Subject: Correct The Record Wednesday December 3, 2014 Afternoon Roundup
From: Burns Strider <[email-masked]>
To: CTRFriendsFamily <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 14:14:12 -0500
List-Id: <CTRFriendsFamily.americanbridge.org>

*​**Correct The Record Wednesday December 3, 2014 Afternoon Roundup:*

*Tweets:*

*Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord:  .@HillaryClinton
<https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton> "will forever be known for taking
opportunities to expand the roles of women," expanding opportunity
http://www.journalinquirer.com/opinion/other_commentary/hillary-is-paving-the-way-for-others-to-follow/article_18061a4a-7af4-11e4-b45f-4fa875b50899.html
…
<http://t.co/EeNrZXuA0p> [12/3/14, 12:41 p.m. EST
<https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord/status/540199087992107008>]

*Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: As Secretary of State, @HillaryClinton
<https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton> launched global action to fight
climate change.
http://correctrecord.org/stemming-the-tide-of-climate-change/ …
<http://t.co/5229XfhTZn> [12/2/14, 3:06 p.m. EST
<https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord/status/539873184485371904>]

*Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: "You saw her tonight...leaning in to
this issue to make it clear how much she cares about it." @LCVoters
<https://twitter.com/LCVoters>' Karpinski
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-goes-green …
<http://t.co/ChvF5yMpsM> [12/2/14, 1:22 p.m. EST
<https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord/status/539846988670312450>]

*Headlines:*

​​*Journal Inquirer opinion: East Hartford Mayor Marcia Leclerc: “Hillary
is paving the way for others to follow”
<http://www.journalinquirer.com/opinion/other_commentary/hillary-is-paving-the-way-for-others-to-follow/article_18061a4a-7af4-11e4-b45f-4fa875b50899.html>*

“This fall, Hillary Clinton crisscrossed the country campaigning on behalf
of Democrats and speaking out for women’s rights and opportunity. I cannot
think of anyone better to speak on our behalf than the one who paved the
way for the rest to follow.”

*The Hill blog: “Clinton: Women should have larger role in national
security”
<http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/225853-clinton-women-are-agents-of-change>*

“Hillary Clinton called for women to have a larger role in national
security issues in a speech at Georgetown University on Wednesday, saying
women ‘are agents of peace and agents of change.’”

*MSNBC: “Hillary Clinton plays it safe with ‘smart power’ speech”
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-plays-it-safe-smart-power-speech>*

“It was the right topic at the right venue for Hillary Clinton Wednesday
morning at Georgetown University, but the timing was off. Poor weather and
impending finals kept students from filling up the ornate Gaston Hall, and
her wonky foreign policy remarks left many disappointed who are hungry for
something more from the likely presidential candidate.”

*NBC News: “Hillary Clinton Lauds Female Leaders As ‘Agents of Change’”
<http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/hillary-clinton-lauds-female-leaders-agents-change-n260796>*

“Hillary Clinton appeared at Georgetown University Wednesday to laud the
contributions of female leaders globally, saying that women are important
catalysts for change throughout the world.”

*Washington Post blog: Post Everything: Sally Kohn: “The Republicans hating
on Hillary Clinton’s speaking fees are hypocrites”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/12/03/the-republicans-hating-on-hillary-clintons-speaking-fees-are-hypocrites/>*

“Let that sink in for a moment. The Republican Party, which wants to keep
women and minimum wage workers (the majority of whom, incidentally, are
also women) severely underpaid while trust fund families and Wall Street
execs pocket more — this crowd is attacking Hillary Clinton for being paid
well.”

*Mediaite: “Politico Demands Hillary Put It out of Its Own Misery”
<http://www.mediaite.com/online/politico-demands-hillary-put-it-out-of-its-own-misery/>*

“It should be pointed out that nobody forced the Beltway media to cover a
campaign that didn’t exist.”

*The New Republic: “Poll: Obama's Immigration Plan Could Help Hillary
Clinton Win Latino Voters”
<http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120467/hillary-clintons-support-obamas-executive-action-good-politics>*

“A new poll from Latino Decisions asked 405 Latino voters if they were more
or less likely to support Hillary Clinton for president if she said she
would extend the executive action. The results were clear: 85 percent of
respondents were likely to support Clinton in such a situation, with just
11 percent saying they were unlikely to support her.”

