Telling Tales About Her First Lady Travels: Where and Why Did Hillary Exaggerate?

Hillary Clinton's calendars from her years as First Lady are a window opening onto a detailed landscape of her many trips abroad and suggest several possible reasons for her consistently overstating her role, which was essentially that of First Wife, when she traveled with her husband, and Goodwill Ambassador, when she traveled without him. But Hillary Clinton, as we now know, has been mentally rewriting her official visits--rigid constructions of protocol and set-pieces carefully crafted as any dioramas--injecting them with elements of surprise, adventure, chance human interaction and meaning. Trips to more than eighty countries that are completely lacking in spontaneity and other possibility would quickly drive most people crazy. Hillary Clinton survived by telling herself more involving stories than what actually happened. And now her Bosnia tale, with added hardship and danger, has embarrassed her campaign. In this light, the most interesting sentence in Clinton's 2003 autobiography Living History is this: "During this trip I also met with a group of prominent Japanese women--the first of dozens of such meetings that I held around the world--to learn about the issues women were facing everywhere."

I held. Hillary Clinton did not hold the meeting in Japan or anywhere else. These meetings, as her foreign itineraries make clear, were arranged for her. Aware of her interest in women's issues, embassies and liaison officers with foreign governments tried to accommodate the First Lady by setting up meets-and-greets and hour-long translator-facilitated discussions with local women. She was the First Lady of the United States, the most powerful nation in the world; of course, other countries tried to please by filling Hillary's days with what they thought would interest her. The realpolitik of American might "held" the meetings. That's why women came. Over time, Hillary Clinton has succumbed to a strain of Napoleon complex. Her me-centrism has grown from the amorphousness of her position in the White House--the fact that she had no formally-vested powers--just as surely as if she had been the President herself.

Here is the July 7, 1993 schedule for that meeting with a group of Japanese women:

12:15 PM ARRIVE LUNCHEON
Ambassador's Residence
Hosted by Mrs. Armacost
CLOSED PRESS

FORMAT: 10 prominent Japanese women in attendance.
Mrs. Clinton will be greeted by Mrs. Armacost and escorted to the salon
for drinks and meet and greet.
Guests will be escorted to Dining Room for lunch.
MENU: lightly prepared lobster, veal piccata, salad, asparagus,
puff pastry and fruit.
Guests return to salon for coffee and official photo.

2:10 PM DEPART VIA FOOT Ambassador's Residence

Therefore, Ambassador Armacost's wife held the "meeting," which was really the kind of luncheon program that generations of American women have been familiar with since the advent of women's clubs in the post-Civil War era. While Mrs. Clinton was entertained, the President was talking with President Suharto of Indonesia and other leaders, for this was the G-7 Summit. The question now is whether Hillary Clinton's tendency to self-aggrandizement is a worrisome trait for a potential world leader. By raising it, I am suggesting, of course, the affirmative. A further look at Clinton's First Lady travels illuminates the issue.

If either Hillary's White House staff or later the Clinton Library had grasped the revealing level of detail in the foreign itineraries attached to the First Lady calendars, likely these insertions would have been held back as long as Senator Clinton's foreign policy experience is an issue. The "away" days on the calendars, partly because they include daily schedules arranged with time intervals as small as ten minutes, offer much more than the cautious entries for White House days. Two different mindsets are at work here: HRC's mum loyalists, with their typical notations of "closed meeting" and "no public schedule," and the loquacious itineraries, coming from outside planners, which Patti Solis Doyle without much thought to future consequence allowed to be filed away among the daily records.

What kinds of experience did Hillary Clinton gain from all those trips abroad? She grew accustomed to admiring rose gardens (every wife of every world leader seems to have one) and accepting gifts from children through interpreters. She practiced "the wave," the dressy formal photo-op and the "arrive and hold." She learned how to walk the cordons of different militaries. She perfected the proper facial expression for watching one's husband place wreaths on the graves of fallen soldiers. She grew in patience and fortitude for yet one more staged hospital tour and pass-through observation of women making crafts. She grew familiar with the quick introduction and the brief intimacy and learned how to make the most of surface human interaction. As the timelines of her itineraries reveal, she seldom had the opportunity to meet with foreign women for any meaningful length of time. Indeed the protocol of these trips was stultifying. Hillary Clinton might as well have been Lady Curzon visiting the Raj or Queen Elizabeth on annual progress.

