If Hillary weren't running and Bill Clinton offered to campaign for Edwards or Obama....

Clintons Making Statements Not Supported by the Facts
January 20, 2008

CLINTONS CLAIMED OBAMA SAID REPUBLICANS HAD BETTER IDEAS
Hillary Clinton Said Obama "Said That He Thought The Republicans Had Better Ideas Than Democrats The Last 10 To 15 Years." Hillary Clinton said, "My leading opponent the other day said that he thought the Republicans had better ideas than Democrats the last 10 to 15 years. That's not the way I remember the last 10 to 15 years. I don't think it's a better idea to privatize Social Security. I don't think it's a better idea to try to eliminate the minimum wage. I don't think it's a better idea to undercut health benefits and to give drug companies the right to make billions of dollars by providing prescription drugs to Medicare recipients. I don't think it's a better idea to shut down the government, to drive us into debt. I think we know what needs to be done in America and I think we're ready to do it. I'm ready to lead on day one."

Bill Clinton: Obama Claimed Republicans Had "All the Good Ideas." Bill Clinton said, "Her principal opponent said that since 1992, the Republicans have had all the good ideas...I can't imagine any Democrat seeking the presidency would say they were the party of new ideas for the last 15 years. But it sounded good in Reno I guess...So now it turns out you can choose between somebody who thinks our ideas or better or the Republicans had all the good ideas."


OBAMA SAID GOP WAS CONSIDERED PARTY OF IDEAS, WENT ON TO DESCRIBE WHY THOSE IDEAS ARE WRONG

Obama: "Fair to Say the Republicans Were the Party of Ideas For a Pretty Long Chunk of Time," Then Laid Why Many of Those Ideas Were Wrong. Obama was asked how his being the nominee would help congressmen and senators, down-ballot candidates, get elected. Obama said, "I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that, you know, Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. They felt like, you know, with all the excesses of the 60s and the 70s and government had grown and grown but there wasn't much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating and he tapped into what people were already feeling. Which is, people wanted clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamic and entrepreneurship that had been missing, alright? I think Kennedy, twenty years earlier, moved the country in a fundamentally different direction. So I think a lot of it just has to do with the times. I think we're in one of those times right now. Where people feel like things as they are going aren't working. We're bogged down in the same arguments that we've been having, and they're not useful. And, you know, the Republican approach, I think, has played itself out. I think it's fair to say the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last ten, fifteen years, in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom. Now, you've heard it all before. You look at the economic policies when they're being debated among the Presidential candidates and it's all tax cuts. Well, you know, we've done that, we tried it. That's not really going to solve our energy problems, for example. So, some of it's the times. And some of it's, I think, there's maybe a generation element to this, partly. In the sense that there's a, I didn't did come of age in the battles of the 60s. I'm not as invested in them. And so I think I talk differently about issues. And I think I talk differently about values. And that's why, I think we've been resonating with the American people."




BILL CLINTON TWICE CRITICIZED NON-EXISTENT RADIO AD ENCOURAGING REPUBLICANS TO SWITCH PARTIES FOR A DAY, CLAIMED VOTER INTIMIDATION THAT DID NOT HOLD UP UNDER INVESTIGATION

Bill Clinton Twice Claimed An Obama Radio Ad Encouraged Republicans to Switch Parties for A Day—No Reports of Such an Ad; Also Claimed to Have Witnessed Voter Intimidation That Was Not Verified. After criticizing Obama, Bill Clinton said on January 18th, "It goes along with their plan to ask Republicans to become Democrats for a day and caucus with you tomorrow, and then go back and become Republicans so they can participate in the Republican primary." Ben Smith reported that Bill Clinton said, "There's a radio ad up in the northern part of Nevada telling Republicans that they ought to just register as Democrats for a day so they can beat Hillary and go out and be Republicans next week and vote in the primary. Doesn't sound like the new politics to me. Today when my daughter and I were wandering through the hotel, and all these culinary workers were mobbing us telling us they didn't care what the union told them to do, they were gonna caucus for Hillary. There was a representative of the organization following along behind us going up to everybody who said that, saying 'if you're not gonna vote for our guy were gonna give you a schedule tomorrow so you can't be there.'" Smith wrote, "To go over the facts here, the only publicly reported radio ad anything like what Clinton refers to is one that encourages Republicans and independents to caucus, but doesn't mention Hillary. And the Vegas papers haven't found any evidence of the kind of straightforward voter suppression Clinton reports. The Obama campaign has suggested the Clinton campaign file formal complaints if it has evidence."