*Washington Post blog: Post Partisan: Stephen Stromberg: “Hillary Clinton’s
insulting silence on Keystone XL”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2014/12/03/hillary-clintons-insulting-silence-on-keystone-xl/>*

“Did Hillary Clinton learn enough from 2008? She still seems to be
self-defeatingly guarded.”

*People: “Mia Love, the First Black Republican Congresswoman-Elect, Says
Hillary Clinton Should Stand Down”
<http://www.people.com/article/mia-love-first-black-republican-congresswoman-on-hillary-clinton>*

“But asked if she would like to see Hillary Clinton run in 2016, Love
responded, in her first at-home interview since her election, ‘Nope.’ Asked
to elaborate, the normally outspoken conservative had nothing more to say.”

*The Hill: “Benghazi panel to meet in lame duck”
<http://thehill.com/policy/defense/225865-benghazi-panel-to-meet-in-lame-duck>*

“The hearing on Dec. 10 will feature two State Department officials and
serve as a follow-up to the panel’s inaugural September meeting on security
measures surrounding American diplomats overseas.”

*The Hill blog: Ballot Box: “Ready for Hillary holding events in O’Malley’s
home state”
<http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/225861-ready-for-hillary-to-hold-event-in-omalleys-backyard>*

“Ready for Hillary is holding events this week in the home state of
Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley (D), a potential presidential rival to
Hillary Clinton.”

*The Hill blog: Briefing Room: “Elizabeth Warren gets a new slogan”
<http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/225860-elizabeth-warren-gets-a-new-slogan>*

“The merchandise could stir fresh speculation that Warren is considering a
run for the White House in 2016 despite her repeated denials.”

*Articles:*

​​*Journal Inquirer opinion: East Hartford Mayor Marcia Leclerc: “Hillary
is paving the way for others to follow”
<http://www.journalinquirer.com/opinion/other_commentary/hillary-is-paving-the-way-for-others-to-follow/article_18061a4a-7af4-11e4-b45f-4fa875b50899.html>*

By Marcia Leclerc, mayor of East Hartford

December 3, 2014 11:00 a.m. EDT

This fall, Hillary Clinton crisscrossed the country campaigning on behalf
of Democrats and speaking out for women’s rights and opportunity. I cannot
think of anyone better to speak on our behalf than the one who paved the
way for the rest to follow.

Clinton will forever be known for taking opportunities to expand the roles
of women and for not resting until everyone is given the opportunity to
succeed.

As secretary of state, Clinton showed her ability to lead as a woman on the
global stage. In an increasingly challenging and changing world, Clinton’s
leadership helped make the planet a safer place and created opportunities
for millions in underdeveloped countries.

Throughout her career, Clinton has successfully paved a path in a
traditionally male-dominated world.

Here are just a few examples of her many accomplishments that have left her
poised, qualified, and ready to potentially become the first female
president of the United States.

First lady of Arkansas: During her time in Arkansas, Clinton became a
lifelong advocate for families and creating opportunity for all. Even
before her time as first lady, Clinton worked to expand early childhood
education to low-income families.

As first lady, Hillary Clinton brought the Home Instruction for Parents of
Preschool Youngsters program to Arkansas to expand early childhood
education. And as chairwoman of the Arkansas Education Standards Committee,
Clinton helped develop new education reform standards that were eventually
adopted statewide.

Clinton understands the value of education. Here in East Hartford, we too
know the value of education and we celebrate our excellent schools.
Education is the greatest tool for creating opportunity, economic security,
and building greater family and community engagement.

First lady of the United States: As First Lady of the U.S., Clinton
continued to change the role of women in politics. Clinton demonstrated
that, in a role once only thought of as “the wife to the president,” she
could become an effective powerhouse, forever changing the direction of our
country.

The moment I knew that Clinton would forever change the role of women was
when she famously declared in China, circa 1995, that “human rights are
women’s rights, and women’s rights are human rights.”

Clinton continued to be a trailblazer, working to improve the lives of
children and families throughout the country. Clinton was instrumental in
the creation of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, which
increased health coverage to millions of children in low-income and working
families, continuing to provide a vital lifeline to millions of families
today.

