Full Transcript of Clinton on "Meet the Press"

MR. TIM RUSSERT: Our issues this Sunday: Obama wins Iowa.

(Videotape):

SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D-IL): Thank you, Iowa.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: Clinton wins New Hampshire.

(Videotape):

SEN. HILLARY CLINTON (D-NY): Let's give America the kind of comeback that
New Hampshire has just given me.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: Next stops, Nevada and South Carolina. Our MEET THE
CANDIDATES 2008 series continues. An exclusive interview with Democrat
Hillary Clinton.

For 12 years, she was the first lady of the state of Arkansas, for eight
years the first lady of the United States, and in 2000 was elected United
States senator from New York. This morning, Hillary Clinton joins us for
the full hour on MEET THE PRESS.

MR. TIM RUSSERT: Senator Clinton, welcome back to MEET THE PRESS.

SEN. HILLARY CLINTON (D-NY): Thanks, Tim. Good to be with you.

MR. RUSSERT: When we arrived in South Carolina yesterday this was The
State newspaper, and the headlines agree to this. And let me share it
with you and our viewers: "Clinton Camp Hits Obama, Attacks `painful' for
black voters. Many in state offended by criticism of Obama," and "remarks
about" Martin Luther "King." Bob Herbert, in The New York Times,
columnist, weighed in this way: "I could also sense how hard the Clinton
camp was working to undermine Senator Obama's main theme, that a campaign
based on hope and healing could unify rather than further polarize the
country. So there was the former president chastising the press for the
way it was covering the Obama campaign and saying of Mr. Obama's effort,
`The whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen.' And there was
Mrs. Clinton telling the country we don't need `false hopes,' and taking
cheap shots at, of all people, the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
We've already seen Clinton surrogates trying to implant the false idea
that Mr. Obama might be a Muslim, and perhaps a drug dealer to boot."

What is this all about?

SEN. CLINTON: Well, beats me, because there's not one shred of truth in
what you've just read. And I regret that, because obviously a lot of
people have been, you know, given information or an impression that is
absolutely false.

First, with respect to Dr. King, you know, Tim, I was 14 years old when I
heard Dr. King speak in person. He is one of the people that I admire
most in the world, and the point that I was responding to from Senator
Obama himself in a number of speeches he was making is his comparison of
himself to President Kennedy and Dr. King. And there is no doubt that the
inspiration offered by all three of them is essential. It is critical to
who we are as a nation, what we believe in, the dreams and aspirations
that we all have. But I also said that, you know, Dr. King didn't just
give speeches. He marched, he organized, he protested, he was gassed, he
was beaten, he was jailed. He understood that he had to move the
political process and bring in those who were in political power, and he
campaigned for political leaders, including Lyndon Johnson, because he
wanted somebody in the White House who would act on what he had devoted
his life to achieving.

So I think it's important to set the record straight. Clearly, we know
from media reports that the Obama campaign is deliberately distorting
this. And, you know, I think we should just take a step out here for a
minute. This is the most exciting election we've had in such a long time
because you have an African American, an extraordinary man, a person of
tremendous talents and abilities, running to become our president. You
have a woman running to break the highest and hardest glass ceiling. I
don't think either of us want to inject race or gender in this campaign.
We are running as individuals, we are making our cases to the American
people, and it's imperative that we get the record and the facts straight
because people are entitled to have that information. But I have no
intention of either, you know, doing something that would move this race
in a wrong way, or, frankly, sit standing by when I think tactics are
being employed that are not in the best interests of our country.

And let me address the point that Bill was making. Because, again, I
think it's been unfairly and inaccurately characterized. What he was
talking about was very directly about the story of Senator Obama's
campaign, being premised on a speech he gave in 2002. And that was to his
credit. He gave a speech opposing the war in Iraq. He gave a very
impassioned speech against it and consistently said that he was against
the war, he would vote against the funding for the war. By 2003, that
speech was off his Web site. By 2004, he was saying that he didn't really
disagree with the way George Bush was conducting the war. And by 2005, '6
and '7, he was voting for $300 billion in funding for the war. The story
of his campaign is really the story of that speech and his opposition to
Iraq. I think it is fair to ask questions about, "Well, what did you do
after the speech was over?" And when he became a senator, he didn't go to
the floor of the Senate to condemn the war in Iraq for 18 months. He
didn't introduce legislation against the war in Iraq. He voted against
timelines and deadlines initially.

So I think it's important that we get the contrasts and the comparisons
out. I think that's fair game. You know, I think that we don't want
anyone, any of our supporters, anyone--and that's why in my campaign, any
time anybody has said anything that I thought was out of bounds, they're
gone, you know? I have gotten rid of them, I have said that is not
appropriate in this campaign. You know, when Senator Obama's chief
strategist accuses me of playing a role in Benazir Bhutto's
assassination, there's silence. So let's have one standard. This is an
exciting and historic campaign. One of us is going to make history, which
is thrilling to me. I've worked all my life on behalf of civil rights and
women's rights and human rights, and so I want a good, vigorous campaign
about the differences between us and our various qualifications and
experiences to be the president that America needs.