Here is a typical afternoon hour, from the HRC trip to Bratislava, Slovakia, July 6, 1996:

4:05 PM WALK THROUGH PRIMATE SQUARE
OPEN PRESS
FORMAT:
HRC proceeds to the Primate Square.
A children's dance folk ensemble will perform.
A young girl will present HRC with a traditional doll in folk costume.
HRC stops at the Statue of Roland, a symbolic patron of the City, as well
as a symbol of pride and citizenship.
NO REMARKS REQUIRED
HRC bids farewell and departs.
NOTE: HRC will have the option to shake some hands upon her departure.
Peace Corp [sic] volunteers will be at the end of the ropeline on departure.
5:00 PM DEPART Old Town
EN ROUTE Bratislava Airport

This touch-down in Slovakia was part of a longer trip Hillary Clinton took in summer 1996 to Romania, Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Estonia and Finland. Briefly, Mrs. Clinton traveled with fellow Wellesley grad Madeleine Albright (then U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.), and perhaps for this reason Clinton sees this trip, particularly, through the lens of American foreign policy and gives herself a central place in it. In her autobiography, Clinton says, "I was asked to represent Bill in a region he thought needed U.S. encouragement and a show of solidarity." Since this sentence closes a paragraph about the expansion of NATO, the reader is left to assume that pact membership was the agenda of Hillary's trip. However, if she spoke to leaders of former Warsaw Pact countries about NATO expansion, a centerpiece of her husband's foreign policy that was questioned by many in both Congress and the press--not to mention Russia--and was therefore a difficult and fraught venture requiring caution and nuance, she had precious little time in each country for such conversation.

In Romania, Hillary Clinton had a 15-minute private meeting with President Iliescu and eight other people, including the wife of the Foreign Minister. In Poland, she met with President Kwasniewski for 15 minutes. She paid courtesy calls on the presidents of Estonia and Hungary. In Hungary, she met with Prime Minister Horn for 30 minutes. In the Czech Republic, she, along with eight others, met with Prime Minister Klaus for half an hour; then Mrs. Clinton and Mrs. Klaus retired for tea while "Ambassador Albright remains with Prime Minister Klaus." In Slovakia, Mrs. Clinton's meeting with President Kovac lasted 25 minutes. Her itinerary reveals that Madeleine Albright did the heavy lifting. "The President will return to continue meeting with Ambassador Albright" (July 6, 11:55 AM). "The President will then resume a meeting with Ambassador Albright."

Clinton's autobiography presents her meeting with Slovakian Prime Minister Meciar as a dramatic and menacing encounter: "A former boxer, he sat on one end of a small couch; I sat on the other. . . . By the end of our meeting, I was wedged tightly into the corner of the couch, appalled at his bullying attitude and barely controlled rage." Clinton fails to account for the eleven other people present at "our meeting," including her own Melanne Verveer and Madeleine Albright. It's Ambassador Albright who has to put up with Meciar at length. "Ambassador Albright will meet with the Prime Minister for an additional 30 minutes after HRC departs" (3:50 PM).

Did Hillary Clinton learn anything from her First Lady experiences abroad about the making of foreign policy? Yes indeed she did. She learned that there is only one Commander-in-Chief. As Carl Bernstein amply documents in his biography of her, Hillary Clinton entered the White House thinking that her husband and she were embarking on a co-presidency. Travels abroad with the President disabused her of that delusion. President Clinton received the dinner toasts and the gun salutes; he adjusted the ribbons on wreaths at memorials and cemeteries; sometimes only he signed a book of remembrance. Mrs. Clinton's itineraries are punctuated with instructions for her to "walk behind her husband," to "follow the President," to "stand behind," to "remain behind." Although her official visits garnered her little tangible foreign policy experience, the tenor of these travels prepared Hillary Clinton very well for her Senate race. The last few months of her White House calendars are suddenly full of events in New York State--just the kind of meets-and-greets, polite discussions, luncheons, teas and walk-abouts that she had eschewed in Arkansas, partly out of necessity as a law firm partner, and then tried to avoid in Washington, but in which over the course of her First Lady travels she became well-versed.

Comments

[S1m0n]

Reading this piece has filled me with more sympathy for Hillary Clinton than I've had for a while. No wonder she's been in a cold rage since the day Bill took office.

I wonder if Michelle Obama understands exactly what she's in for.

[saulpaulus]

You know Supershrink, I sleep better now than I would if Hill were to become president. How can I trust someone to take that 3 AM phone call when she either cannot remember that she was NOT under fire or lied about being under fire?. How can I trust her to send men and women into combat where they may be injured, killed or tortured, making loved ones widows and orphans?

