letter in support of the group. The head of the South Dakota Planned Parenthood had called Clinton's silence on the issue "mystifying."

Malcolm sidestepped the question, raised Clinton's speech on the Senate floor again, and said that her example then had shown true leadership. Obama only had one sentence on Roe in his floor statement in comparison on Roberts' nomination, Malcolm said. Both senators voted against confirming the chief justice.

Obama's campaign followed up on the press conference by circulating a letter Obama had received from Malcolm praising him for his keynote speech at the 2006 EMILY'S List Majority Council Conference and a list of pro-choice activists willing to speak on behalf of Obama's commitment to women's reproductive rights.  

If anything, yesterday's exchange illustrated just how coveted the women's vote is and that neither campaign is willing to give any ground on the issue.

*** UPDATE *** The Clinton campaign called First Read to object to the characterization of yesterday's event as a press conference gone "awry." The campaign also cited a comment from the head of the Illinois National Organization for Women, who has criticized Obama for his "present" votes: "In each case, the right vote was clear, but Senator Obama chose political cover over standing and fighting for his convictions." It's worth pointing, however, out that Illinois NOW -- as well as the national organization -- has endorsed Clinton.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Here is another hit job on Senator Clinton from MSNBC... I wonder when the media is going to start looking at Obama? Has there ever been a negative story about Obama? On Fritst Read? Always seems to be about Clinton, and how her hair looks one day - how she laughs, how her press plane had trouble...

But read a latest poll -

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x2882.xml?ReleaseID=1125
Anybody care about this?
This will turn out to be another major blunder on Hilary's part where she'll lose even more female voters. I think the reason she lost some to obama was her playing the gender card after her poor performance in the Philadelphia debate.  The spin afterwards turned off a lot of women.  This is going to be another one of those moments. Glass house Hilary; you live in one!
Oh please, either of these democrats would protect women and choice issues. Trying to make a distinction on this is totally pointless.  

And by the way, you guys need to remember, whoever wins the democratic nomination needs to be able to appeal to independants and conservatives in the general.  Can't win without crossover votes, period.  In the past, leftist candidates have not done this very well.  Moderate, pragmatic democrats (Bill Clinton, for example) have tended to do well in general elections.  Not saying Obama couldn't, but he's pandering to the left more and more and I wish he's stop, he needs to think about the general.  You better believe, folks, the republicans will beat thes positions up if he gets the nomination.  It won't play well.  Hillary's more moderate, thought out positions would stand up better.  Especially on defense and foriegn affairs.  There is a world of difference between the leftist opinion and most independant americans.  Maybe that sucks, but it's still the reality.  Please Dems, don't snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.  Not AGAIN.
Chicago NOW director Lorna Brett, who devised the strategy on abortion issues that led Obama to vote present, saying ?I am a supporter of Hillary Clinton and an Emily?s list donor, but this line of attack is unacceptable. While I was the president of Chicago NOW, Senator Obama worked closely with us, could not have been more supportive of a woman?s right to choose, and there was no bigger champion in Illinois on our issues.? http://cameron.blogs.foxnews.com/2007/12/04/emilys-list-goes-after-obamas-leadership-on-choice/

This doesn't look to good for her either....based on the speech she gave several days ago questioning this.
Even people who may not support his election will not put up with the lies she wants to manufacture
I think that makes it three strikes and you are out for Emily's list and the Emily's list alumni. I have been a loyal supporter for years but no more. First the FISA vote, then the Mukasey vote and now this unnecessary, divisive, exclusive endorsement. I believe they should remove all references to being progressive from their website and literature. Can someone recommend an organization that supports progressive candidates.

I understand that Emily's list supports women candidates who support choice, therefore it would make sense for them to support Hillary because she is a women and I have no problem with that but it was wrong to say (if it was reported correctly) that Hillary was the ONLY candidate who stood tough on women's issues.
So what do women who didn't marry money, marry politically powerful men, or inherit money think of this?
Referencing the battle Planned Parenthood had waged in South Dakota to repeal a law that had banned all abortions in the state, Malcolm was asked why Clinton had done nothing to help support that effort. Obama had sent money and written a letter in support of the group. The head of the South Dakota Planned Parenthood had called Clinton's silence on the issue "mystifying."

I don't think anyone on here can bring up anything on Hillary Clinton and women's issues again after that.

I would wonder seriously if anybody on her campaign is capable of answering the tough questions that is required of any presidential candidate.  her husband tried to answer them and digs an extra foot in his grave every time he tried it.