MR. RUSSERT: It just isn't at Senator Obama who is taking offense. This
is exactly what President Clinton said in Dartmouth. Here's the tape.

(Videotape, Hanover, New Hampshire, Monday):

PRES. BILL CLINTON: Give me a break. This whole thing is the biggest
fairy tale I've ever seen.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: Congressman James Clyburn of South Carolina, who's
neutral...

SEN. CLINTON: Mm-hmm.

MR. RUSSERT: ...said this, "To call that dream a fairy tale, which Bill
Clinton seemed to be doing, could very well be insulting to some of us."

SEN. CLINTON: Tim, let me--let me just stop you right there.

MR. RUSSERT: But, no...

SEN. CLINTON: No, wait a minute.

MR. RUSSERT: No, I didn't stop you. Let me just go through...

SEN. CLINTON: No, but you did not give the entire quote and so...

MR. RUSSERT: No, but you...

SEN. CLINTON: The entire quote was clearly about the position on Iraq.

MR. RUSSERT: But I'm...

SEN. CLINTON: It was not about the entire candidacy. It was not about the
extraordinary, you know, abilities.

MR. RUSSERT: But Congressman--but Congressman Clyburn has been covering
this race. Donna Brazile, herself a longtime activist in the Democratic
Party, this is what she said. Here's Donna Brazile.

(Videotape, Tuesday):

MS. DONNA BRAZILE: As an African American, I find his words and his tone
to be very depressing.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: So these are people who are not supporters of Obama, who are
listening. Let me just go to the Martin Luther King thing because you had
your opportunity to talk about this at the beginning of the show and I
want to lay this out for our viewers. This is how The New York Times
categorized it. "In an interview with Fox News on Monday, Mrs. Clinton
... tried to make a point about presidential leadership. `Dr. King's
dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights
Act of '64.' Mrs. Clinton said in trying to make the case that her
experience should mean to voters than the uplifting words of Mr. Obama.
`It took a president to get it done.'" Again, Congressman Clyburn, "We
have to be very, very careful about how we speak about that era in
American politics. ... That bothered me a great deal."

A writer in the Washington Post today, a black woman said it's as if you
are minimizing "I Have a Dream." That you're saying it's a nice
sentiment, but it took a white president to get blacks to the
mountaintop.

SEN. CLINTON: Well, you know, I...

MR. RUSSERT: That's her take.

SEN. CLINTON: I understand the taking out of context and the
mischaracterization. I've spoken with Congressman Clyburn. I have spoken
with a number of my very strong and adamant supporters, but Tim, I can't
let you get away with that mischaracterization and those snippets. I was
responding to a speech that Senator Obama gave in New Hampshire where he
did compare himself to President Kennedy and to Dr. King. You know,
President Kennedy served in the Congress for 14 years, he was a war hero.
He'd been engaged in many of the battles that led to his election in the
1960 election. Dr. King had been on the front lines. He had been leading
a movement. But Dr. King understood, which is why he made it very clear,
that there has to be a coming to terms of our country politically in
order to make the changes that would last for generations beyond the
iconic, extraordinary speeches that he gave. That's why he campaigned for
Lyndon Johnson in 1964. That's why he was there when those great pieces
of legislation were passed. Does he deserve the lion's share of the
credit for moving our country and moving our political process? Yes, he
does. But he also had partners who were in the political system.

And I think it is such an unfair and unwarranted attempt to, you know,
misinterpret and mischaracterize what I've said. Look at what I've done
my entire life. I have been working on behalf of civil rights, women's
rights, human rights for years and I know how challenging it is to change
our political system and I have the highest regard for those who have put
themselves on the line. You know, Congressman Clyburn was part of that
movement. So many of the people whom I admire in my country who have
given of themselves to make these changes went into politics in order to
realize the changes, worked to elect people in order to make the changes.

You know, this is, you know, an unfortunate story line that the Obama
campaign has pushed very successfully. They've been putting out talking
points, they've been making this, they've been telling people in a very
selective way what the facts are. And I'm glad to have the opportunity to
set the facts straight.

MR. RUSSERT: In Newsweek, you gave an interview to Jon Meacham, and you
talked about the personal narrative that candidates develop. You seem to
compare Barack Obama to, you say, demagogues like Huey Long.

SEN. CLINTON: Oh, that is so untrue and unfair. Look, if you are running
for president based primarily on a speech you gave in 2002 and speeches
you have given since, most notably at the Democratic Convention, then I
think it is fair to say we need to know more beyond the words. You know,
if you are part of American political history, you know that the speeches
are essential to frame an issue, to inspire and lift up people. But when
the cameras are gone and when the lights are out, what happens next? How
do you translate your words into deeds?