This may seem like a small thing to you, but there is no bigger issue for those of us who have served. For someone to "misspeak" about being under fire not once but at least three times in prepared remarks is reprehensi­ble---espe­cially when that someone voted to authorize a war that has cost the lives of over 4000 men and women. And don't tell me she forgot. My uncle and others like him remember every detail about being under fire. My uncle is in his mid 80s and he might not remember what he had for dinner last week, but if I called him now, he would be able to recount every detail, every sight, sound, and, above all, smell of a Japanese suicide attack on his position in Okinawa over 60 years ago. If Hill said she had forgotten a dinner order 12 years ago, I would believe her. I do not believe her when she says she forgot that she was not under fire.

[Didi47]

How about a "Where and Why Did Obama Exaggerate" headline for a CHANGE!

I'm sick and tired of the Obama lynch Clinton... bile. She should sue you all for defamation! I know it is a criminal act and wonder why this nonsense is allowed to continue.

[saulpaulus]

Let me guess...you have never served in the military, have you? Saying you were under fire when you were not is not an exaggeration, it is a complete misrepresentation of the facts...most folks would call it a lie. Now if Hill was content to remain senator or was running for governor, that might not be such a big deal. She is, however, seeking to be Commander in Chief. Again, that means that she gets to send men and women into combat where they may be injured, killed, or tortured. I am sorry but I do not want someone as President with such a casual regard for the truth on such a life-or-death issue. if Hill had wanted to put this issue behind her, she could have dealt with it as Obama did...make a major address on it and confront it honestly. No, she blithely dismissed it and then tried to change the subject to Pastor Wright. That is not the kind of courage and honesty that I want from the President of the United States.

[saulpaulus]

OBTW, Hillary has no grounds for a defamation suit. #1 Statements of opinion are absolutely protected under the First Amendment #2 Truth is an absolute defense against libel and the truth of this matter has been convincingly demonstrated by a video and admitted to by Hillary herself and #3 There is no such thing as criminal defamation in the US, although it does exist in Canada and the UK, for example.

[Kirby]

Hillary is a twister of the truth, and, as such I do not want her answering the White House phone at 3 a.m. or ant any other hour, for that matter. She obviously cannot be trusted with the whole truth, and nothing but the whole truth.
Oh yes, what is a twister of the truth? A twister of the truth is nothing more and nothing less than a liar.

[Didi47]

Right Kirby:

Compare it with Obama's 20 year relationship with Wright, why don't you. Talk about a whopping liar.

The repubs are planning on making minced meat of him - you can bet the bank on that! He doesn't stand a chance in hell against them. They're going to be so busy exposing his lies, you won't know what hit you.

[FullChat]

Hillary calls it "experience".

I call it lies.

[Suprshrink]

My God! Do you ever read your own blogs? You excused without exception everything about Obama and his pastor, suggesting that journalist interns seek out the full text of Wright's sermons to prove no ill will and now you are nit-picking every word Clinton has said and/or written about her memories of her experiences as first lady. What a set up this is. Insist that Clinton produce examples of her experience and then tear it apart, word for word to make sure she gets no credit for any of her deeds. Are you really proud of your work? Do you sleep well at night? Do you get pleasure from this? I am both amazed and disgusted.

[Daniel8168]

The author of the post didn't have to tear apart Hillary's "experience", the factual records did that just fine. You know, the actual EVIDENCE? Obama's pastor's words were taken out of context and regurgitated in that form a thousand times over, then it was unfairly insinuated that because Obama went to that church that he must share all of the exact same views as his pastor. Go ahead and be amazed and disgusted, but you might consider being amazed and disgusted with Hillary's serial fabrications and exaggerations rather than the fact that she has been caught.

Also, while you're feeling amazed and disgusted, consider both candidates' reactions to these issues. Obama directly addressed his issue, admitted that race is a problem in America, and specifically denounced the remarks made by his pastor. Hillary said she must have "mis-spoke" and then immediately tried to divert attention back to Obama's pastor. Perhaps you should be disgusted with Hillary for not only lying in the first place, but for also being such a coward that she would try to dodge the issue and divert attention from it.

If that's not enough for you, let's look at the main distinction between these two issues.

--Obama was practically crucified, and forced to directly address SOMEONE ELSE'S remarks.

--Hillary herself lied through her teeth and exaggerated her experiences on countless occasions, and then refused to address the issue at any length.

Before you feign indignation again, take some time to open your eyes.