U.S. senator: As a senator, Clinton fought for those who put their lives on
the line every day to protect our country — our service members. Clinton
helped expand access to health care for our National Guard and reservists,
and secured funding to help first responders recover from the 9/11 attacks.

Clinton also fought for hardworking Americans by consistently advocating
for equal pay for equal work, expanding access to early childhood education
and health care, and working to raise the minimum wage.

Secretary of state: By the time Clinton was appointed secretary of state,
she had already forever changed the role of women, serving as an example to
millions. But she didn’t stop there. Clinton became one of our most
successful secretaries of state, improving our country’s leadership and
standing in the world, while working to empower women and girls across the
globe.

“The highest, hardest glass ceiling”: We do not yet know what is in store
for Clinton’s future, but we do know that the futures of millions of girls
will forever be brighter and more promising, thanks to her leadership and
dedication to creating opportunities for others.

I know I would not be where I am today if it were not for Hillary Clinton.

*The Hill blog: Briefing Room: “Clinton: Women should have larger role in
national security”
<http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/225853-clinton-women-are-agents-of-change>*

By Peter Sullivan

December 3, 2014, 12:16 p.m. EST

Hillary Clinton called for women to have a larger role in national security
issues in a speech at Georgetown University on Wednesday, saying women "are
agents of peace and agents of change."

While Clinton was not giving a speech especially themed on U.S. politics,
her expected presidential campaign means politics are never far away. Even
as she spoke, Republicans pointed to the empty seats in the hall as
evidence of a lack of enthusiasm for Clinton.

"Women are not victims of conflict," Clinton said. "They are agents of
peace and agents of change."

Clinton made women's rights on the domestic front a centerpiece of her
midterm campaigning for Democrats, touting issues like equal pay and paid
leave. As first lady in 1995, she famously said in Beijing that "women's
rights are human rights."

She touted women defense ministers on Wednesday, saying they prove that
they can they can "defend their countries as well as any man."

Asked about Ukraine, in a session after the speech, Clinton called on the
Ukrainian military to "make it at least possible for women to be in
positions of military and civilian authority in defending their country."

As Ukraine deals with a conflict with separatists in the east and Russia's
annexation of Crimea, Clinton called for the United States to support
Ukraine's military building back up.

"I hope other European countries, the United States will be there as they
undertake this defense buildup," she said.

Some Republicans have called on the U.S. to provide arms to the Ukrainian
military, but Clinton did not weigh in on this debate.

On Syria, an issue where Clinton sparked controversy in August by referring
to President Obama's "failure" to arm the rebels, Clinton steered clear of
larger U.S. policy and said the situation was dire enough that as far as
women and security, a "protective, humanitairan approach" is what is needed.

She said "we should do what we can" to support Kurdish women who are
fighting ISIS militants.

While Clinton was speaking, another issue was generating buzz: the empty
seats in front of her.

The balcony and some of the seats lower down were empty in Georgetown's
Gaston Hall, which the University says is an "over 700-seat hall."

America Rising, a conservative PAC, linked to photos of the empty seats
with the title "Guess who's #ReadyforHillary! Empty chairs!!!"

A lack of enthusiasm for Clinton among students would speak to fears that
some Democrats are not excited about a Clinton candidacy.

Avery Jaffe, who works for Ready for Hillary, the pro-Clinton group, posted
on Twitter, "In fairness to Georgetown students, it is finals prep week."

*MSNBC: “Hillary Clinton plays it safe with ‘smart power’ speech”
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-plays-it-safe-smart-power-speech>*

By Alex Seitz-Wald

December 3, 2014, 1:22 p.m. EST

It was the right topic at the right venue for Hillary Clinton Wednesday
morning at Georgetown University, but the timing was off. Poor weather and
impending finals kept students from filling up the ornate Gaston Hall, and
her wonky foreign policy remarks left many disappointed who are hungry for
something more from the likely presidential candidate.

It was just over a month ago when Clinton last visited Georgetown’s
Institute for Women, Peace and Security, which was founded by a close
friend and former aide of Clinton’s, and where Clinton herself serves as
honorary chair.

“When I told my husband this morning that I was going to Georgetown, he
said, you’ve been to Georgetown more in the past two years than I have,”
the former secretary of state joked as she took the stage. Bill Clinton is
a Georgetown alum.

