Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's resolve on the campaign trail is truly inspiring. On the trail today she confirmed that she had slept no more than "8 hours in the past four days."

In a brief respite on the way to Rhode Island she disagreed with Sen. Barack Obama, about the effect Ralph Nader would have on the campaign.

"We were just talking a little bit about it. I didn't know that he said that this morning and obviously it's not helpful to whoever our Democratic nominee is," Mrs. Clinton said.

"But it's a free country."

She said she wasn't sure what party banner he would run under, but said his past run on the Green Party ticket hurt America's efforts to building a green economy.

"Well, you know, his being on the Green Party prevented Al Gore from being the greenest president we could have had, and I think that's really unfortunate. I think we paid a big price for it," she said.

On the Obama campaign mailings tirade yesterday …

Mrs. Clinton said her discussion and her passion about it was not scripted.

"I thought they'd stopped. You know, they have been discredited and we called their hand and I thought that it stopped or at least it would have been revised to take into account what was clearly a series of false and misleading statements," she said.

"And so when this woman on the rope line said 'look at what I'm getting,' I was really surprised because I did think they had either changed or stopped.

"I mean, I was personally really offended by that."

— Brian DeBose, national political reporter, The Washington Times

RESPONSE TO CLINTON ATTACK: Facts are facts

 "Everything in those mailers is completely accurate, unlike the discredited attacks from Hillary Clinton's negative campaign that have been rejected in South Carolina, Wisconsin, and across America.  We look forward to having a debate this Tuesday on the facts, and the facts are that Senator Clinton was a supporter of NAFTA and the China permanent trade treaties until this campaign began.  And she herself has said that under the Clinton health care plan, she would consider "going after the wages" of Americans who don't purchase health insurance, whether they can afford it or not," said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.

HILLARY CLINTON ON ENFORCING HER MANDATE: "And the reason why I think there are a number of mechanisms, going after people's wages, automatic enrollment, when you are at the place of employment, you will be automatically enrolled, whatever the mechanism is." [ABC's This Week, 2/3/08]

CLINTON'S CAMPAIGN ON COMPARING A DEMOCRAT TO BUSH: "If you want to talk about tactical political maneuvering, it's about one Democrat comparing another Democrat to George Bush. That's the worst kind of tactical political maneuvering." Clinton Spokesman Howard Wolfson [AP, 12/20/07]

CLINTON ON TRADE WITH CHINA:

2000: Hillary Clinton Claimed China's Entry Into The World Trade Organization Would Be Good For American Workers Despite The Already Massive Trade Deficit With China. "I know many people, here in Western New York in particularly and Erie Country, are concerned about this vote, and I share the concerns that many of my supporters in organized labor have expressed to me, because I do think we have to make sure that we improve labor rights, we improve environmental standards in our bilateral and our multilateral trade agreements. But on balance, I've looked at this, I've studied it, I think it is in the interests of America and American workers that we provide the option for China to go into the WTO." [CNN, 4/26/2000]

2000: Hillary Clinton Supported Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) For China, Claimed It Would Create Leverage. "Senate candidate Hillary Clinton said Thursday she supported permanent normal trade relations for China, but slammed Beijing's restrictive birthrate policies." [AFP, 5/25/00]

SOME FACTS ON CLINTON'S SUPPORT FOR NAFTA:

2006/2008: Newsday Reviewed Clinton's Statements, Concluded She Supported NAFTA.   According to a Newsday issues rundown, "Clinton thinks NAFTA has been a boon to the economy." Newsday wrote in 2008, the word "boon" was their "characterization of how we best understood her position on NAFTA, based on a review of past stories and her public statements."   [New York Newsday, 9/11/06; Newsday blog, 2/15/08]

2003: Hillary Clinton Expounded on Benefits of NAFTA, Calling it An Important Legislative Goal. "Creating a free trade zone in North America — the largest free trade zone in the world — would expand U.S. exports, create jobs and ensure that our economy was reaping the benefits, not the burdens, of globalization. Although unpopular with labor unions, expanding trade opportunities was an important administration goal. The question was whether the White House could focus its energies on two legislative campaigns at once [NAFTA and health care]. I argued that we could and that postponing health care would further weaken its chances." [Living History, 182]