[timinhi]

Hey Daniel--
What's amazing and disgusting is the absolute venom and bile that you people are piling on to Hillary Clinton, in this post and in your comments. You don't just dislike her, you don't just prefer another candidate, you don't just disagree with her--You people, from the tone of your words, absolutely hate her with a passion not seen since Hitler was alive and kicking. You give the horrible impression that you won't be satisfied until she and Bill are dead and rotting in their graves, which you will gleefully urinate on. Get a grip! She is not, despite what visions you've formed in your brain, the Antichrist.

And your recitation of the "facts" surrounding Obama's relationship with the Rev. Wright leaves a lot out, to say the least. He didn't just attend the guy's church, as you imply. Wright officiated at Obama's wedding, he baptized both of Obama's daughters, Obama has acknowledged him as his "mentor" and his best friend. Wright inspired the title and general theme of Obama's second book, "The Audacity of Hope," and the list goes on. Obama himself has admitted that Wright's comments and sermons were abhorrent. Also, after initially claiming he hadn't been present when such comments were made by Wright during church sermons, Obama later changed his story and admitted that while yes, he had witnessed the sermons, he still could not "disown" Wright any more than he could disown his grandmother.

[timinhi]

Why wasn't the original deliberate falsehood by Obama given the same scrutiny and character assassination treatment by the media that they gave to Hillary's story about the Tuzla airport? Her landing at the airport didn't even have anything to do with the real importance and purpose of the trip, so if she doesn't remember it accurately, or even if she has embellished it over the years, what difference does it make, except to nitpickers like you, who only wish ill upon her? And how can you say (or write) with a straight face that Obama merely attended Wright's church, and imply that other than that, he hardly knew the guy? Are you people kidding, or what?

[lovethesinner]

"Hillary said she must have 'mis-spoke' and then immediately tried to divert attention back to Obama's pastor."

And saying that she had "misspoken" was in fact another lie. To "misspeak" is to say one thing when you meant to say another. She "missremembered" possibly, but she did not "misspeak". The conscious decision to use that word shows that she was trying to obfuscate the issue.

I believe she chose that word because Roger Clemons had recently been exposed as a "LIAR" in a recent congressional hearing when he was questioned about his steroid use. Remember, he kept saying, "I 'missremembered' when I said that", or "I believe he had 'missremembered' me using steroids.

Hillary is trying to avoid the word "LIAR" because it is the single worst character flaw a candidate can have. AUTHENTICITY is the single most important qualification of a candidate. It's what got Bush elected twice. Remember him in '04: "No matter what you may think of me, you know who I am."

[Didi47]

Right Daniel*...:

I don't know Rezko, taken out of context. NAFTA taken out of context. God damn America was taken out of context. The Italians crucified Jesus taken out of context... "Typical White" taken out of context.... everything Obama and his advisor said taken out of context. Like that's gonna fly with the Repubs.... lol.

[tandrmcdonald]

Note to suprshrink;
My God, do you read your own posts? I suppose it's necessary for the Clinton apologists out there to howl like banshees when facts expose their candidate's "experiences" as a pack of self-promoting lies. What else can you do?
I was neutral until recently. I wanted to see what the candidates had to say, and how their words matched up with their voting records. A few weeks ago I blogged that Senator Clinton lost my vote because of the nastiness of her 3AM phone call ad. It was right out of the Goldwater Republican fear mongering playbook.
Now...with this painfully obvious lie she's lost my respect. Lives were lost in that war; real human beings bled and died. For anyone to fabricate themself into the actual fighting for political gain is reprehensible, and a preview of the kind of leader he/she will be.
The appropriate visual aid here would be GWB in a flight suit waddling across a flight deck. The only thing he flew wasn't in combat and didn't have wings.
Accept facts, Senator Clinton lied. If she hadn't lost my vote earlier, she'd have lost it now. We already have a pathological liar in the Oval Office, do we really want another one?
Gramma Rose

[LeftRoss]

In the interest of staying to the facts, the 3AM phone call ad is actually more directly out of the LBJ Democratic fear mongering playbook. He was the one who employed the infamous "Daisy Ad" against Goldwater. As an old Goldwater Girl, HRC obviously never forgot it!

[rthom]

Everyone likes to complain about all the things Hillary might not have achieved when she was there, but she was there. Obana wasn't there. He wasn't there for the vote on Iraq he likes to criticize; he wasn't there for the health plan work in the 90's; he didn't serve as an envoy to the world as Hillary did, and apparently he wasn't in church when Reverend Wright was crazy and wasn't there when Rezko was a criminal. When else wasn't he there?