And then to top it off, Obama has a letter from this so-called spokeswoman praising him....

All in all, a great day for Hillary Clinton LOL.
The difference in MSNBC's treatment of Clinton (both here and on air) has been somewhat startling to watch unfold in the past couple of weeks.  For example, I watch Morning Joe before work, and a few weeks ago it was all about how strong Hillary is and what a flawless campaign she has run.  Now it is all about how weak she is and how much trouble her campaign is in.  How quickly the tide turns in politics.  When you are on top, everybody loves you.  When you hit a bump in the road, the press is the first one to turn its back on you.

I don't think MSNBC should sing Hillary's praises day in and day out.  I don't think they should sing anyone's praises.  What I do think is that the media should not be covering candidates based on their standings in the polls.  The change in tone of coverage on the Democratic side (at least with MSNBC) has shown just how fickle the media is.  

And Bill Clinton was right yesterday.  The media focuses far too much on the horse-race and the catfights and far too little on what actually matters when choosing a president.  When it comes right down to it, does it really matter if Obama has a more clever comeback than Hillary, or if Hillary lands a skillful jab to Obama or if Edwards rants about them both?  I hope we can all answer that question in the negative.  
Here is another hit job on Senator Clinton from MSNBC... I wonder when the media is going to start looking at Obama? Has there ever been a negative story about Obama? On Fritst Read? Always seems to be about Clinton, and how her hair looks one day - how she laughs, how her press plane had trouble...

But read a latest poll -



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

I did not approve this message above. By their fruit we shall know them. I guess the Clinton's machine is at work. I'll never vote for Hillary

Here is the message that i approve

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/davidcorn/2007/12/hillary-on-obama-fear-and-hatr.html

Hillary Clinton thinks the presidency belongs to her by ascription.
Hey, logic and common sense will tell! Clinton is so screwed up on the meaning of ""pritory issue""! Her constant babble about meaning less issue ""abortion""== keep your legs crossed and that would solve abortion""! The taxpayer should never foot the bill for a whore's off spring or abortion""!
Amazed, are you actually saying that Hillary Clinton can win crossover votes and Barack Obama cannot??  That is an amazingly ridiculous statement.  Hillary Clinton is NO Bill Clinton. Also, what leftist postions of Obama's are you referring to?

Sorry, Hillary haters but your “Hillary’s campaign is imploding” and “she’s unelectable” fantasies just got hit with another dose of reality:

New LA Times Bloomberg Poll – Hillary Maintains Huge Lead Over Obama 45% - 22%

New Quinnipiac Swing State Polls (FL, OH, PA) - Clinton over Obama by 36% (FL), 26% (OH) and 28% (PA)

Hillary defeats Rudy by 7% in FL, 4% in Oh and ties him in PA while Rudy defeats Obama by 8% in FL

I Wonder if Chris Matthews will report these numbers on tonight's Hardball or ignore them since they don't fit his "Hillary Falling"
propaganda.
Amazed,

It was MSNBC that tried to make the distinction, it was Hillary.  She is trying to imply that Obama will not stand up for Women's issues and she is just plain wrong.  I'm glad that this post is here & that Obama is standing up for himself.  She keeps throwing anything she can find at him hoping something will stick but it's not working.  She really can't find any real oppo on him because there isn't any.  Pretty soon people are going to stop paying attention to anything she says if she keeps "crying wolf".
FAKE Bee,

It wasn't a hit job on Clinton.  If anything, it was a failed hit job by the leader of Emily's List to question Obama's devotion to women's rights.  She is the one who said it was "failed leadership" on Obama's part.

These were very legitimate questions that were posed to the leader of Emily's List.  Obama doesn't deserve to lose the female vote just because Emily's List decided to endorse Clinton.  Emily's List has it's own perogative and that's fine.  But, Obama has a right to explain to female voters that he supports their rights as well.