Clinton Camp Claimed Voter Intimidation—A Claim that Didn't Pan Out Under Examination. "New York Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign had a story it wanted to tell this week, so it turned to a friendly blogger. Taylor Marsh, who in the past has been paid by a union now backing Clinton, quickly ran with the story: Members of the Culinary Union were being intimidated to vote for Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, whom the union endorsed last week. Under scrutiny, the story didn't exactly pan out. But no matter. Thursday, the Clinton campaign put out a statement expressing "concern" about "news reports" of "voter intimidation" -- media reports that were the campaign's own doing and all came back to Marsh, as well as a Sun report that questioned the story."




CLINTONS MADE DEBUNKED ATTACK ON OBAMA'S IRAQ WAR OPPOSITION

ATTACK: 1/7/08

Bill Clinton Attacked Obama For Saying In 2004, During The Democratic Convention, That He Didn't Know How He Would Have Voted On The Iraq War Resolution And Saying That There Was No Difference Between Himself And Bush On The War. The very thing that Hillary Clinton doesn't need is what she got from Bill Clinton at a campaign event at Dartmouth College. That's where he accused the media of being soft on Obama, of having a double standard when it comes to the Illinois senator and the former First Lady. Bill Clinton said "But since you raised the judgment issue, let's go over this again. That is the central argument for his campaign. 'It doesn't matter that I started running for president less a year after I got to the Senate from the Illinois State Senate. I am a great speaker and a charismatic figure and I'm the only one who had the judgment to oppose this war from the beginning. Always, always, always.' ... It is wrong that Senator Obama got to go through 15 debates trumpeting his superior judgment and how he had been against the war in every year, numerating the years, and never got asked one time, not once, 'Well, how could you say, that when you said in 2004 you didn't know how you would have voted on the resolution? You said in 2004 there was no difference between you and George Bush on the war and you took that speech you're now running on off your website in 2004 and there's no difference in your voting record and Hillary's ever since?' Give me a break. This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen."

DEBUNKED: 3/22/07, 1/7/08 & 1/12/08

New York Times: "A Review Of Mr. Obama's Statements On Iraq Since 2002 Shows That He Has Opposed The War Against Saddam Hussein Consistently." The New York Times reported, "Over the last week, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign has opened a new offensive against Senator Barack Obama: Former President Bill Clinton has asserted that Mr. Obama was initially ambivalent about the Iraq war, and Mrs. Clinton's strategist has highlighted his votes to finance a war he says he opposes. But a review of Mr. Obama's statements on Iraq since 2002 shows that he has opposed the war against Saddam Hussein consistently, calling it 'dumb' and 'rash.'"

TPM: Clearly Obama Was Pointing To The Fact That He Wasn't In The Senate At The Time As A Way Of Tactfully Avoiding Criticizing His Party's VP And Presidential Nominees; It's Pretty Clear That Obama Was In Fact Against The War At The Time. "So, clearly, Obama was pointing to the fact that he wasn't in the Senate at the time as a way of tactfully avoiding criticizing his party's presidential and vice-presidential nominees. It's perfectly clear that Obama was in fact against the war at the time. His position then -- as now -- was that the case for war had not been made and that the invasion wasn't justified."