On October 30, when she last appeared at Gaston Hall, decorated with
elaborate wood-carved beams and religious frescos, it was to talk about
women’s role in the economy.

It was also in this room that she, in her first year as secretary of state,
launched the the country’s first “action plan on women, peace, and
security.” Melanne Verveer, who now runs the Georgetown institute and who
moderated the discussion Wednesday, served as Clinton’s Ambassador-at-Large
for Global Women’s Issues.

This time, when Clinton came to Georgetown to partake in a conference on
“smart power,” the topic was as close to her heart as any. It was her
guiding philosophy at State.

Clinton defined the term Wednesday as “using every possible tool and
partner to advance peace and security,” while “showing respect” for other
countries and actors on the world stage – “even for one’s enemies.”

She also spoke about women, noting they often “bear the humanitarian load”
of conflicts more than men. But she added, “Women are not just victims of
conflict, they are agents of peace and agents of change.” She referenced
the Northern Ireland Peace process, where women took a lead.

After Clinton concluded her remarks, Norway’s 38-year-old female Defense
Minister, Ine Eriksen Soreide took the stage. She told a story about how
the then-secretary of state inspired Soreide to have the confidence to take
on the chairmanship of the foreign policy committee in her Parliament.

Soreide also said Russia “violated fundamental … international law” in
Ukraine. Clinton nodded in agreement. Later, the former secretary of state
called the comments “very strong.”

The themes are all well-known to those familiar with Clinton’s work, but
felt somewhat vintage for a former secretary of state who has been
increasingly moving away from her foreign policy safe zone into economic
and other domestic issues, like immigration.

And there was little room for spontaneity or commenting on news of the day.

Questions from students were submitted ahead of time and reviewed by a
committee of faculty and students before being read by Verveer. At the
start of the program, an announcer declared that interruptions to the
program “will not be permitted.”

The questions Clinton was asked focused on women’s roles in the conflicts
in Ukraine and Syria, something Clinton spoke about another time she
visited Georgetown.

Meanwhile, as she speaking, an entirely different theme was being pushed by
Republicans operatives, who filled reporters’ inboxes and Twitter feeds
with pictures showing empty rows of seats in the hall.

The university said the hall seats over 700 people, but that only 400
turned out. The entire balcony was empty, save reporters, while there were
several empty seats downstairs.

Clinton regularly gives speeches where she’s paid up to $300,000 by groups
to hear her remarks. Tickets were offered free to every student.

The university and students sympathetic to Clinton pointed out that many
students were busy studying for upcoming finals. The rainy weather also may
have kept some students indoors, and made Clinton run about 30 minutes late
for her speech, which Verveer blamed on “weather delays.”

*NBC News: “Hillary Clinton Lauds Female Leaders As ‘Agents of Change’”
<http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/hillary-clinton-lauds-female-leaders-agents-change-n260796>*

By Carrie Dann

December 3, 2014, 11:55 a.m. EST

Hillary Clinton appeared at Georgetown University Wednesday to laud the
contributions of female leaders globally, saying that women are important
catalysts for change throughout the world.

"Women leaders, it has been found, are good at building coalitions across
ethnic and sectarian lines and speaking up for other marginalized groups,"
the former secretary of state told attendees at a Georgetown University
conference entitled "Smart Power: Security Through Inclusive Leadership."

"It's important to underscore this overriding fact: women are not just
victims of conflict," added Clinton, who is widely viewed as a potential
first female president if she chooses to run in 2016. "They are agents of
peace and agents of change."

During her remarks at the conference, some Republicans took to Twitter to
gleefully point out empty seats at the event.

*Washington Post blog: Post Everything: Sally Kohn: “The Republicans hating
on Hillary Clinton’s speaking fees are hypocrites”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/12/03/the-republicans-hating-on-hillary-clintons-speaking-fees-are-hypocrites/>*

By Sally Kohn

December 3, 2014, 8:50 a.m. EST

Hillary Clinton makes a lot of money when she speaks. This is, somehow,
offensive to the Republican Party.

Let that sink in for a moment. The Republican Party, which wants to keep
women and minimum wage workers (the majority of whom, incidentally, are
also women) severely underpaid while trust fund families and Wall Street
execs pocket more — this crowd is attacking Hillary Clinton for being paid
well.