Obama '08
This issue is a non-issue for the GOP. All their Candidates feel Women have no Reproductive-Rights.
Hillary's comments are tailored to her audience.She takes one position one day and the opposite the next. Hillary has taken exactly six different positions on immigration and I can't begin to count the number, of conflicting positions she has taken on the mideast, starting with kissing Arafat's wife.
The Republicans will have a field day with her and her only response will be "the big bad men are attacking me" again.
CLINTON WILL SELLOUT ANYBODY AND ANYTHING
.
It is possible that Senator Clinton is the best candidate.  However, even though many may like the policies that Senator Clinton proposes, they should also consider her record, just as Senator Clinton insists.
.
The last Clinton Administration, when faced with the fact that protection rackets where assaulting, torturing and murdering people with poison and radiation, chose to avoid its responsibilities to incarcerate the criminals and to protect the citizenry.
.
Instead, they made a deal with the criminal gang stalker protection rackets to leave them alone and to consequently abandon the citizenry.
.
Do we want a President who sells out the citizenry for votes?
.
Do we want a President who sends a "crime does pay" message to society?
.
Would you vote for a President who signed nonaggression deals with the KKKlan or the Nazi party? Gangs that torture with poison and radiation are much like the KKKlan and Nazi Party.
.
We do not need a sellout President. We need a principled leader President.
.
If you are one of the few who do not know what the above refers to, do a web search for “gang stalking” to see the tip of the dirtberg.  Please do it before you decide to reply to my post. Here let me make it easy for you: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22gang+stalking%22.
.



So was obama for it before he voted against it or present or whatever...or was he jsut pandering to a vocal slice of the dim party...this is all so clintonesque
To csh,Il:

Once again the Hillidiots come out in droves and declare that the media is 'biased' for not making Hillary look like the messiah.
Carrie,

I agree with you, however, Hillary accused Obama of not standing up for women's rights.  This press conference that her campaign set up was to reinforce those accusations.  This is a very important issue for many people.  It is only right that Obama stood up for himself and it is only right for the press to cover this - otherwise the only information that is out there is her accusation.

She really was off base here and I'm glad it has come to light.
thank you for writing about this.  It has been frustrating that the news has not brought up Obama's support of women's rights and the plan by the women's groups in regard to his present vote.
I have found Obama to be much stronger than clinton on women's issues and find she only supports us when it's convienent.
Carrie, I also watch Morning Joe every morning (except when he's not there and they replace him with that David Shuster wank) along with Hardball, and I gotta say that the coverage is fair.

Sorry, but the Clinton campaign slipped up and has been doing things wrong for weeks now.

I disagree with Chris Matthews on why this happened, though. He thinks that it was Clinton's performance at the Philadelphia Debate that got her in trouble. I don't think so. I think it was the Clinton campaign's damage control afterwards that really made them look bad. Blaming everyone but themselves, pulling the gender card, etc... It made people think about her not taking responsibility for her Iraq vote, the Iran vote, and all of the politics she plays. It made peopel scared that it'd just be 4 years of a Democrat version of Bush/Cheney
If I'm not mistaken, the delegates from both Michigan and FL WILL NOT COUNT.  
Obama keeps saying how he was always against the Iraq war and that Hillary voted for it. If Obama was in the Senate at the time and had access to allthe info that the Senators had, and he was under the pressure they were under I wonder how he would have voted. He is greatly disingenuous on this issue. And how about his response to the Illegal immigration drivers licence....he too blew but I don't see him being chastized over it. HE does NOT get my vote.
Lewis,
What I am saying is that Obama, in an effort to distinguish himself from Hillary, has taken more liberal stands on a variety of issues.  While that works well in the primary, those positions will be touted in the general.  I am not saying he can't win crossover votes, but when he goes on the record on some of these things and then has to defend it in front of a not so friendly audience made up of people who lean to the left/right/ and everything in between.. it will be difficult.  This is a trend you can view in historical terms if you are so inclined, as well.  
Give MSNBC a break; They don't care about who wins or looses, they only care about controversy, contentiousness and doing what they can to make it a close race. They're part of the media, and the media narrative is that Clinton is slipping. They'll change their tune if she slips too much, though, or if Obama can ever crack the 30% mark anywhere.

Mike Huckabee is a HUGE story. Why isn't he getting more space here? Rudy and Mitt aren't just slipping, Huck's GAINING, yet it's still Obama vs. Clinton, 24/7
I think one reason is that they don't really have a narrative for the republican race yet, so until they can tie everything up in a neat little package, you get Hillary and Barack, "Smackdown '08"!"


Van
Obama keeps saying how he was always against the Iraq war and that Hillary voted for it. If Obama was in the Senate at the time and had access to allthe info that the Senators had, and he was under the pressure they were under I wonder how he would have voted. He is greatly disingenuous on this issue. And how about his response to the Illegal immigration drivers licence issue ...he too blew it but I don't see him being chastized over it. HE does NOT get my vote.
Unfortunately csh, polls in states where no campaigning has been done really don't matter right now.  They are irrelevant.  Voters, for the most part, have not gotten to know ANY of the candidates.  Clinton leads based on her last name, nothing else.