And I think, you know, starting in New Hampshire it became clear that one
of the significant contrasts in this campaign is between talking and
doing, between rhetoric and reality. And I have the greatest regard for
rhetoric and particularly the ability that Senator Obama has to, you
know, lift our sights and our hearts with his oratory. But I think it is
fair to point out that he has not had a record of actually producing
positive change. Translating those words into action is something that is
the, you know, the slow, hard, boring of hard boards in politics, and I
think that people, you know, deserve to ask themselves questions about
that contrast.

MR. RUSSERT: You use the terms in Newsweek you'd be a work horse, and
suggested he's a show horse. Isn't that a bit patronizing?

SEN. CLINTON: No. There's a wonderful phrase in Senate lexicon whether
senators are show horses or work horses. And what I was saying is that
when I arrived in the Senate in 2001, a lot of people thought I'd be a
show horse, you know, somebody who frankly was on your show all the time,
Tim, somebody who was doing the press conferences all the time. But I
said to my colleagues the very first day that we went into session, I
intend to be a work horse, because I think it's important the results you
deliver for people. That...

MR. RUSSERT: Is Senator Obama a work horse or a show horse?

SEN. CLINTON: I was talking about myself. I believe I am a work horse. I
believe that that is what our country needs right now. We need a
president who will, you know, roll up our sleeves collectively as a
nation and tackle the problems that we confront. And that's what I've
been doing. You know, here in South Carolina, 68,000 children have
healthcare because of the Children's Health Insurance Plan that I helped
to create 10 years ago.

MR. RUSSERT: In New Hampshire, now, the famous scene in Portsmouth where
you showed some emotion, was that exhaustion, frustration? What was it?

SEN. CLINTON: No. It was actually, Tim, a moment of real emotional
connection. Those of us who are running for office and holding office, I
know it may be hard to believe, we're also human beings. And when I spend
my time out on the campaign trail, it's usually about what I can do for
somebody else. You know, I'm very other directed. I don't like talking
about myself, I don't like, you know, sort of the, the whole atmosphere
of how people, you know, are judged in American politics too often as to,
you know, what you say instead of what you do. And so for me it's always
about what can I do for you? How can I help you? And I was very touched
when that woman said, "Well, how are you doing? How do you get up in the
morning?" Because really, the question is for so many of the people that
I meet, how does anybody get up in the morning?

I just went door-to-door in Las Vegas. I met construction workers who've
lost their jobs, I met a man who's been laid off from the casinos because
the economy is beginning to go down. I meet people who can't get
healthcare for their families, people who are just distressed over, you
know, what is happening in our country. So when somebody asks me, "How do
you get up?" it really triggered in me, you know, the feeling that, you
know, that's what I, I want us all to think about each other. How do we
get up? How do we, you know, pull on our shoes, go out and deal with the
problems America faces. That's what I intend to do as president.

MR. RUSSERT: The woman who asked the question said the next day that she
wound up voting for Barack Obama.

SEN. CLINTON: Mm-hmm.

MR. RUSSERT: Because after your emotional moment, she said that, "You
stiffened up and took on a political posture again," and said that some,
"Some of us are right, some of us are wrong, some of us are ready and
some of us are not." Do you believe that Barack Obama is ready to be
president?

SEN. CLINTON: Look, this is up to the voters of our country to determine.
But I want them to have accurate information about our respective
records, what we've accomplished, the working that each of us have done
when given a chance to serve. And I think it is relevant. I mean, we face
huge problems at home and around the world. Nobody can diminish those.
And the next president is going to walk into that Oval Office on day one
having to end the war in Iraq, having to deal with what's happening in
Afghanistan, the Middle East and across the world, dealing with our tough
problems from the economy going south to 47 million people uninsured. And
I think we're going to need a president who has really prepared and
thought about what to do on that very first day. That is...

MR. RUSSERT: But is...

SEN. CLINTON: You know, that is my case to...

MR. RUSSERT: But is Barack Obama ready to be president?

SEN. CLINTON: That is up for voters to decide, Tim. You know, you can ask
that question of him, voters can ask that question, but that's what I
want. I thought the campaign really started at the debate in New
Hampshire. For the first time we really had a debate that compared and
contrasted our records. When Senator Obama was asked, what is your major
accomplishment in the Senate, he said it was passing ethics reform and
getting legislators to be prohibited from having lunch with lobbyists.
And then, you know, Charlie Gibson said, "Well, wait a minute. You can
have lunch if you're standing up, not if you're sitting down." So if
that's his main claim for legislative accomplishment, people deserve to
know that. And finally, in New Hampshire, we had an atmosphere where
tough questions were asked and answered. I answered hundreds and hundreds
of questions, saw thousands and thousands of people, and I think that the
results really speak to what people are hungry for. They want to get
beyond, you know, just the coverage of the campaign, to really understand
what motivates us, what we bring to this campaign, and what we will do as
president.