[Daniel8168]

The point that you're overlooking is that Hillary based all her claims of experience on "being there". Yeah, she was there, but she was told to go have tea so that the real officials could get down to business once the smiles and photo-ops were done.

Basically, now that all this light has been shed on Hillary's "experience", her campaign message comes down to, "Barack Obama didn't do all the meet-and-greet photo-ops in foreign countries that I have done!"

Hillary has been caught with her proverbial pants down. She's been taking a giant shit on everyone this whole time by pretending that she has any real experience. What's really sad is that now we know she's not only an experienced liar with little government experience, but she won't admit that she lied. She uses cute words like "misspoke". Maybe she's been a neo-con fan too long and actually started to adopt their belief that if you tell a lie enough times it becomes the truth.

And as far as her snide little remarks about uncles and pastors, perhaps she should ask herself why she stayed with a man that cheated on her numerous times. You know, your uncle is always your uncle, but you can leave a church. Well... in the same vein, your uncle is always your uncle, but you can leave a philandering husband - unless of course you think affiliation with him amounts to political gain.

[Didi47]

Another lie rthom: Obama was there. Where do you think he was when Wright went on his rants and raves. How did he manage to not know what Wright was preaching for 20 years.

Another lie. Yeah, yeah, taken out of context; not Obama's fault; just another boneheaded mistake. Boy this guy makes one bone headed mistake after another - has supporters that threaten, vilify and defame his opponent - beyond belief - some more examples of not his fault??? And this is supposed to be a leader? What's he gonna say... when things get tough and he makes more bone headed mistakes in the White House... ooops.. I made another bone headed mistake with the country? Or accuse 'typical whites' of not understanding - his continued relationship with Rev. Wright?

[goodgulf]

All this guff from Obama about how he was never there during any anti-American speechs and then a few days later he admits he was but chose to ignore them because Wright was such an excellent pastor. Judging by all the hubbub going on during these speechs, the congregation is just as radical as Wright. If Obama didn't agree with his fellow parisioners about the speechs, why would he subject his family to 20 years of the diatribe and the bad influence of the radical congregation. Hillary says" look at my resume, sometimes I was successful, sometimes I wasn't, but I gave it 100%." Obama says look at the speech I gave 5 years ago and ignore the rest. The neocon attack dogs won't ignore the rest. They will run Wright's speechs and Obama's cocaine use so much that the independents will go for McCain.

[Hansharriet]

Why don't you tell us whether you are going to vote for McCain if Obama becomes the Candidate?
It probably would be a bigger jump for you to join the Obama camp than to go over to the McCain camp. Hillary in the meantime is doing a good job in giving McCain enough smear material, so that perhaps he would lose the election.
That is the kind of Democrat Hillary is. If she doesn't get the presidency, no Democrat will. It's not about a Democrat to get into the White House, it's about Hillary!

[Didi47]

Hansharriet:

Grow up. Obama is giving McCain the smear material all by himself!

[MikeL1]

Do you actually think that the Republicans fear Clinton? Don't be silly. Even though your comment has NOTHING 2 do with the blog, I'll reply by typing a few words.

1. WHITEWATER
2. TRAVELGATE
3. LITTLE TO NO EXPERIENCE
4. LIES
5. LIES
6. LIES
7. KEN STARR
8. LIES
9. MONICA
10. MORE LIES

The Republicans are fighting 4 her 2 make it 2 the general election. They'll know that they'll eat her alive. They're also trying 2 find out about Obama because they don't know him. That's what scares the right. Hillary's negatives are WAY too high. Some Dems, most or all Republicans & most or all independents dislike Hillary. Now if you think I'm lying like your top candidate, my point will be proven once McCain is our new president after Hillary steals the nomination away from Barak.