Once Obama wins Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, don't you think that voters in these others states that you list will start to take notice.  Yeah, me too.

Obama '08
Jessica,
The democrats are all right on abortion.  It won't be the major issue in this campaign.. what will be are issues that effect all americans, regardless of political stripes.
In Historical terms, democrats with more centrist views tend to do better among indpendants and conservatives than those who pander to the left.  The democrats need those voters..they can't win with democratic loyalists alone.  Independants now outnumber both democrats and republicans. This is simply a historical trend.  Will Obama buck that trend?  Maybe.. and many centrist candidates before Hillary did not have her negatives or the media spinning 15 years of smut.. however, the trends are still the trends, and it's food for thought.
And Bill Clinton was right yesterday.  The media focuses far too much on the horse-race and the catfights and far too little on what actually matters when choosing a president.

Maybe if Hillary was to start giving some compentent answers to the tough questions, maybe they can get back to the campaign.  But as long as Hillary shys away from answering any questions about anything, it is kind of hard to figure out what she is for....
When it comes down to it, we need to look at who is right for the job?  Who is capable of helping America remain the powerful country that we are?  Who is willing to think of others before themselves?  I worry that the candidates are too concerned with making a name for themselves, and pleasing others, than to actually serve in the role of president.
Press is basically in the tank for Obama at this point.  The limo libs, and Ivy league elites are totally bamboozelled by this fake Chicago pol.

That is why nothing will stick to Obama.  The press doesn't want it to.
Question to the moderator(s):

By what criteria are you approving comments? See the flame thrown by fac/ AZt at 11:21 today.  Pretty inappropriate, from what I can see.

All abortions are had by "whores"?  So, women who get raped (even by their husbands) are whores? Women who get pregnant when birth control fails are whores? Women who can't afford birth control pills because their insurance won't cover it and who's partners refuse to wear condoms are whores?

Let's keep this debate on track, shall we?
Amazed, What specifically liberal stands has he taken? You've written two posts and have not listed one of these so called stands
Watching one's enemies in disarray is a good way to start the morning...

Perhaps, however, this little fracas will open a few Democrats' eyes to the single-mindedness of Mrs. Clinton's quest for the White House.  This is not a woman between whom and whose goals you want to stand, because she's got the political "playbook" and it's all fair game as far as she's concerned.  The only sure thing about Hillary is that she believes she should be President.  Beyond that, what she'd actually do or stand for is all just a guess.
Dominic...so you're faulting Obama for being right on the Iraq War, but not being elected yet to vote for it? What sort of logic is that?

And Obama did not flub the illegal immigrant driver's license question. He was against it the whole time, unlike Clinton. He did stumble however, and lacked brevity. Is that a good enough reason to not vote for someone? Because they were unable to be concise in what they call a "lightning round" 30 second sound bite on a huge issue like Illegal Immigration?

Clinton wanted it both ways by using "doublespeal"....Obama simply fumbled his answer, which was still consistent
You mean Hillary Clinton's campaign was caught being dishonest AGAIN?  For what?  The eighth time in a week?

I'm glad the media is finally starting to stand up for FACTS and TRUTH.  Hillary will do whatever it takes to win, including slander and lie
Dominic,

Given that Hillary didn't bother to read the intel. report before she voted for war I guess you could say that both her and Obama had the same information.  His good judgement made his stand up against the war & her judgement made her vote for the war.
We are currently in the primary season and abortion does matter to many dems.  Hillarys accusation that Obama does not support womens right is an issue and I'm glad the record has been set straight.  

I think most right to lifers would view Obama's and Hillary's positions on this issue about the same.
Carrie, Eastern Iowa says:

"When it comes right down to it, does it really matter if Obama has a more clever comeback than Hillary, or if Hillary lands a skillful jab to Obama or if Edwards rants about them both?  I hope we can all answer that question in the negative."  

I hope we can answer that in the negative in the general election, too. It will take a lot of effort on both sides and entail an abandonment of standard campaign tactics for Democrats and Republicans alike.
sure Hillary is pro choice which is supported mostly by druggies, that want an abortion to cover up their mistakes when high, and trading sex for crack, there are exceptions, but few.
Dominic A. Martin, Raleigh , NC.... It wasn't just that obama was against the Iraq war, it was why it was wrong.  

When obama said his best foreign relations experience was living in Indonesia, he was talking about understanding the Muslim world and the difference in tribes.  He knew that even if we took out Saddam it would be a mess in Iraq because of the three distinct and separate cultures there.  He called what we have happening now, before the war even started.  