MR. RUSSERT: If you don't think Senator Obama is ready to be president,
then he wouldn't be ready for vice president.

SEN. CLINTON: Well, you know, I'm not--you're once again taking words I
didn't say. I'm asking people to compare and contrast our records. I
believe that we need a president ready on day one. I'm putting forth my
qualifications, my experience, my 35 years of proven, tested leadership,
sometimes, as you well know, you know, walking through the fires, being
prepared to take on whatever the Republicans send our way. I want people
to make an informed decision. Look, I trust voters. Voters decide on
whatever basis they think is important to them. I just want them to have
a full range of information to make that decision.

MR. RUSSERT: We had the event in New Hampshire, the so-called emotional
event. When I did the debate with Rick Lazio, with you in Buffalo in
2000, Mr. Lazio walked over to your podium and asked you to sign a
document that banned soft money, and people said that he had violated
your space. One of your campaign advisers said he was menacing. After the
Philadelphia debate, your campaign said that the men were piling on,
which led some women, commentators, writers, to say this. Maureen Dowd:

"If the gender game worked when Rick Lazio muscled into her space, why
shouldn't it work when Obama and Edwards muster some mettle? If she could
become a senator by playing the victim ... surely she can become
president by playing the victim now."

Ruth Marcus, Washington Post: "Hillary Clinton doesn't need to play the
woman-as-victim card ... using gender this way is a setback."

SEN. CLINTON: Well, you know, I don't think that either of us should use
gender. I don't think this campaign is about gender, and I sure hope it's
not about race. It needs to be about the individuals. Each of us is
running for the highest position, the most difficult job in the world.
And, you know, I am, I think, very clearly someone who's gone through a
tremendous amount of criticism, you know. That's fine. I'm more than
willing to shoulder that. I think voters and viewers can draw their own
conclusions when they watch whatever it is that we are doing.

And I believe that, you know, for me, this is about who is ready on day
one. And much of what I've gone through in my entire life is, I believe,
preparation for being able to go into that Oval Office. Clearly, I bring
the experiences of women. As a daughter, as a mother, as a wife, as a
sister. That is who I am. Those experiences are part of me. And it is
part of our American journey that we have moved through so much of what
used to hold people back because of gender, because of race. Are we there
yet? Is the journey over? I don't think so, and I don't think any fair
person would say that.

So we still have to overcome barriers and obstacles. And the very fact
that Barack and I are in this campaign, each of us having won one of the
first two contests, being prepared to take our case to the country, I
think will do more to put to rest so many of these old shibboleths, and
all of the, you know, kind of commentary and punditry. Just look at us as
individuals. Take us as to who we are, analyze our records, compare and
contrast us, and then let the American people make their own decision.

MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn to Iraq. You brought it up. President Bush had
talked to General Petraeus the other day. General Petraeus is to report
back to Congress in March. If General Petraeus says the surge is working,
that reconciliation started in a big way yesterday when the Iraqi
parliament said that former members of the Saddam government can
participate in new government, don't pull 35,000 troops out now, keep
them there for at least the remainder of the year, would you be open to
that?

SEN. CLINTON: No, and here's why, Tim. The surge was certainly explained
and rationalized as giving the Iraqi government space and time to make
the hard decisions that they needed to make. 2007 was the deadliest year
for American troops, and, you know, from my perspective, part of the
reason that the Iraqis are doing anything is because they see this
election happening and they know they don't have much time, that the
blank check that George Bush gave them is about to be torn up. I have
said that as soon as I become president, I will ask the Joint Chiefs,
secretary of defense, my security advisers to give me a plan to begin
withdrawing our troops within 60 days.

The reason I have to do that is because last spring, I asked for a
briefing on what the planning was. Secretary of defense and the
Department of Defense basically said "We're not going to tell you." And I
said, "Well, yes you are." We had such a briefing. It was classified. I
can't talk about it, but the bottom line is it was cursory. I don't think
that the Bush White House wants there to be much planning. So starting on
day one of my presidency, we will begin that planning. We will begin to
withdraw our troops within 60 days. I think we can take out one to two
brigades a month. At the same time, I will put increasing pressure on the
Iraqi government. I will engage in a full diplomatic effort to work with
the countries in the region and others who have an interest in the
stability of Iraq.