Washington Post Fact Checker: Bill Clinton Comments About Obama's 2004 Convention Iraq Statements "Are Somewhat Misleading Snippets From News Paper Interviews Obama Gave Before The Convention;" The Clinton Campaign Left Out That Important Last Sentence... When It E-Mailed Reporters With Backup Materials For The Inconsistency Claim. "I just came from a Bill Clinton town hall meeting in Peterborough. The news nugget out of the meeting was his attack on Barack Obama for alleged inconsistency over the Iraq war. The former president reminded his audience that Obama had made a big deal out of a 2002 speech opposing the invasion of Iraq. According to Clinton, opposition to the war in Iraq has become "the central logic" behind the Obama presidential campaign. Clinton then expressed surprise that Obama has been allowed to get away with a statement in 2004, "at the Democratic Convention," saying that there was "not much difference" between him and George W. Bush on Iraq. He also quoted Obama as saying that he "did not know" how he would have voted on the now-contentious 2002 Senate resolution authorizing military action in Iraq, had he been in the Senate at the time. The way Clinton said all this, it sounded as if these statements were part of Obama's big speech to the convention, which marked his introduction to big-time politics. In fact, they are somewhat misleading snippets from newspaper interviews that Obama gave before the convention. As the keynote speaker, Obama was trying to be loyal to the Democratic nominees, John Kerry and John Edwards, both of whom had voted in favor of the war authorization resolution, along with Hillary Clinton. In an interview reported by the New York Times on July 26, on the first day of the convention, he reiterated his opposition to the war but declined to criticize Kerry and Edwards, saying he was "not privy to Senate intelligence reports." He then continued: "What would I have done? I don't know. What I know is that from my vantage point the case was not made.' (The Clinton campaign left out that important last sentence when it e-mailed reporters with backup material for the inconsistency claim, which was also made by Hillary Clinton in the televised debate Saturday night.) In an interview published in the Chicago Tribune the following day (July 27,2004), Obama said that he would have voted "no" on the Senate resolution. But he said he was not in favor of "pulling out now." On the issue of whether to stay in Iraq , he said "there's not much of a difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage." The context of his remarks makes clear that he was not referring to the original decision to go into Iraq, but the question of whether to remain."


CLINTONS MADE DEBUNKED ATTACK ON OBAMA'S CHOICE / PRESENT VOTES
ATTACK: 12/20/07, 1/8/08, 1/13/08

Clinton Attacked Obama For Voting Present On Legislation. Clinton: You know, Senator Obama voted present 130 times in the state Senate. When you're president, you can't vote present. You have to make a decision. Sometimes it's a split second decision. You don't have time to, you know, think about it. You've got to actually decide.

Clinton Surrogates Attacked Obama's "Present" Votes And Said That The President Of The United States Needs To Take A Tough Stand On Tough Issues. Just a few hours after Clinton's surrogates in Iowa praised her foreign policy experience today in Iowa, three other Democratic supporters -- Reps. Stephanie Tubbs Jones of Ohio and Anthony Weiner and Joe Crowley of New York -- held a conference call with reporters, questioning Obama's leadership and record for voting "present" numerous times while in the Illinois state Senate. "The president of the United States needs to take a tough stand on tough issues -- and not say, 'I'm here, but I'm not going to take a position.'"

The Clinton Campaign Attacked Obama For Voting "Present" On Seven Abortion Votes In The Illinois Legislature. An attack mailer from Hillary Clinton's campaign appeared in some New Hampshire mailboxes in the last few days. The flyer questions Barack Obama's pro-choice credentials, citing seven "present" votes he cast in the Illinois state Legislature. The implication is that Obama lacked the courage to stand up to the anti-abortion crowd. What the mailer leaves out is that pro-choice leaders in Illinois asked legislators to vote "present" viewing the bills in question as cheap election-year stunts from anti-abortion politicians, and that Planned Parenthood leaders from Illinois have defended Obama against Clinton's attacks on the votes.

DEBUNKED: 3/9/04, 7/17/07 & 12/20/07

The "Dirt" On Attacks on Obama's Present Votes Is "All Over The Hands of Those Pointing The Finger." "This column has the dirt on the issue of state Sen. Barack Obama's 'present' votes on tough issues in the Illinois Legislature--votes that at least two of his opponents in the March 16 Democratic U.S. Senate primary say mark him as a coward... There's dirt here all right. It's all over the hands of those pointing the finger."