[jwsub28]

Hillary has lied for years for her political gains. Why in the world would a woman put up with her husband infidelity over and over again. Especially when you are in the spotlight like the president of the United States. She is so calculating and arrogant. We all think that Bush is sneaky and does things behind the backs of the american people. We all agree I think on that point. There is so much dirty laundry out there regarding the Clinton's , the republicans will have a field day.
Why have only 1/2 of 1% of the Clinton documents been released from his library? That is a logical question we all should be asking. There is proof in those records of the real Hillary and Bill Clinton. For the Clinton supporters take the time to do your homework on Hillary. Do we want another dynasty of Clinton's in the White House? We only remember the good times , don't we?
Google some of their victims : Billy Dale-head of Travel Office for decades who was not just fired but had trumpted up charges brought against him by Hillary. Google Norman Hsu who was their fundraiser during the Clinton years. Google: Aaron Tonken who was arrested for scams regarding their fundrasing. Ask why we can't buy or watch the movie "Path to 9/11"? Ask questions before you stand behind a person that is obviously not fit for any office let alone the highest in the US

[koolwoman]

If Hillary had left her husband, you would have criticized her for being a quitter. I give her credit for being strong enough to withstand all the hurtful publicity., her own personal hurt and disappointment, and for her insight into the reasons for this breach, and getting him into therapy. She isn't the first woman to be willing to stay if her mate agreed to stay in therapy as long as needed. She was successful. Some of us were not. I admire Hillary very much. She has proven her strength and dedication to any cause in which she truly believes. Hillary will make a great president.. Some of you misoganists would never approve of a woman as president. You need to rethink that. Women are stronger than you know.

[ChimpmasterDJ]

It's very tiresome to read all this pop-psychology trying to "understand" why poor Hillary is a liar. The truth is that she "sells" herself to people for whom she only has contempt. She cynically calculates everything, but her arrogance makes her miscalculate. It's really that simple.

[PrdAmerican]

She wouldn't know the truth if it lept up and bit her on the leg.

Hillary Clinton appeared on NBC's Dateline and told viewers of a heartbreaking story about how her daughter Chelsea had cheated death that morning of Sept. 11th.

"She had gone on what she thought would be a great jog," Hillary Clinton explained. "She was going down to Battery Park, she was going to go around the towers. She was going to get a cup of coffee and - that's when the plane hit!"

Apparently Hillary Clinton's tragic tale of Chelseas near death experience was a big hit with the media. "At that moment, she was not just a Senator, but a concerned parent," TODAY show's Katie Couric told viewers.

Hillary Clinton's shameless exploit wasn't reported in the media when it was contradicted by Chelseas own take of that morning of Sept. 11th. After it was clearly contradicted by her own daughter, Hillary and the media didn't touch the story any longer. Chelsea Clinton wrote about her own experience in a Talk Magazine article.

Chelsea's story was simple: she did not mention any morning jog, she did not mention plans to go to Battery Park near the World Trade Center Towers, only to be stopped by a coffee break. In fact, Chelsea writes that she was at her friend's apartment on Park Avenue South miles from Ground Zero when she learned of the attacks!

"I stared senselessly at the television," Chelsea writes.

[eliandbo]

When in St.Louis a few weeks ago Hillary said that when the Clintons left office, they left with a 5.6 trillion dollar surplus, that was another lie, it was a 5.6 trillion dollar DEBT!
NON OF THE MEDIA PICKED UP ON THIS lIE, AND SHE HAS REPEATED IT SINCE THEN.
WHERE IS THE PRESS?

[Daniel8168]

I am far from a Hillary supporter, but it should be noted that surplus and debt are two entirely different things when talking about national economics. Clinton's presidency, I believe, did actually have a national budget surplus. The debt however is the result of surpluses and deficits. When the government puts forth a budget, they either end up spending more than they make (a deficit) or taking in more than they spend (a surplus). A surplus results in a decreased national debt and a deficit results in an increased national debt.

Surpluses and deficits are annual measures of budgeting, while the national debt is the accumulated result of all previous annual budget deficits and surpluses.

For sake of argument, assume the national debt is $1,000 and there is a budget surplus of one hundred dollars, the national debt then becomes $900 since that surplus is typically used to pay off national debt. If, instead, there is a budget deficit of one hundred dollars, the government would have to borrow $100 to cover the budget deficit, which would result in a national debt of $1,100. (Of course, deficits and surpluses, as well as national debt, are on a much higher scale than hundreds of dollars.)

If Hillary said there was a surplus, she was probably right. If however she said that the surplus was the same amount as the national debt then she is sadly mistaken, otherwise we would have had no national debt going into the Bush years.

[Larry Kegel]

What is the difference what she said about when she got there??? I main thing is what she did when she was there!!! Obama lied about sitting through the Preachers speech... I don't hear anyone talking about that!!! It is a lot worse sitting while Your Preacher is talking against the Whites 7 This Country than saying that they were shooting motors at her at the airport!!! If it was the other way around... They still be going after Hillary... i News hates the Clintons and doesn't care who wins the election as long as it's not her...