But Tim, I think that the large part of the reason that we're seeing the
Iraqi government do anything is because time is running out. And yes, I
believe President Bush will give them the rest of this year no matter
what we try to do, and we don't have the votes to reverse course. But as
of January 20, 2009, we will begin to bring our troops out of Iraq.
Therefore, I certainly believe it's in the interests of the Iraqi
government and the people of Iraq that a lot of this reconciliation that
I've been calling for going back four or five years start and actually
get implemented now.

MR. RUSSERT: If General Petraeus says, "Senator, in September you called
the surge the suspension of belief. It has worked, and you know it's
worked"--let me finish--"you can see on the ground. I'm saying to you,
Senator, or president-elect Clinton, don't destroy Iraq. It's working,
the surge is working. Keep troops there just a few more months to get
this reconciliation complete."

SEN. CLINTON: Tim, I'm going to go back to what the whole point of the
surge was, and the testimony that we heard last fall. The point of the
surge was to push the Iraqi government to make these tough choices. Now,
if we put in 30,000 of our finest young men and women, who are going to
go after the bad guys and quell violence in certain parts of Iraq,
there's no doubt that can be done. The partnerships that have been
created by the tribal sheiks in Anbar province and elsewhere gave us an
extra advantage. But that doesn't in any way undermine the basic reality.
The point of the surge was to quickly move the Iraqi government and Iraqi
people. That is only now beginning to happen, and I believe in large
measure because the Iraqi government, they watch us, they listen to us. I
know very well that they follow everything that I say. And my commitment
to begin withdrawing our troops in January of 2009 is a big factor, as it
is with Senator Obama, Senator Edwards, those of us on the Democratic
side. It is a big factor in pushing the Iraqi government to finally do
what they should have been doing all along.

MR. RUSSERT: Let me bring you back to October 10 of 2002, when the Senate
had to vote on the authorization to go to war. This was Senator Clinton
on the floor of the Senate.

(Videotape, October 10, 2002):

SEN. CLINTON: So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as
being in the best interest of our nation. And it is a vote that says
clearly to Saddam Hussein, this is your last chance. Disarm or be
disarmed.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: Casting your vote for conviction for the authorization for
use of military force against Iraq resolution. That same week Senator
Obama gave a speech, and this is what he said: "I know that Saddam poses
no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors.
... I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S.
occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with
undetermined consequences. I know that" "invasion of Iraq without a clear
rationale" "without strong international support will only fan the flames
of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than the best,
impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of
al-Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars."

Who had the better judgment at that time?

SEN. CLINTON: Well, Tim, let's put this in context. You didn't show my
entire speech--of course, you don't have time to do that--because I made
it very clear that my vote was not a vote for preemptive war. I said that
on the floor, I said it consistently after that. It was a vote to put
inspectors back in to determine what threat Saddam Hussein did in fact
pose. And in Senator Obama's recent book, he clearly says he thought that
Saddam Hussein had chemical and biological weapons, and that he still
coveted nuclear weapons. His judgment was that, at the time in 2002, we
didn't need to make any efforts. My belief was we did need to pin Saddam
down, put inspectors in. But I said I was against preemptive war, I spoke
out against it.

But let's look at the--let's look at the...

MR. RUSSERT: But...

SEN. CLINTON: Wait a minute, let me finish.

MR. RUSSERT: It's, it's import...

SEN. CLINTON: Let's look at the entire context.

MR. RUSSERT: Well, let's just...

SEN. CLINTON: Because by 2004, Tim, by the summer of 2004, Senator Obama
said he wasn't sure how he would have voted. And when you asked him about
that, he said, well, he didn't want to say something that could have hurt
our nominees, Senator Kerry and Senator Edwards. Well, the fact is he's
always said he doesn't take positions for political reasons. That is a
political explanation. If he was against the war in 2002, he should've
strongly spoke out in 2004. He should've followed what he said in his
speech, which was that he would not vote for funding in '05, '06 and '07.
That is inconsistent with what he is now running his campaign on. The
story of his campaign is premised on that speech.

MR. RUSSERT: Viewers can read the transcript from November 11 when I did
talk to Senator Obama about this. He also added that from his vantage
point, the administration had not made the case, but let people read it
and make up their own minds.

I want to stay with your vote because that same day, Senator Levin
offered an amendment, the Levin amendment, and this is how the New York
Times reported it. "The [Levin] amendment called ... for the U.N. to pass
a new resolution explicitly approving the use of force against Iraq. It
also required the president to return to Congress if his U.N. efforts
failed." ... Senator Levin said, "Allow Congress to vote only after
exhausting all options with the United States." You did not participate
in that vote. You voted against Carl Levin, who was saying give diplomacy
a chance and yet you said no. You voted to authorize war. The resolution
you voted for, Robert Byrd said was a blank check for George Bush. Ted
Kennedy says it was a vote for war. James Carville and Paul Begala said
anyone who says that vote wasn't a vote for war is bunk.