2003: Clinton Called NAFTA a "Victory" For President Clinton. In her memoir, published in 2003, Clinton wrote, "Senator Dole was genuinely interested in health care reform but wanted to run for President in 1996. He couldn't hand incumbent Bill Clinton any more legislative victories, particularly after Bill's successes on the budget, the Brady bill and NAFTA." [Living History, p.231]

1996: Clinton Said "I Think Everybody Is In Favor Of Free And Fair Trade. I Think NAFTA Is Proving Its Worth." A questioner pointed out that UNITE opposes the North American Free Trade Agreement, backed by the Clinton administration, on grounds it sends American jobs to Mexico. In March 1996, three years after President Clinton signed NAFTA into law, Hillary Clinton said, "I think everybody is in favor of free and fair trade. I think NAFTA is proving its worth," she said, adding that if American workers can compete fairly, they can match any competition. "That's what a free and fair trade agreement like NAFTA is all about," she said. [AP, 3/6/96]

1996: Clinton "Vowed That Her Husband Would Continue To Support Economic Growth In South Texas Through Initiatives Such As The North American Free Trade Agreement." AP wrote, "Mrs. Clinton vowed that her husband would continue to support economic growth in South Texas through initiatives such as the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Rio Grande Valley empowerment zone, which allows tax breaks to businesses that relocate to the border." [AP, 11/2/96]

1996: Hillary Clinton "Touted" President Clinton's Support for NAFTA, Saying it Would Reap Widespread Benefit.  On a trip to Brownsville, Texas, Clinton "touted the president's support for the North American Free Trade Agreement, saying it would reap widespread benefits in the region."  [United Press International, 11/1/96]

COMMENTATORS AGREE CLINTON HAS SUPPORTED NAFTA AND FREE TRADE

Sirota: "What A Total Joke" That Clinton Camp Tries to Argue She Did Not Support NAFTA, "Clinton Has Made Statements Unequivocally Trumpeting NAFTA." In response to Barack Obama's attack on NAFTA, the Hillary Clinton campaign has gone into meltdown mode…The Huffington Post has followed along with a laugh-out-loud piece in which the chief architects of NAFTA (many who are now wealthy corporate lawyers and lobbyists) are now saying, no, no, Hillary Clinton was really opposed to it. These are the same people, of course, who are looking for jobs in the Hillary Clinton White House. What a total joke, really. This campaign clearly thinks we are all just a bunch of fools. Hillary Clinton has made statements unequivocally trumpeting NAFTA as the greatest thing since sliced bread." [David Sirota, 2/14/08]

Bloomberg: Clinton "Praised" NAFTA, Friends Said She Was "A Free-Trader at Heart." Bloomberg News reported, "Clinton promoted her husband's trade agenda for years, and friends say that she's a free-trader at heart. 'The simple fact is, nations with free-market systems do better,'' she said in a 1997 speech to the Corporate Council on Africa. 'Look around the globe: Those nations which have lowered trade barriers are prospering more than those that have not.' Praise for Nafta At the 1998 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, she praised corporations for mounting 'a very effective business effort in the U.S. on behalf of NAFTA.'' She added: 'It is certainly clear that we have not by any means finished the job that has begun.' Clinton 'is committed to free trade and to the growing role of the international economy,' said Steven Rattner, a Clinton fundraiser and co-founder of Quadrangle Group LLC, a New York buyout firm. 'She would absolutely do the right thing as president.' There was little evidence of a protectionist tilt to Clinton's trade views during either her 2000 campaign or first years in the Senate. She stressed issues such as homeland security and children's health care, and wasn't a major voice in trade-policy debates. As she began to gear up for a White House run, Clinton became less of a free-trade booster and more skeptical about the payoff of globalization." [Bloomberg News, 3/30/07]