[IslandGyal]

Larry Kegel,
Again Hillary Clinton demographic folks, when did Barack say that he WAS in the congregation when Rev. Wright was ranting and raving the sermons you have heard?!?!?!?!? Saying that he heard Rev. Wright say “controversial” things does NOT by default mean that he heard those comments. It has already been proved he was not there December 22, 2007 as was initially reported by the right wing rag NewsMax.

[jstock]

LarryKegel: Did a vein in your temple burst as you were typing this? You went all incoherent on us. You do not know for a fact that Obama was at any of the 3 sermons from which the infamous snippets - taken out of context, of course - were taken. You obviously haven't even tried to educate yourself about any of this. As for Ms. Clinton, we've caught her (yet again) with her hands in the cookie jar.

[Daniel8168]

And, as far as what she did when she got there - did you bother to read the post at all? The records of Bill Clinton's presidency show without a doubt that Hillary was nothing more than a figurehead. She would make nice with the leaders of other countries and then be escorted out of the room to have tea while Madeleine Albright did all the real government stuff. Hillary is a liar, and a serial exaggerator. The sooner you come to terms with that, the better off this country will be.

[treetracker]

Now she's made it perfectly clear on Fox News this morning. She will take this fight to the Creditials Committee. She is willing to split the party to get her way. She is willing to sacrifice our troops to 4 more years under John McCain to fulfill her own ambitions. Disgraceful.

[MikeL1]

Although it's a shame what Hillary is doing, I won't blame her 4 splitting the party. I'd blame the slow-thinking Dems. 2 be fooled by a dumb crook is unreal! She makes it so obvious that she's a crook, it's a joke. I do agree with you though. Disgracefu­l.....inde­ed!

[nellie]

Thanks for doing such a good job researching this topic. Your post answers a lot of questions.

[sbrownmiller]

Beautiful, funny, a delight to read.

[Serena67]

Hillary reminds me of Kristen Wiig's character, Penelope, on Saturday Night Live -- telling incredulous and ridiculous stories to appear more illustrious than she really is.

[jayinma]

Good one. I saw her on Fox and thought of the Black Knight scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail-- you know, when the Black Knight loses all his limbs and refuses to see it?

Arthur: Your arm's off.
BK: No, it isn't.
Arthur: What's that, then?
BK: 'Tis but a scratch...

BK: I'm invincible!
Arthur: You're a looney...

[Daniel8168]

Or John Lovitz' SNL character:

Lovitz: I went to Bosnia and a little girl gave me flow..er... I mean there were snipers and I had to run to safety.... yeah.... that's the ticket!

[SMAGGIE]

COULD ANYONE ON THIS BOARD REMEMBER WHERE YOU WERE, SAY MARCH 15,1996, AND TELL EVERYTHING JUST THE WAY IT HAPPENED? I'LL BET IF YOU SAY YES, YOU ARE A LIAR. NO ONE CAN REMEMBER THE VERY THINGS THAT TOOK PLACE THEN. SHE HAS ALREADY APOLOGIZED SAYING SHE MISSPOKE, WHY CAN'T YOU ACCEPT HER APOLOGY? YOU NEVER SEEM TO QUESTION "ANYTHING" THAT YOUR HUSSEIN OBAMA SAYS! WHY NOT GIVE THEM BOTH A CHANCE TO TELL US WHAT THEY WILL DO. OBAMA HAS SAID NOTHING EXCEPT "CHANGE". WHAT CHANGE IS HE TALKING ABOUT? I THINK WE NEED TO KNOW.

[treetracker]

No need to YELL. No, I cannot tell you what I was doing on that date. But I can tell you the details of every single car accident I have been in. Where it happened, how it happened & who was with me. But a quick phone call to my insurance company would get me the dates of those accidents. She "misspoke" 4 times - she wrote up a watered down version in her book, that she has now embellished (with a straight face). It's one thing to catch a fish and claim it was bigger than it was. It's quite another to claim to have caught the bigger fish, when you didn't catch one at all. She lied. Face it. And Obama has said more than change and unitity - both being necessary components of getting this country's act together - check out his web site for details. Did you hear his speech today on the economy? It was stellar! If she wants to apogize for lying, I happily accept it. But an apology for a "I misspoke" - not a chance.

[saulpaulus]

First, stop shouting. It's rude. Second, i recall an explanation, not an apology. Third, you don't misspeak about being under fire...EVER!!! Especially not in the middle of a war she helped authorize that has cost the lives of over 4000 US men and women.