In a hum-drum effort to vet the hum-drum presumptive 2016 Democratic
presidential candidate, news outlets have been reporting on Clinton’s
speaking fees and contract requirements. Most recently, the Washington Post
revealed Clinton’s terms for a speech at the University of California Los
Angeles.

For the speech, Clinton’s team made such ludicrous requests as a “pitcher
of room temperature water, water glass, and lemon wedges.” Why can’t she
settle for cold water? Plus she wanted, nay demanded, that backstage there
be “diet ginger ale, crudité, hummus and sliced fruit.” How dare Hillary
Clinton demand healthy snacks? For this, she was paid $300,000 — a sum,
like all her speaking fees, which Clinton donated to the Clinton Global
Foundation.

The Washington Post story comes on the heels of June reporting about a
speech to the University of Nevada Las Vegas Foundation, for which Clinton
was paid $225,000. Anti-Hillary conservatives have taken this reporting and
run with it:

*America Rising PAC* @AmericaRising: Hummus: $5 Crudité: $19 Speaking fee:
$300,000 Making students pay for it: Priceless http://gph.to/1vPxHa6
<http://t.co/uPNWeKZgDA> cc @ClintonCosts <https://twitter.com/ClintonCosts>
@HillaryClinton <https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton> [11/26/14, 8:29 p.m.
EST <https://twitter.com/AmericaRising/status/537780301096054784>]

First, the facts. Neither the UCLA speech or UNLV speech were paid for with
student tuition dollars. The UCLV Foundation is a private non-profit
separate from the university; the UCLA speech was paid for as part of a
separately endowed lecture series. More pertinently, though, both speeches
raised money for the universities and their students. For instance, the
UNLV event raised more than $350,000. But shame on Hillary, speaking at
events that raise money for public universities!

It’s ironic that, after a 2012 election spent complaining about how Mitt
Romney was attacked for being successful, Republicans now find themselves
trying to attack success. And that’s just the tip of the irony iceberg.

On the occasion of Clinton’s UNLV speech, the Republican National Committee
put out a statement saying, “Hillary Clinton’s speaking fee at UNLV is more
than 4 times what the average Nevadan makes in a year.” Raising the minimum
wage would sure help those Nevada families way more than cutting Hillary
Clinton’s speaking fee. But Republicans are the ones blocking a minimum
wage hike nationwide.

Conservatives also complained that Clinton accepted six figures to speak at
a public university about, among other things, the challenges of mounting
student debt. They pounced on calls by some students for Clinton to donate
her speaking fees back to defray scholarships and rising tuition costs.

But if conservatives are so outraged about the rising cost of college and
run-away student debt, why have they blocked legislation to refinance
student loans and proposed massive cuts to Pell grants?

Certainly, Clinton has stumbled in finding a populist way to talk about her
finances, as when she said she was “dead broke” when she and Bill left the
White House (they had two houses). The New York Post wrote that Clinton’s
“diva routine could hurt her chances of campaigning as a champion for the
middle class.” Sure, but you know what else hurts a party’s reputation as a
middle class champion? Repeatedly opposing policies like paid sick leave
and investments to fix roads and schools  that help the middle class—which
Republicans routinely do.

Selective outrage sure works for fanning the flames of Twitter trolls, but
when Election Day rolls around, Republicans won’t be able to paint Hillary
Clinton as an out-of-touch elitist if their party is a still a worse
example of that which they seek to condemn.

There is plenty in Hillary Clinton’s speaking schedule actually worth
scrutinizing. Since leaving the State Department, Clinton has given paid
speeches to Goldman Sachs, Fidelity, the Carlyle Group, the National
Association of Realtors and other business interests. “This is a great way
for a company to get access to her, to hear what she’s thinking, to be
remembered if and when she does run for office,” Campaign Legal Center
policy director Meredith McGehee told Mother Jones. This might also seem
like the perfect thing to attack given the problems with Clinton’s coziness
with Wall Street in a post-Occupy political era increasingly focused on the
crisis of inequality. Curiously, conservatives aren’t even mentioning these
speeches—just the ones Clinton has given at fundraisers for public
universities.