SEN. CLINTON: Well, Tim, if I had a lot of paper in front of me, I could
quote people who say something very differently, so I know you're very
good at this and I respect it, but let's look at the context here. Number
one, the Levin amendment, in my view, gave the Security Council of the
United Nations a veto over American presidential power. I don't believe
that is an appropriate policy for the United States, no matter who is our
president.

Number two, I have the greatest respect for Senator Levin. He is my
chairman on the Senate Armed Services Committee. And I--immediately after
we did have the vote on the authorization, went to work with him to try
to make sure that every piece of intelligence we had was given to the
U.N. inspectors. And Senator Levin and I sent a letter to Secretary
Powell, we pushed that position very hard because we both had the same
view that we were going to put inspectors back in and we needed to let
the inspectors do the job that they were asked to do.

Number three, I actually joined with Senator Byrd on an amendment that
would limit the president's authorization to one year. I was very
strongly in favor of limiting what President Bush could do.
Unfortunately, that amendment did not pass.

Fourth, it is absolutely unfair to say that the vote as Chuck Hagel, who
was one of the architects of the resolution, has said, was a vote for
war. It was a vote to use the threat of force against Saddam Hussein, who
never did anything without being made to do so.

MR. RUSSERT: The title of the act was The Authorization For Use of
Military Force Against Iraq resolution.

SEN. CLINTON: But, you know, Tim, that was exactly what would happen if
we weren't successful with the diplomacy and if we weren't successful in
persuading Hussein to do something. And let me just add here that when we
were moving toward the preemptive war that George Bush decided to wage,
the inspectors were in Iraq, we were getting information, finally, that
would give us a basis for knowing. I believe if the inspectors had been
allowed to do their work, we would've learned that what Saddam Hussein
had constructed was a charade. It could've very well brought him down by
his own people.

Now, we can sit here and argue about 2002 or we can say what has happened
since and what needs to happen going forward in the future. And I think
that you have two different story lines here. You have Senator Obama's
story line, the speech he gave in '02, to his credit, which then was not
followed up on. By '03, it was off his Web site. By '04, he was saying he
didn't know he would vote and that he basically agreed with George Bush
on the conduct of the war. There were others, Tim, who voted against it,
spoke out against it and never wavered over that period of time.

MR. RUSSERT: But you voted for all the funding for the war.

SEN. CLINTON: I did. I never--I'm not premising my campaign on something
different.

MR. RUSSERT: And then until '06 was against the timetable.

SEN. CLINTON: But I did what I--my principle concern has always been
doing what I thought was best for our country and what I thought was best
for our troops. I'm not here saying anything different than that. I'm not
giving you a story line that does not hold up...

MR. RUSSERT: But did he have better...

SEN. CLINTON: ...under the facts and the times we were in.

MR. RUSSERT: Did he have better judgment in October of 2002?

SEN. CLINTON: You know, look, judgment is not a single snapshot. Judgment
is what you do across the course of your life and your career.

MR. RUSSERT: A vote for war is a very important vote.

SEN. CLINTON: Well, you know, Tim, we can have this Jesuitical argument
about what exactly was meant. You know, when Chuck Hagel, who helped to
draft the resolution, said it was not a vote for war, when I was told
directly by the White House in response to my question, "if you are given
this authority, will you put the inspectors in and permit them to finish
their job," I was told that's exactly what we intended to do. Now, I
think it's important to take a look at the entire context here. If
Senator Obama's going to get credit for his speech and his position
against the war, then he deserves to be asked what happened in '03, '04,
'05, '06 and '07. I voted for the authorization...

MR. RUSSERT: I asked him those very questions...

SEN. CLINTON: And his answer was very political.

MR. RUSSERT: ...in November.

SEN. CLINTON: I mean, his whole point is that he doesn't make political
decisions.

MR. RUSSERT: Let me, let me ask you this way. Doris Kearns Goodwin,
presidential historian, I talked to her and she's been on MEET THE PRESS,
talked about the qualities in a president. And she said one of the most
important is that you learn from mistakes. Looking back on your vote in
October of 2002, what can you learn from that mistake, the way you'll
make decisions in the future?

SEN. CLINTON: Well, I have said that obviously, I would never do again
what George Bush did with that vote. He misused and abused the authority
that was given to him, in my opinion. And we can't turn the clock back.
I've taken responsibility for it. It was a sincere vote at the time,
based on my assessment of, number one, what the potential, you know,
risks might be if left unchecked, given the problems that we were facing
in the world with global terrorism, and the hope that we would get
inspectors back in to figure out what had been going on since '98. We
hadn't had inspectors since '98. I, I would not have given President Bush
the authority if I knew he would deliberately misuse and abuse it. And as
I said, I was told by the White House personally that the point of the
authority was to send a very clear message to Saddam Hussein that he was
going to have to be held accountable finally, that we would know once and
for all what he had there that could be used as he had used it in the
past.