Clinton's NAFTA Rhetoric Is Not Driven By Policy. Bloomberg News reported, "Clinton's positioning on trade reflects the changing nature of the debate in the U.S., which increasingly focuses on concerns over outsourcing and the shift of jobs to other nations such as China and India rather than on the benefits of tariff reductions. It also -- as with Republicans grappling over illegal immigration -- demonstrates the extent to which grassroots sentiment can alter candidates' platforms. A Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll conducted in January found 39 percent of Democrats believe free trade hurts the economy; only 18 percent say it is a benefit.  Both parties agree that a backlash on trade helped Democrats in the 2006 elections. West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller, a Democrat, said U.S. workers have been ‘so decimated' by unfettered competition that ‘I think the American people understand they will be hit by it.' Clinton promoted her husband's trade agenda for years, and friends say that she's a free-trader at heart." [Bloomberg News, 3/30/07]

SF Chronicle: "Add to this Democratic front-runner Sen. Hillary Clinton's coolness to the idea. Her husband moved earth and sky to win passage of the NAFTA trade pact with Mexico and Canada in 1993. Now she favors periodic reviews to continue such deals, a "timeout" on new ones, and more federal officials to oversee complaints. It's clearly a flip-flop favor to unions and industry sectors hit by layoffs and cheap imports and bid to outflank her rival, Sen. Barack Obama, who is more favorable to free trade." [San Francisco Chronicle, 10/12/07]

BILL CLINTON CONTINUES TO ARGUE FOR NAFTA

JANUARY 2008: Bill Clinton Says "A Lot Of People Think NAFTA's A Bigger Problem Than it Is." During an event in Las Vegas, Clinton said "She [Hillary Clinton] believes that NAFTA, she believes that all our trade agreements should be reviewed in the first 90 to 120 days of taking office.  She would have a total moratorium on all new trade deals until we conducted a review.  And one of the things that we have to examine is the point I made earlier. That is, is the trade agreement basically fair, but we just don't enforce it.  A lot of people think that NAFTA's a bigger problem than it is.  Our problem with Mexico, our trade deficit with Mexico is mostly because we buy oil from them." [Bill Clinton, 1/18/08]

— Brian DeBose, national political reporter, The Washington Times

"Today in the crowd I was given two mailings that Sen. Obama's campaign has been sending out. … I have to express my deep disappointment that he has continuing to send false and discredited mailing with information that is not true to the voters of Ohio," Sen. Clinton said this morning.

Then it got really ugly.

The mailings, which are actually quite old, say Clinton saw NAFTA as a "boon" for the American economy. And say her health care plan mandates people to get insurance even if they can't afford it.

"He says one thing in speeches and then he turns around and does this," she said when addressing the issue of the mailings.

"We have consistently called him on it. It has been discredited. It is blatantly false, and yet he continues to spend millions of dollars perpetuating falsehoods," Mrs. Clinton said.

"That is not the new politics that the speeches are about. It is not hopeful, it is destructive particularly for a Democrat to be discrediting universal health care by waging a false campaign against my plan, to be talking about NAFTA in a way that tries to make him appear to have a plan when he does not."

Sen. Clinton said the health care mailing was similar to mailings that health insurance companies have sent out attacking universal health care proposals in the past:

"It is the worst kind of politics. Number one, it is wrong and untrue, and number two, it is exactly the talking points that the health insurance industry and the Republicans use on a daily basis.

"Sen. Obama knows that it is not true that my plan forces people to buy insurance even if the can't afford it. … My plan has more financial help my plan has been evaluated by independent experts as actually achieving universal coverage and providing the financial assistance so everyone can have health care.

"This mailing about NAFTA saying that I believe NAFTA was a 'boon' quoted a newspaper [Newsday] that has corrected the record. We have pointed it out, the newspaper has pointed it out. Time and time again you hear one thing in speeches and then you see a campaign that has the worst kind of tactics reminiscent of the same sort of Republican attacks on Democrats.

"Well, I am here to say that it is not only wrong, but it is undermining core Democratic principles. Since when do Democrats attack one another on universal health care?"