Of course, why would Republicans ever critique big business, even if big
business is courting the potential Democratic frontrunner for 2016? While
conservatives might rhetorically feign a defense of public colleges and the
middle class, they would never, ever hint at attacking big business. Which
reveals the deepest irony of all — Republicans regularly say that
government should get out of the way and let “market forces” handle
everything from pay inequity to healthcare. But market forces are precisely
what have made Hillary Clinton the second best paid political speaker in
America (after her husband, Bill) — she’s simply more popular, by leaps and
bounds, than any potential Republican challenger. By drawing attention to
how much Hillary Clinton is being paid to speak, Republicans are merely
pointing out how in-demand Clinton is—presumably not just on the stage but
in the voting booth in 2016.

*Mediaite: “Politico Demands Hillary Put It out of Its Own Misery”
<http://www.mediaite.com/online/politico-demands-hillary-put-it-out-of-its-own-misery/>*

By Evan McMurry

December 3, 2014, 8:34 a.m. EST

For the twenty-one months, Hillary Clinton has daily disappointed the
political press corps by not actually being a presidential candidate. In
not holding any office nor actively campaigning for one, Clinton left
political publications and cable news shows to endlessly pick over the
non-ness of her non-campaign. It’s as if every science publication were
forced by invisible decree to incessantly debate whether the cat is still
alive.

On Wednesday Politico’s Roger Simon had enough. Chiding her non-campaign
for “insufficiently” arguing her qualifications for the office for which
she’s not yet running, Simon all but demanded that Clinton put everybody
out of their misery. “Not since Hamlet first strode upon the stage circa
1599 and dithered over ‘To be, or not to be’ have so many held their
collective breath for an answer,” he wrote.

Not for nothing, the subhead suggests who this “so many” is:

[SCREENGRAB OF HEADLINE: “HILLARY SHOULD STOP DITHERING”]

Simon even cites “his own publication’s” coverage — just in the past week —
as proof that Clinton’s non-campaign is failing. He could go back further:
a search of Politico’s archives reveals 1,064 mentions of “Hillary Clinton
2016″ since February 2013, when Clinton left the State Department. Even
allowing for peripheral mentions, that’s more than article a day. No wonder
Politico’s exhausted, though it should be pointed out that nobody forced
the Beltway media to cover a campaign that didn’t exist.

*The New Republic: “Poll: Obama's Immigration Plan Could Help Hillary
Clinton Win Latino Voters”
<http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120467/hillary-clintons-support-obamas-executive-action-good-politics>*

By Danny Vinik

December 3, 2014

President Barack Obama’s executive action protecting more than four million
undocumented immigrants from deportation isn’t just good policy. It’s also
good politics for the Democratic Party.

A new poll from Latino Decisions asked 405 Latino voters if they were more
or less likely to support Hillary Clinton for president if she said she
would extend the executive action. The results were clear: 85 percent of
respondents were likely to support Clinton in such a situation, with just
11 percent saying they were unlikely to support her.

Clinton announced her support for the executive action soon after Obama
announced it, so it’s hard to imagine her discontinuing it as president.

Of course, a backlash among non-Hispanic voters could hurt Clinton. But
given party polarization today, there are few voters left in the middle who
could be disheartened with her over her support for Obama's plan. In other
words, this move allows Clinton to consolidate her support among Hispanic
voters while her risk of losing many non-Hispanics is low. That’s a good
position to be in.

*Washington Post blog: Post Partisan: Stephen Stromberg: “Hillary Clinton’s
insulting silence on Keystone XL”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2014/12/03/hillary-clintons-insulting-silence-on-keystone-xl/>*

By Stephen Stromberg

December 3, 2014, 11:51 a.m. EST

Did Hillary Clinton learn enough from 2008? She still seems to be
self-defeatingly guarded.

Several recent articles have called Clinton out for refusing to say where
she stands on the Keystone XL pipeline. In fact, reporters should be asking
her whether she has changed her mind on the issue now that
environmentalists have made it into a purity test — because she had
sensible things to say about Keystone XL four years ago, before she adopted
her strategic silence.