But you know, Tim, I think that it's only fair to look at the entire
context, because, you know, I was against a preemptive war. I said at the
time that would be a mistake. Obviously, President Bush doesn't listen to
me or a lot of other people, and unfortunately, we're in the situation we
are now, and we're going to have to have very careful and steady
leadership to get us out with the least amount of damage.

MR. RUSSERT: Again, learning from mistake, do you wish you had read the
National Intelligence Estimate, which had a lot of caveats from the State
Department and the Energy Department as to whether or not Saddam Hussein
really had a biological and chemical and active nuclear program?

SEN. CLINTON: I was fully briefed by the people who wrote that. I was
briefed by the people from, you know, the State Department, the CIA, the
Department of Defense; all of the various players in that. And many
people who read it--well, actually, not very many people read the whole
thing because we were getting constant briefings. And people--some people
read it and voted for the resolution, some people read it and voted
against the resolution. I felt very well briefed. And it wasn't just what
the Bush administration was telling us in the NIE, I went way outside of
any kind of Bush administration sources; independent people, people from
the Clinton administration, people in the British government. I looked as
broadly as I could at how to assess this.

And if, of course, you see the vote as I saw it as opposed as how it's
been characterized, I thought it was a vote to put inspectors back in, to
make it very clear that Saddam Hussein wouldn't be able to go off
unchecked. If those inspectors had been permitted to do the job that they
were set up to do, we would have avoided war. It became clear in
retrospect, Tim, once people started writing books and information came
out of the administration, the president had no intention of letting the
inspectors do their job. That's not what I was told by the Bush White
House. That's not what we were told in constant briefings from high-level
Bush administration officials. That's not what the president told the
country in his speech in Cincinnati shortly before the vote. If you
remember, he said this vote was the best chance to avoid some kind of
confrontation.

MR. RUSSERT: We're going to take a quick break. We'll be back in South
Carolina with more of our conversation with Senator Hillary Clinton,
Democratic candidate for president, right after this.

(Announcements)

MR. RUSSERT: And we're back talking to Senator Hillary Clinton. In a few
moments, the presidential primary: Iowa and New Hampshire are down. Next
up, Nevada, South Carolina. We'll be right back.

(Announcements)

MR. RUSSERT: And we are back in South Carolina. The Democratic primary
here a week from Saturday. Our guest is Senator Hillary Clinton, the
Democrat from New York, candidate for president.

Experience is a big issue in this campaign...

SEN. CLINTON: Mm-hmm.

MR. RUSSERT: ...that your campaign has talked about extensively. I want
to go back to a debate back in October of 1992, when a young governor
from Arkansas was talking about experience. Let's listen.

(Videotape, October 11, 1992):

Pres. CLINTON: I believe experience counts, but it's not everything.

We need a new approach. The same old experience is not relevant.

And you can have the right kind of experience and the wrong kind of
experience. Mine is rooted in the real lives of real people, and it will
bring real results if we have the courage to change.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: That could've been written by Barack Obama.

SEN. CLINTON: Well, you know, by the time Bill ran in 1992, he was the
senior most serving governor in our country. He had done a lot of work on
the economic and trade issues that affected the state of Arkansas. And I
do think that there's not a contradiction between experience and change.
I think that they have been somehow put in these opposing categories, and
I don't think that's the way that we make decisions in our life. What the
question is is who has the experience we need to make the changes we
want. And I believe that my experience over the course of 35 years of my
life equips me very well to do exactly what Bill said in that clip.

I am rooted in the real lives of real people. That is what I've cared
about, that's what motivates me. That's what I want to do as president.
And so when I go out, it is to talk with people about what I can do to
help them, and it is a reflection then of everything that I have done
over the course of my life, you know, as a public servant, as a public
office holder. I just think it's imperative that we quit this false
distinction. It is who has the experience we need to make the changes we
want. And we need and want to have it happen in America, and I believe
that I am tested and ready and prepared to do it.

You know, we just spent the most--the first part of the program talking
about a speech and vote from 2002. What people are talking to me about is
the economy. They're losing their jobs. You know, economic activity is
slowing down. We need to focus very clearly on what we're going to do to
make this economy as, you know, ready to be able to navigate through the
potential of a recession. We're slipping toward recession. Some people
think we're in recession right now. And I've proposed a very vigorous
package of economic action that I think would, you know, forestall and
maybe, hopefully mitigate against what is going on in the economy.

MR. RUSSERT: You don't pay for it.

SEN. CLINTON: Well, you know, Tim, I am probably the strongest on fiscal
responsibility in this campaign. Senator Edwards, I respect, he said
that's not a priority for him. Senator Obama puts out a lot of his
policies without paying for them, about 50 billion, as we have
calculated. I have paid for everything. I tell you how I will pay for my
healthcare plan, how I will pay for the American retirement accounts.