If you think this is nothing, ask the Boordas what they think. Their husband, father, and grandfather Admiral Jeremy "Mike" Boorda was Chief of Naval Operations under Clinton. When it was revealed that he had worn combat decorations he had not earned, he committed suicide.

I served in the Navy and, although I was never under fire, I know men who were. My uncle was on Okinawa in 1945. Sixty years on, in his mid-80s, he still vividly recalls it. You don't forget and "misspeak" about.it later and it is not a minor issue. This woman wants to be Commander in Chief. That means that when that phone DOES ring at 3 AM, she'ill be called upon to send men and women into harm's way to be dismembered. killed, or tortured, creating widows and orphans.

Everyone in the military remembers that her husband not only dodged the draft but staged a photo op with our enemies in Red Square while their guns and bullets were killing men his age in Vietnam. No one is going to want to serve under her.

[SamiNJ]

No I can't remember. That makes me an idiot apparently. Or if I made up a story would that make me the fool? Try to think of WHY the imbelishment. Sorry she got caught ... I think it displays a real "extreme" nature to her that is dangerous. She is all or nothing. Sorry I don't perceive that as strength... it is just arrogance.
I CAN recall around the time you ask about... I was on a flight from Caliornia to Hawaii. Now I do recall that I was told what to do in case of a water landing. Nothing happened, we arrived safely and I exited the plane without incident, i even got a lei from someone on the tarmac, not a poem and a hug.
Now,... if I had told you INSTEAD OF THE TRUTH that I survived a harrowing flight and a crash landing what woudl that make me? I would say you should look into WHY I tend to exaggerate... especially if I were to get phone calls at 3 a.m. and decide what to tell the American people about what I was told and decided on their behalf.

THAT is why is IS as important as we claim.
.
p.s.- the flight and water landing hypothetical is not my own. a brilliant blogger posted it in an answer to someone claiming she wasn't a liar when the story first broke.
Just wanted to be fair to that original blogger. I thought it was very apropos.

[Daniel8168]

I remember where I was on September 11th, 2001. Why I remember is because that was a very frightening, extraordinary day. I remember that I was living at my brother's house in California, and that he came into my room and woke me up (I slept late because I worked a graveyard shift). He said something to the effect of "Dude! They attacked New York!" I don't remember his exact words, but I remember thinking that he was utterly full of shit. I remember that he had a nervous kind of half smile as though he couldn't believe his own words. I remember walking out into the living room and seeing the images of the buildings burning.

I also remember being in Vacaville, CA when the Loma Prieta earthquake struck in 1989. I specifically remember that I was lying in bed in my room, excited to see game 3 of the world series between the A's and the Giants. When the earthquake hit, I felt like I was floating because the rocking was sort of smoothed out by the mattress. I had a gran mal seizure a few years before, and when the earthquake struck I thought I was beginning to have another seizure, so I remember feeling relieved when my brother pushed open my door and said, "Dude it's an earthquake!" He then asked what we were supposed to do, and I said "Stand in a doorway." (continued in reply)

[Daniel8168]

I had posted a few other experiences that I remembered vividly, but they didn't make it through for some reason. Suffice it to say that I vividly remember the gran mal seizure that I had (or the lead-up to it anyway), the time that my arm was mauled by a German Shepherd (the dog variety) over 26 years ago, and the time I was hit by a car when I was J-walking on my way to junior high. I can remember parts of those experiences as though I were in them.

People tend to remember extraordinary or traumatic events much better than they do the mundane ones. So, while most people do not remember what they were doing or where they were on March 15th, 1996, someone should be able to vividly recall a time that they were running and ducking under sniper fire. The bottom line is that Hillary either intentionally lied to America, or she has lost her mind and begun to confuse fantasy with reality. So, she's either like George Bush the Idiot, or like George Bush the Bold-faced Liar. Take your pick Hillary fans, there are no other alternatives.

[lovethesinner]

Why are we making an issue of this? Why do we ignore her apology? It's because she didn't misspeak, she lied. She doesn't have memory problem, she has a VERACITY problem. Obama has not LIED, and the change he's talking about is just that. The CHANGE that he's suggesting America needs, is TO STOP LYING. Bush LIED us into Iraq. He lied about the surge. He lied about so many things that now LYING has become THE ISSUE. HILLARY IS GEORGE BUSH IN A PANTS SUIT. That's why we are making this an issue.

[Didi47]

lovethesinner:

Obama has lied so much.... it's raining Obama lies all over the place. You better start ducking because the poop is just starting to hit the fan my friend.

He's done.