Here is Clinton in 2010, then secretary of state, speaking at San
Francisco’s Commonwealth Club:

We haven’t finish[ed] all of the analysis. So as I say, we’ve not yet
signed off on it. But we are inclined to do so and we are for several
reasons — going back to one of your original questions — we’re either going
to be dependent on dirty oil from the Gulf or dirty oil from Canada. And
until we can get our act together as a country and figure out that clean,
renewable energy is in both our economic interests and the interests of our
planet — (applause) — I mean, I don’t think it will come as a surprise to
anyone how deeply disappointed the president and I are about our inability
to get the kind of legislation through the Senate that the United States
was seeking.

Now, that hasn’t stopped what we’re doing. We have moved a lot on the
regulatory front through the EPA here at home and we have been working with
a number of countries on adaptation and mitigation measures. But obviously,
it was one of the highest priorities of the administration for us to
enshrine in legislation President Obama’s commitment to reducing our
emissions. So we do have a lot that still must be done. And it is a hard
balancing act. It’s a very hard balancing act.

Clinton was responding to a question about the Alberta Clipper, a pipeline
that began transporting tar sands oil to Wisconsin in 2010. But the State
Department subsequently clarified that she was speaking about Keystone XL.
Her remarks were on the right track: The Keystone XL decision will not
determine the future of oil use here or abroad, and there are much more
important factors that will. Policymakers should focus on those instead of
trying to micromanage decisions on energy supply infrastructure, angering
our allies in the process.

Does Clinton still hold to those principles? If so, why won’t she admit it?
If not, what changed her mind? Clinton is not officially running yet, so
she is not under the high obligation to square with the public that
candidacy brings. But she isn’t free of obligation; she led the State
Department when it considered the issue.

Continuing evasion only communicates one thing: insulting caution. As was
often the case in her 2008 run, she gives the impression that she is
unwilling to tell you what she really believes, at least not until Mark
Penn or some other purveyor of political pablum has sliced it up and served
it to the public in its maximally inoffensive — and least interesting —
form. That’s infuriating for those who would agree with her — particularly
for those who want pro-environment leaders to guide people toward issues
that really matter — because she knows better and won’t stick up for their
side. It’s patronizing to environmentalists because she is trying to pander
to them by refusing to engage them like adults. Clinton’s political
calculation is good sign that she’s running for president — but not an
indication that she will do a better job than she did in 2008.

*People: “Mia Love, the First Black Republican Congresswoman-Elect, Says
Hillary Clinton Should Stand Down”
<http://www.people.com/article/mia-love-first-black-republican-congresswoman-on-hillary-clinton>*

By Sandra Sobieraj Westfall

December 3, 2014, 7:45 a.m. EST

It seems there is little in the way of sorority when it comes to
glass-ceiling shatterers.

Last month Utah's Congresswoman-elect Mia Love sent shards flying when she
became the first black woman Republican – not to mention, first
Haitian-American – to be elected to the House of Representatives.

Her victory was noted as a milestone even by political opponents, such as
Democratic strategist Donna Brazile, who said, "Black women no longer have
to fit in a bracket."

But asked if she would like to see Hillary Clinton run in 2016, Love
responded, in her first at-home interview since her election, "Nope."

Asked to elaborate, the normally outspoken conservative had nothing more to
say.

PEOPLE sat down with Love and her family – husband Jason, daughters Alessa,
14, and Abi, 12, 7-year-old son Peyton and even the rambunctious family dog
Xander – at their Saratoga Springs home to get better acquainted with the
woman arguably poised to be the most high-profile member of the new
Congress being sworn in Jan. 6.

Once a fine arts major who dreamed of a musical theater career, Love, 39,
gave up that path when her 1998 wedding date conflicted with a Broadway
audition.

After that she became a flight attendant, a call-center manager, and a
fitness instructor before finding her calling in politics when an insect
infestation in her community motivated her to organize – successfully –
against a home developer.

After six years on her city council, and one term as mayor of her small
Utah town, Love finds herself headed to Washington, and into the history
books for changing the face of the Republican party.

But making history, she says, "wasn't important to me – it's certainly not
why I ran. I wasn't elected because I'm female or because I'm a certain
color. We wanted to make sure we were focusing on issues."

*The Hill: “Benghazi panel to meet in lame duck”
<http://thehill.com/policy/defense/225865-benghazi-panel-to-meet-in-lame-duck>*

By Martin Matishak

December 3, 2014, 1:01 p.m. EST

The House Select Committee investigating the 2012 Benghazi attack announced
Wednesday that it will meet again before the year is out.

