Posted on 01/17/2008 7:56:25 PM PST by jdm
Judicial Watch has tried to gain access to the records from Hillary Clinton's task force on revamping the American health-care system, and has been met with considerable resistance. After seeing the first batch released by the Clinton library, one can certainly understand why. In a press release from Judicial Watch earlier this evening, they excerpted some explosive passages within the documents, passages which will create some uncomfortable questions for Hillary on the campaign trail.
First, an internal critique of Hillary's plan marveled at the unprecedented scope of government control over a private industry -- at least in peacetime:
A June 18, 1993 internal Memorandum entitled, “A Critique of Our Plan,” authored by someone with the initials “P.S.,” makes the startling admission that critics of Hillary’s health care reform plan were correct: “I can think of parallels in wartime, but I have trouble coming up with a precedent in our peacetime history for such broad and centralized control over a sector of the economy…Is the public really ready for this?... none of us knows whether we can make it work well or at all…”
The other two excerpts paint the effort in an entirely new and darker light. First, Senator Jay Rockefeller proposed that the federal government conduct smear campaigns against the opponents of the plan:
A “Confidential” May 26, 1993 Memorandum from Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) to Hillary Clinton entitled, “Health Care Reform Communications,” which criticizes the Task Force as a “secret cabal of Washington policy ‘wonks’” that has engaged in “choking off information” from the public regarding health care reform. The memorandum suggests that Hillary Clinton “use classic opposition research” to attack those who were excluded by the Clinton Administration from Task Force deliberations and to “expose lifestyles, tactics and motives of lobbyists” in order to deflect criticism.
Rockefeller had allies in mind for this effort:
Senator Rockefeller also suggested news organizations “are anxious and willing to receive guidance [from the Clinton Administration] on how to time and shape their [news] coverage.”
Wow. Media Matters should contact Rockefeller to disabuse him of the myth of the liberal-biased press!
Some might wonder about the notion of the White House digging up dirt on its critics in order to shut them up. Of course, this memo came from Rockefeller to Hillary, and no one can say whether she responded affirmatively or scolded Rockefeller for his dangerous suggestion. We can say that the suggestion came up earlier:
A February 5, 1993 Draft Memorandum from Alexis Herman and Mike Lux detailing the Office of Public Liaison’s plan for the health care reform campaign. The memorandum notes the development of an “interest group data base” detailing whether or not organizations “support(ed) us in the election.” The database would also track personal information about interest group leaders, such as their home phone numbers, addresses, “biographies, analysis of credibility in the media, and known relationships with Congresspeople.”
Anyone remember Craig Livingstone and the 700 FBI raw-data files that the White House obtained illegally? The story broke in 1996, but the files got accessed in 1993 by the former director of the White House Office of Personnel Security. Judicial Watch sued over the case, attempting to uncover the reason the highly-confidential files were requested by the Clinton White House.
Even without that, the idea that the government should essentially spy on its critics as a means to extort their silence or to discredit them publicly is completely noxious. If nothing else, Rockefeller should have to answer for his proposal, and Hillary should produce her response to it. Voters should pay particularly close attention to this and remember how the Clintons worked and how they would undoubtedly work again if allowed back into the White House.
NOTE: Judicial Watch's website is down for some reason at the moment. I'll link to the specific documents when the site comes back up.
Jay Rockefeller: an embarrassment to WV and to his family name.
“Whose initials could be P.S.?”
“Patti Solis ?”
Likely... President Soros!/ sarc/ kinda?
If Hiterily gets elected with enough votes in Congress, these will be the good old days.
The purists, who will stay at home because our candidate couldn’t walk on water without getting the soles of his Teva’s wet will have gifted us with another Clintoon pillaging.
bingo — see post 82, if you haven’t already.
That is bingo, I don’t want to win!
Clinton’s papers will be destroyed before they see the light of day. Much the way much of the real history of the USSR will never be known. Even in that brief period of openness after the fall of the USSR, it was evident Stalin’s archives had been extensively vetted.
Same will happen to the papers of our own totalitarian-wanna be’s.
That’s a very astute observation, even if entirely obvious. I for one didn’t key in on it.
I have come to the opinion that presidential papers should be collected and handled by a government agency. I am loathe to do that because I don’t like the idea of government being involved in most things, but a public committee set up by the president’s themselves has proven to be essentially a criminal enterprise in some instances. Clinton being the real proof of this.
Thanks for the comment.
BTW, Bush really screwed the pooch when he blocked access to presidential papers for extended periods of time. In the intance of Bill Clinton and even his own dad, it was vitally important that he not do so. It was one of his major failings IMO.
Good catch! Thanks! Was just able to skim the thread today after having only a glance last night. I'm looking forward to some finds that are a bit more revealing than these, too. :-)
I like W personally. I think he really tries to do the right thing, and I believe he has high personal morals. His problem is that he expects everyone around him to have the same moral standards and same view of what is right for the country. (And I mean the whole Beltway crowd; politicians, bureaucrats, media, lobbyists, all of them).
The way these snakes, esp. clinton-inc., play him a fool is really sad to see.
Exactly. Sandy Burglar was only one aspect of the campaign.
These provisions will lend credibility to the charge that we aren't really providing people with their current options and that we're regulating fees permanently across the board. And the charges will be true.
I believe there is truth in that. My view of Bush is that he simply wasn’t in tune enough for the job. Lest you think I’m saying he wasn’t good at all, that’s not the case.
With regard to some issues, his instincts have been good. With regard to many others his actions that should reflexively have been conservative, have been liberal because he wasn’t well grounded in conservatism.
He has been easily led astray, and for this very reason.
His dad was a long-time political figure. He should have known better than some of the things he did, and he has no excuse. His son wasn’t, and I just think we paid for that all too often.
It is true. The foggy bottom folks used Bush for a sock puppet at times. That’s a bit strong way of saying it, but I think it holds up.
So who will be the first to out P.S. ?
Gary Aldrich anecdote regarding health care and Hillary - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1955955/posts
Well, my visions of the wretched one have finally been publicly completely validated, not that I needed them to be, that’s for certain.
[... a couple hours go by and a bus in Nevada
loaded with casino workers injures 40 occupants ...]
I do not believe in coincidences. Do you?
You mean Reno’s rage don’t you? Didn’t think Bill was that involved but don’t remember.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
