Hillary's Secrets

Radley Balko | November 2, 2007

Hillary Clinton has (correctly) excoriated the Bush administration for its excessive secrecy. I've pointed out (as have others), however, that her own record and that of her husband don't exactly scream transparency and open government.

Neither does this:

Smith was hoping to inspect records that could shed light on what role the First Lady played in her husband's administration. But Smith quickly discovered the frustrations of dealing with a library critics call "Little Rock's Fort Knox."

[...]

Could she look at memos detailing the advice Hillary gave Bill during debates over welfare reform? Smith asked. No, the archivist said, those memos were "closed" to the public because they dealt with "policy" matters. What about any records that show what advice Bill gave his wife about her 2000 U.S. Senate campaign? Those, too, were closed, the archivist said, because they dealt with "political" matters. "He essentially told me I had no chance of getting anything," says Smith, whose book, "For Love of Politics: Bill and Hillary Clinton, the White House Years," hits the bookstores this week.

[...]

The lack of access is emerging as an issue in Hillary's presidential campaign: she cites her years of experience as First Lady as one of her prime qualifications to be president. Like other Democratic candidates, she has decried the "stunning record of secrecy" of the Bush administration; her campaign Web site vows to bring a "return to transparency" to government. But Clinton's appointment calendar as First Lady, her notes at strategy meetings, what advice she gave her husband and his advisers, what policy memos she wrote, even some key papers from her health-care task force—all of this, and much more documenting her years as First Lady, remains locked away, most likely through the entire campaign season.

Comments

|11.2.07 @ 10:47AM|#

I'd once again like to point out that I was at a Ron Paul sign waving yesterday, and some lady flipped me off and screamed Hillary Clinton at me.

I replied loudly with "fascist."

Episiarch|11.2.07 @ 10:49AM|#

Wait, Hillary's just another power-hungry politcal animal like Bush with no respect for the Constitution? I think joe needs to come along and instruct us on why she's not.

And good job, Republican partisan morons. You gave your guy a pass on power grabbing and now your worst nightmare (and many people's) might get in the White House with all those powers you supported for Bush.

lunchstealer|11.2.07 @ 11:01AM|#

No, the archivist said, those memos were "closed" to the public because they dealt with "policy" matters. What about any records that show what advice Bill gave his wife about her 2000 U.S. Senate campaign? Those, too, were closed, the archivist said, because they dealt with "political" matters. "He essentially told me I had no chance of getting anything," says Smith

Now that's just crazy talk. All manner of public records about the Clinton Administration are available. Everything from the menus offered at state dinners to advice on Christmas decorations. Both heavily redacted of course, due to national security implications, but you can still tell what font the menus were in, and in one passage they left in the color she wanted for one wall. It was eggshell.

|11.2.07 @ 11:07AM|#

some lady flipped me off and screamed Hillary Clinton at me.

I replied loudly with "fascist."

I guess she was driving too fast for you to respond with "Hugo Chavez..," meh, why bother.

|11.2.07 @ 11:08AM|#

Now that's just crazy talk. All manner of public records about the Clinton Administration are available. Everything from the menus offered at state dinners to advice on Christmas decorations. Both heavily redacted of course, due to national security implications, but you can still tell what font

Kolohe|11.2.07 @ 11:13AM|#

Richard Nixon in a pantsuit?

|11.2.07 @ 11:19AM|#

"And good job, Republican partisan morons. You gave your guy a pass on power grabbing and now your worst nightmare (and many people's) might get in the White House with all those powers you supported for Bush."

Ah yes, the words of the late Harry Browne come to mind; "Give good people the power to do good and that power eventually will be in the hands of bad people to do bad." Bind them ALL down with the chains of the Constitution, and if they won't listen then throw the whole lot of them out and replace them with people that will! Fire the first warning shot over their no-good, collective bows - vote Ron Paul in '08.

P.S. I ain't skeerd of Hillary Clinton at all - (well, at least no more so than I am of Rudy McRomneyson and company).

lunchstealer|11.2.07 @ 11:29AM|#

Richard Nixon in a pantsuit?

Just be really careful not to misread that as "hotpants"

|11.2.07 @ 11:38AM|#

Dick Cheney with hair.

|11.2.07 @ 11:40AM|#

J. Edgar Hoover in a skirt suit...

Uh, I guess that's still just plain old J. Edgar Hoover.

|11.2.07 @ 11:45AM|#

where did the article that was posted above this go? The one about Edwards?

|11.2.07 @ 11:50AM|#

Randolph,

Right here: http://reason.com/blog/show/123309.html

|11.2.07 @ 12:10PM|#

huh it's not showing up on the main H&R page for me

|11.2.07 @ 12:37PM|#

And good job, Republican partisan morons. You gave your guy a pass on power grabbing and now your worst nightmare (and many people's) might get in the White House with all those powers you supported for Bush.