So, he would not have voted to authorize Military operations in Iraq. For all the EXPERIENCE of the candidates running: Joe, Dodd, Hilary, and Edwards they didn't understand why going into Iraq was going to be a BIG mistake, but obama understood why.  That's why Judgement trumps experience.
Given that Hillary didn't bother to read the intel. report before she voted for war I guess you could say that both her and Obama had the same information.

Jessica, Wisconsin (Sent Wednesday, December 05, 2007 11:58 AM)

I wouldn't go so far as to say she didn't read it at all. She read the summary, which is basically the same thing that the media reports. So the basic premise still stands. She had access to more information than Obama, she just didn't use it all. That's the problem I have with her vote (and everyone else's). It seems like it was a pretty important vote, and all she read was the summary of the report?

As for saying he wasn't sure how he would vote, I don't see how his position could have been anything different from that. He wasn't a Senator, so he didn't have that information. That's what he said. He also said that from what he did know, the case wasn't made. That's pretty good judgement, seeing as how a majority of the Senate couldn't/wouldn't see it the same way.
If this isn't proof that Hillary is a liar, I don't know what is. If Hillary had anything good on Obama, she would use it, and look at what she's come up with.

1. He's too ambitious - The proof is an essay he wrote when he was 5 about wanting to be president.

2. He doesn't support women's rights. - The proof is a hastily arranged hit job by a woman who wrote a letter praising him in the past, and Hillary's criticism of Obama was rebutted by one of her own supporters?

3. He says one thing, but does another - that's you, Hillary.

This is crap. She has made a fool of herself on every issue she has attacked him on over the past week.
Hillary's flip-flopping , Iraq war-hopping, is catching up with her.  Pretty soon even the sleep walking far-left Dems will realize that she is hypnotizing them with whatever the polls tell her to say at the time.
Hillary Clinton chose to attack Barack Obama by mocking his kindergarten dream to be president one day.  Mrs. Clinton managed to insult every voter all at once.  Because who among us didn't have childhood dreams?  Whether to be an astronaut, teacher, or even president of the United States the chance to realize our dreams is something that defines America.  Mrs. Clinton, who previously insulted just all male voters, is proving to be a poor campaigner who is ultimately unelectable.

Let's face it:  we who are Democrats must soon unite on whoever will be our presidential candidate.  The constant mudslinging must eventually stop if we are to defeat the Republican candidate in 2008.  But it looks just awful when the candidates and their constituencies have spent so much time belittling and demeaning each other only to subsequently have to shake hands and support the primary winner!  Do you really think Obama or Clinton are such bad candidates, or would you rather see Rudy or Romney as our next president?  Sure, everyone has a favorite, but keep the remarks civilized.  Even those Republicans do not degrade one another the way the Democrats do!  
Lewis, here you go. Now, understand, these may not be my opinions, but these are issue that will come under scrutiny by those who are more conservative.  I know this is no representative sample, but my husband, is a die hard republican, and because of Hillary's stand on these issues (and others) he will support her, but cannot commit to any of the other front-runners.
1.  Obama beating up Clinton's vote to give the president authority to use Military action against Iraq (2002).  The intention was to use the vote for leverage against Saddam.. and many agreed with this approach at the time (how funny we forget the mood of 2002).  Obama acting like he knows exactly what he would have done is seen as disingenious by some, and underscores his naivity on how complex the vote really was.
2.  Obama decrying Hillary's vote on the Iranian guard, yet not showing up to vote on the resolution himself.  Can't have it both ways.  He could have put pen to paper on it, yet, he didn't.  His disagreement on this issue would be more credible, had he put it in writing.
3.  Obama's insistance that a national healthcare plan does not require a mandate is seen as naive by many.
4. Obama pledging to meet with the Iranian leader prior to his first year in office ending.  While this seems like a great stand, it, is also naive.  A candidate cannot make such a pledge, as they have NO IDEA what the situation will warrant when they take office.  The left continues to insist that the Iranian leader is no threat, not a bad guy, and diplomacy will solve all.  While diplomacy is certainly the route we should take first, many moderates also understand that we cannot trust Iran.. and we cannot use political debates to create lame "what if" scenarios.  While it wasn't a sexy or popular answer with the left.. Hillary's answer on that question was dead on.  That she would not commit to something that she could not predict right now, or that could be used against us as a propaganda tool.  That is a pragmatic, practical, and presidental answer.  And conservatives like my husband who happened to see it.. Noticed.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=497101

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google