— Brian DeBose, national political reporter, The Washington Times

Mrs. Clinton still wasn't finished telling us how different and or bad Mr. Obama's health care plan is, because her campaign just sent out yet another response (pasted below):

Sen. Obama disputes that his plan would leave 15 million uninsured. The experts disagree:

Concord Monitor: 'Gruber estimated that 15 million people would remain uninsured under Obama's plan.' "Jonathan Gruber, a health economist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology who worked on the Massachusetts plan, said a mandate means "the difference between universal or near-universal coverage. Obama would have a large expansion, better than anything the Republicans have, but not universal coverage," Gruber said. "You can't get it without a mandate; it's just not possible." Gruber estimated that 15 million people would remain uninsured under Obama's plan." [Concord Monitor, 12/26/07]

Len Nichols, Jonathan Gruber and Mark Pauly: 'Even with other cost-saving measures and a child mandate, we think that it is very likely that a least 15 million American would remain uninsured.' "Recent estimates suggest that a plan with uniform generous subsidies but without a mandate would cover no more than one-half of the uninsured in the U.S. Even with other cost-saving measures and a child mandate, we think that it is very likely that at least 15 million Americans would remain uninsured." [New America Foundation Policy Brief, 12/06/07]

Jonathan Holohan of the Urban Institute: 'Obama would still leave about 22 million, 23 million, but he has a mandate for children, about 9 million uninsured kids, so assuming you get most of them, you get pretty close to 15 million.' [New Republic, 12/03/07]

Wall Street Journal: 'Mrs. Clinton charges that Mr. Obama's plan would leave 15 million people without insurance. Outside experts agree that number is in the ballpark.' [Wall Street Journal, 12/04/07]

Washington Post: 'The Obama plan could leave a third of those currently uninsured lacking coverage.' [Washington Post, 6/9/07]

Mr. Obama's only major success story in the Senate is his bill with Sen. Tom Coburn, Oklahoma Republican, to create a database for earmarks to cut back on wasteful spending and strengthen ethics in Congress.

He just said it should probably be strengthened, something that came up earlier in the year when it was discovered that a politician could go to dinner with a lobbyist if they didn't sit down. The legislation specifically says no "sit-down dinners."

That is probably his strongest position that stops John McCain in his tracks, an avid protester against earmarks and pork-barrel spending.

Mrs. Clinton's is that Sen. McCain has no fiscal standing on that position because he supported the Bush tax cuts in a time of war.

Interesting how her fighting stance against Mr. McCain is an attack on his position, and Mr. Obama's is his own policy.

Not sure which is better, but Mr. Obama's is more complicated, because he has to explain his policy.

Uh-oh, Mr. Obama said once again that the will of the voters should determine who the nominee is.

This is tricky for him, because while he is saying that, the campaign media strategist David Axelrod is saying the 796 super delegates should act as "party elders" and use their own judgment in who they vote for at the convention.

Finally! Who is ready to lead?

Well, the answer, based on the focus of the question on foreign policy and their answers, is that both of them are.

Now to look at who would be better against Mr. McCain in terms of readiness, judging whether it was right or wrong to oppose the 30,000-troop surge in Iraq:

Clinton:

"The rationale of the surge was to create the space and time for the Iraqi government room and space to make the decisions only it can make."

The Iraqi government hasn't taken advantage of the dollars and investment and reductions in the loss of life the surge has given them, she added.

So in her opinion, it was right to oppose the surge despite the good things that have happened, because the real goal has not been achieved and she wants to start bringing home troops after her first 60 days.

Obama:

"It is indisputable that we have seen reductions in violence in Iraq. But this is a tactical victory imposed on a huge strategic blunder."

He said the person who opposed the entire war from the outset will be in a better position to oppose Mr. McCain, who will have to defend the surge and the war at the same time, and he will have to explain that the surge should have occurred in 2005, not 2007.

Sen. Clinton just made the major move to ignore the question about whether Sen. Obama is ready to be commander-in-chief, and answer her own question on health care.

Mrs. Clinton criticized Mr. Obama's plan, saying it leaves out 15 million people, which we have heard dozens of times by now, and said that difference if too important not to bring up.

Now both candidates are taking over the debate.

Mr. Obama answered that her mandate plan is failing in Massachusetts, where 20 percent of people who can't afford it have been exempted and even more are being fined, yet still have no health care.

That was a pretty good prepared response.