Why do you think that the Dems in Congress haven't actually done anything to reign in that power? I can almost see them rubbing their hands together and licking their chops.

And, of course, the same point was made after Bush was elected, that the huge sweeping government the Dems had worked so hard to create was now under the trigger finger of a totally republican adminstration and congress.

A Fake Joe|11.2.07 @ 12:42PM|#

Wait, Hillary's just another power-hungry politcal animal like Bush with no respect for the Constitution? I think joe needs to come along and instruct us on why she's not.

Hillary's almost as open as Richard Nixon with her records.

|11.2.07 @ 1:01PM|#

lady flipped me off and screamed Hillary Clinton at me.

This only confirms that her name is actually a curse. I know I suspected it all along.

I totally would have called her a Rudy.

|11.2.07 @ 1:18PM|#

I'd once again like to point out that I was at a Ron Paul sign waving yesterday, and some lady flipped me off and screamed Hillary Clinton at me.

I replied loudly with "fascist."

This only confirms that her name is actually a curse. I know I suspected it all along.

I totally would have called her a Rudy.

As you can note from my response, I did.

|11.2.07 @ 1:19PM|#

"""No, the archivist said, those memos were "closed" to the public because they dealt with "policy" matters."""

Didn't Bush sign a executive order to prevent the release of archived "policy" information that also applied to past President's libraries?

|11.2.07 @ 2:06PM|#

Tom Tuttle from Tacoma in a tube top.

antagonist|11.2.07 @ 2:07PM|#

i think she wants to surpress the love letters she wrote to Janet Reno and Linda Tripp.

Paul|11.2.07 @ 2:18PM|#

cites her years of experience as First Lady as one of her prime qualifications to be president.

The simpler response to this is: Prove it.

If we can't see documented evidence as your experience as "First Lady", then shut up and move to the back of the room.

|11.2.07 @ 2:29PM|#

If her "experience" as a first lady is a qualification, then get set for four years of nose-up-your-asshole nannyism.
Big surprise.

|11.2.07 @ 3:21PM|#

As you can note from my response, I did.

Touchè!

lunchstealer|11.2.07 @ 5:37PM|#

If her "experience" as a first lady is a qualification, then get set for four years of nose-up-your-asshole nannyism.
Big surprise.

And a commitment to opacity.

SIV|11.2.07 @ 6:09PM|#

Wait, Hillary's just another power-hungry politcal animal like Bush with no respect for the Constitution?

No she is power-hungrier and has even less respect for the Constitution.

ed|11.2.07 @ 9:27PM|#

New Hillary campaign video.
Hot!
Rigid bones! Double entendre!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRdDa7_xVvY

|11.3.07 @ 10:32AM|#

No she is power-hungrier and has even less respect for the Constitution.

I'm not a Hillary fan, but is it possible to have less tahn zero respect for the constitution?

Goldthwait|11.3.07 @ 4:16PM|#

"...she cites her years of experience as First Lady as one of her prime qualifications to be president."

The fact that she believes merely being married to a president somehow sets her above the other candidates should automatically disqualify her from the race. Following her logic, I guess the wife of Bill's heart surgeon is qualified to perform his next bypass. That she even makes such an argument shows how unworthy she is of serious consideration.

|11.4.07 @ 1:31PM|#

Episiarch,

You're the one obsessed with getting "the right people" in power, and reducing everything to personality.

I don't think I've ever written a single word about Hillary Clinton as an individual.

When you get to your junior year, maybe you'll be able to discuss politics as a system, like a grownup.

|11.4.07 @ 1:35PM|#

Clinton didn't spend her years as First Lady picking out china patterns, you know.

Her experience during the previous administration is probably comparable to that of a White House Chief of Staff or other top advisor.

And, of course, everybody knows this. Dismissing her experience during those eight years because of who she was married to smack of sexism.

|11.5.07 @ 9:37AM|#

She spent much of her time covering up scandals and sicking PI's on women who came forward about Bill's sexual harassment and sicking the IRS on her enemies and digging up dirt on her enemies.

|11.5.07 @ 10:48AM|#

...and, of course, stomping kittens.

|11.5.07 @ 6:10PM|#

...and, of course, stomping kittens.

If it would get her votes, I have little doubt she'd do this.