Lisa Madigan, Illinois Attorney General: "It's Just Plan Wrong To Imply That Voting Present Reflected A Lack Of Leadership...In Fact, It Was The Exact Opposite." "Lisa Madigan, the Illinois attorney general who was in the Illinois Senate with Mr. Obama from 1998 through 2002, said she and Mr. Obama voted present on the anti-abortion bills. 'It's just plain wrong to imply that voting present reflected a lack of leadership,' Ms. Madigan said. 'In fact, it was the exact opposite.'"

Planned Parenthood Says Obama's Present Votes On Choice Are "Leadership Votes." "'We at Planned Parenthood view those as leadership votes,' Pam Sutherland, the president and CEO of the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council, told ABC News. 'We worked with him specifically on his strategy. The Republicans were in control of the Illinois Senate at the time. They loved to hold votes on 'partial birth' and 'born alive'. They put these bills out all the time...because they wanted to pigeonhole Democrats...Sutherland said Obama approached her in the late 1990s and worked with her and others in crafting the strategy of voting 'present.' She remembers meeting with Obama outside of the Illinois Senate chambers on the Democratic side of the aisle. She and Obama finished their conversation in his office. 'He came to me and said: 'My members are being attacked. We need to figure out a way to protect members and to protect women,' said Sutherland in recounting her conversation with Obama. 'A present vote was hard to pigeonhole which is exactly what Obama wanted.'




CLINTONS MADE DEBUNKED ATTACK ON OBAMA AND SOCIAL SECURITY TAXES

ATTACK: 1/7/08

Clinton Sent A Mailer In New Hampshire, Attacking Obama On Wanting To Raise Social Security Taxes to the Tune of $1 Trillion. Hillary has dropped in New Hampshire, attacking Obama on Social Security taxes. The mailer said "New Hampshire families need to keep more of their hard-earned dollars -- not less" and "We need a President that will help hard-working families keep more of what they earn."

DEBUNKED: 11/16/07, 11/28/07 & 12/3/07

FactCheck.Org: If The Social Security Tax Were Applied To All Earnings, It Would Be A Billion Dollar Tax Increase Over Ten Years. "Clinton called Obama's proposal to raise Social Security taxes on earnings over $97,500 per year, the current upper limit on which any tax is levied, a trillion-dollar increase on 'middle class families.'...Taxing all earnings would indeed amount to a $1.3 trillion increase over the next 10 years alone, according to estimates by Cato Institute Social Security expert Michael Tanner, who says he drew his figures from projections by the Social Security Administration staff. A similar estimate comes from Citizens for Tax Justice, which figures the measure would bring in $124 billion per year."

Obama Has Not "Proposed Eliminating The Cap Entirely." "He has not proposed any specific way to adjust the cap - nor has he proposed eliminating the cap entirely, which would mean all wage income would be subject to the tax. But he has stated in various venues that 'his inclination ... has been for a 'donut' where the uncapping would take place above some threshold income level - probably around 200,000 or 250,000' his economic adviser Austan Goolsbee said in an email. A donut would protect a certain portion of income (e.g., between $100,000 and $200,000) from the payroll tax and could be phased in over decades, Goolsbee said."

Reich: Obama Offered A "Sensible" And "Progressive" Solution For Social Security. Robert Reich wrote, "I'm becoming increasingly concerned about the stridency and inaccuracy of charges in Iowa -- especially coming from my old friend...Obama wants to do it by lifting the cap on the percent of income subject to Social Security payroll taxes, which strikes me as sensible. That cap is now close to $98,000 (it's indexed), and the result is highly regressive. (Bill Gates satisfies his yearly Social Security obligations a few minutes past midnight on January 1 every year.) The cap doesn't have to be lifted all that much to keep Social Security solvent – maybe to $115,00. That's a progressive solution to the problem."
http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/01/20/clintons_making_statements_not.php