Hillary was probably hoping the question her campaign raised about Mr. Obama Plagurizing Mass. Gov. Duval Patrick's lines wouldn't come up. It forced her into an attack, to defend something her campaign decided to do.

"If your candidacy is going to be about words, they should be your own words. And lifting some passages out of somebody else's speeches is not change you can believe it. It's change you can Xerox." — Hillary Clinton

That was a great line, but it backfired, as most of her heavy attacks have done. It received a number of boos and even some supporters of hers in the audience cringed.

Still, it was funny.

But for the record, to plagiarize, you have to take copy or words from someone without their knowledge, and it must be exact. Mr. Obama used Mr. Patrick's lines with his permission and insistance and he paraphrased them during the speech.

Well, I saw this coming 20 minutes ago, and here it is from the Clinton campaign.

Tonight, Sen. Obama said he would not normalize relations with Cuba until the country started making some progress. Here's the exchange with Campbell Brown:

OBAMA: … But I would not normalize relations until we started seeing some of the progress that Senator Clinton is talking about.

BROWN: But that's different from your position, back in 2003, you called us policy towards Cuba a miserable failure and you supported normalizing relations. So you backtracked now.

BUT in 2004, Sen. Obama was saying something different:

VIDEO: Sen. Obama on Cuban Embargo 2004

In a 2004 questionnaire, Sen. Obama supported normalization of relations with Cuba: Q: "Do you support normalization of relations with Cuba?" Obama: "Our longstanding policies toward Cuba have been a miserable failure, evidenced by the fact that Fidel Castro is now the longest-serving head of state in the world. If our isolationist policies were meant to weaken him, they certainly haven’t worked. I believe that normalization of relations with Cuba would help the oppressed and poverty-stricken Cuban people while setting the stage for a more democratic government once Castro inevitably leaves the scene." [IVI-IPO 2004 US SENATE QUESTIONNAIRE, 1/5/04]

Immigration:

Border Fence on the Southern Border funding being held up.

Clinton: "The University of Texas at Brownsville would have a part of its campus cut off," Mrs. Clinton said meaning if the border fence continues to be built along the same track lines that it has been. She then accused the President of being stupid for filing eminent domain and taking private land to build it.

Sen. Obama said pretty much the same.

However, duh! That's why the Bush Administration stopped the continued building, because of the logistical and territorial problems.

This is where the Democrats seem to be trying to game the people.

The Office of Management and Budget shut down building for the time being late last week, and was attacked almost immediately by Sen. Robert Byrd, West Virginia Democrat. He said the president had betrayed the will of the American people.

Well Mr. Obama, Mrs. Clinton, which is it?

Sen. Clinton appears to have an edge in the debate having a better feel for the city of Austin, having "lived here."

But Sen. Obama's answer to the question of how the nation should normalize relations with Cuba may have looked like he just put one foot into the well. But it was consistent.

In 2005, Mr. Obama chastised the Bush Administration's refusal to give any leeway on loosening travel (once a year) and remittance ($100/month) restrictions to Cuba even for Cubans with family still living there. His comments were followed by fellow freshman Cuban-born Sen. Mel Martinez, Florida Republican, who denounced Mr. Obama's position.

Sen. Obama said those restrictions should be removed even while Fidel Castro was president. A number of Democrats and most Republicans stood by the president, but as he said then and now he thinks the U.S. should open the door by easing the restrictions as an incentive to begin a dialog toward Democratic reforms.

Still, a few questions later it is clear that Sen. Clinton's backup strategy is to not stick to the time limits and keep Mr. Obama from speaking, and that is probably a good strategy and excellent gamesmanship.

The Clinton campaign is desperate to prove that Sen. Barack Obama has no accomplishments or qualifications to speak of. But now it seems that Obama's supporters are perfectly eager to help the Clinton campaign out. Just look at what happened when Texas state Sen. Kirk Watson was asked to name one accomplishment:

Now, I will grant that putting a state senator who announced his support a week ago up against a four-term congresswoman and former Judge in Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones is a bit of a mismatch, but still it just looks bad when your people can't talk intelligently about you.

-- Brian DeBose, national political reporter, The Washington Times