The hearing on Dec. 10 will feature two State Department officials and
serve as a follow-up to the panel’s inaugural September meeting on security
measures surrounding American diplomats overseas.

The lame-duck session meeting's tone could be less restrained than the
House panel’s first hearing, when Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) stressed the
neutral, fact-finding nature of the committee's mission.

Committee Republicans could look to use the hearing to chastise Hillary
Clinton, who was secretary of State at the time of the deadly strike in
Libya.

Republicans have repeatedly attacked Clinton’s handling of the episode,
with several suggesting it should bar her from seeking the presidency in
2016.

The hearing also comes after the House Intelligence Committee released a
report last month that cleared the Obama administration of GOP charges that
it covered up the circumstances of the attack and intentionally misled
Congress.

Many Republicans, including Sens. Rand Paul (Ky.), Ted Cruz (Texas) and
Marco Rubio (Fla.), all of whom could run for the White House in two years,
have lambasted the report, charging the panel with whitewashing its
conclusions to protect the intelligence community.

They, along with other Senate Republicans, want the upper chamber to join
the investigation.

Appearing next Wednesday will be Greg Starr, the assistant secretary for
diplomatic security, who testified in September, along with Steve Linick,
the State Department’s inspector general.

*The Hill blog: Ballot Box: “Ready for Hillary holding events in O’Malley’s
home state”
<http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/225861-ready-for-hillary-to-hold-event-in-omalleys-backyard>*

By Peter Sullivan

December 3, 2014, 12:49 p.m. EST

Ready for Hillary is holding events this week in the home state of Maryland
Gov. Martin O'Malley (D), a potential presidential rival to Hillary Clinton.

The group, which is not formally affiliated with Clinton but has gained
welcome among her advisers, will hold a fundraiser at a Potomac, Md. home
on Thursday. That follows an event held at Goucher College in Baltimore on
Monday.

The events are featuring a number of top Democratic figures in Maryland who
support Clinton, ahead of a possible 2016 presidential run.

Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) told the Monday gathering that the state
would provide a "groundswell of grassroots" support for Clinton, according
to the Baltimore Sun.

Seth Bringman, a spokesman for Ready for Hillary, said about 100 people
attended the event, mostly young professionals giving $20.16 each.

The Thursday event's host committee includes Attorney General Doug Gansler,
state Treasurer Nancy Kopp, state Senate President Mike Miller, and other
members of the legislature.

O'Malley says he is weighing a bid and has been laying the groundwork for a
run with visits to early states like Iowa and New Hampshire.

He has also gone to Clinton's left on some issues, warning President Obama
not to send unaccompanied children back across the border this summer, and
urging the rejection of the Keystone pipeline.

O'Malley faced a possible setback to a presidential run on Election Day,
when his lieutenant governor, Anthony Brown, lost the governor's race to a
Republican, Larry Hogan.

Asked by the Washington Blade last month whether the loss would hurt his
chances, O'Malley said "Don't know, don't care."

*The Hill blog: Briefing Room: “Elizabeth Warren gets a new slogan”
<http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/225860-elizabeth-warren-gets-a-new-slogan>*

By Kevin Cirilli

December 3, 2014, 12:46 p.m. EST

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has a new slogan: "The best senator money
can't buy."

Those are the words plastered across a new T-shirt that is now for sale on
the senator’s campaign website.

The merchandise could stir fresh speculation that Warren is considering a
run for the White House in 2016 despite her repeated denials. Warren is not
up for reelection in the Senate until 2018.

The T-shirt plays up the senator's independent streak, something liberals
have seized on while declaring themselves members of the “Warren wing of
the Democratic Party.”

Groups on the left have praised Warren for her populist, anti-Wall Street
rhetoric, with some pleading for her to mount a challenge to Hillary
Clinton in 2016.

The grassroots of the Democratic Party has long been suspicious of Clinton,
recently criticizing her for making paid speeches to Wall Street banks.

Earlier this week, The Winnipeg Free Press reported that Clinton will speak
at the Winnipeg Convention Center in January at an event sponsored by the
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce.

Republicans, meanwhile, have sought to portray Clinton as out of touch with
Americans as she collects hefty paychecks, some of which have been reported
to be upwards of $300,000 per speech.