MR. RUSSERT: But not for this stimulus.

SEN. CLINTON: But this--stimulus shouldn't be paid for. The whole point
of stimulus--now, as we end the war in Iraq, we're going to be bringing
that money home. But the stimulus, by the very nature of the economic
problems we're facing, is going to require an injection of federal
funding. And I would start with the mortgage crisis. You know, I've been
doing events in Nevada and California, which have very high rates of
mortgage foreclosure. I want to have a moratorium on foreclosures for 90
days so we can try to work them out. I want to freeze interest rates for
five years, and I want to have a $30 billion package that will go in and
try to stabilize the housing market and stabilize communities that are
going to be affected by that.

MR. RUSSERT: But, Senator, many people opted for those cheaper mortgages.
They could've had a fixed mortgage at a higher rate, but they opted for a
cheaper one. Should they not bear some responsibility?

SEN. CLINTON: Well, Tim, I think all of us should. But I'd say three
things about that. The bankers, the mortgage lenders, the brokers, all
bear a lot of the responsibility, because many of the practices that were
followed were just downright predatory and fraudulent. There is no doubt
about that. I started talking about this last March. A lot of people got
into subprime loans who frankly could've been in a conventional
fixed-rate loan. They were basically told that this was a better
opportunity for them. Should they take responsibility? Yes, but look at
what will happen if we continue this cascade of foreclosures. Housing
values are down. They're down 6 percent. That's over $1.3 trillion in
housing values in the last year. So everybody bears some responsibility.
I went to Wall Street last month to tell Wall Street they had to be part
of the solution because they sure had been part of the problem.

What I have proposed would begin to stabilize the situation as it is
today. You know, even Alan Greenspan said give money to homeowners so
that they can be able to withstand the pressures of this mortgage crisis.
I would do it a little differently, but I think the--we're seeing the
same problem. If we allow these foreclosures to continue, we are going to
be facing even a deeper and longer set of economic problems. So I think
we've got to take action now.

MR. RUSSERT: You say you've been deeply involved in the eight years of
the Clinton administration. One of the powers given to a president is the
power of pardon. At the end of the president's second term, he granted
140 pardons, including one to Marc Rich, someone who had been convicted
of tax evasion, fraud and making illegal oil deals with Iran. Were you
involved in that pardon?

SEN. CLINTON: No. I didn't know anything about that.

MR. RUSSERT: No one talked to you whatsoever?

SEN. CLINTON: No. No. Unh-unh.

MR. RUSSERT: His ex-wife gave $109,000 to your campaign.

SEN. CLINTON: Well, no one talked to me about it, Tim.

MR. RUSSERT: Nobody?

SEN. CLINTON: Nobody.

MR. RUSSERT: Your two brothers proposed people for pardons and you were
paid money. One brother, you asked to give the money back.

SEN. CLINTON: That's right. That's right.

MR. RUSSERT: Were you aware your brothers were involved?

SEN. CLINTON: No, I was not.

MR. RUSSERT: If you're president, will you make a pledge that your family
will not recommend people...

SEN. CLINTON: Absolutely. Absolutely.

MR. RUSSERT: And you'll file--follow Justice Department guidelines?

SEN. CLINTON: Yes. Yes. Well, number one, I want to have a much more
transparent government, and I think we now have the tools to make that
happen. You know, I said the other night at an event in New Hampshire, I
want to have as much information about the way our government operates on
the Internet so the people who pay for it, the taxpayers of America, can
see that. I want to be sure that, you know, we actually have like agency
blogs. I want people in all the government agencies to be communicating
with people, you know, because for me, we're now in an era--which didn't
exist before--where you can have instant access to information, and I
want to see my government be more transparent. I want to make sure that
we limit, if we can't eliminate all the no-bid contracts, the cronyism, I
want to cut 500,000 government contractors.

MR. RUSSERT: But follow Justice Department guidelines on pardons?

SEN. CLINTON: Absolutely. Absolutely.

MR. RUSSERT: Back in 1998, a very painful period for you, beginning of
the Lewinsky scandal, you said, "This may be the result of a vast
right-wing conspiracy." Do you believe that the vast right-wing
conspiracy still exists?

SEN. CLINTON: Oh, I don't know. I haven't paid much attention to it for
about 10 years. I really don't have any idea. I know that I've been
involved in, you know, championing causes I care deeply about for a very
long time. And that does sometimes draw a little bit of controversy and
criticism. Some of it's organized, but you know, I'm just too busy to
worry about that.

MR. RUSSERT: The voters who voted for you in New Hampshire were asked
also who would be the most likely to unite the country. And it was quite
interesting. This is what they said: Obama 51, Clinton 28. That's a state
that you carried, yet they say that Barack Obama would unite the country.
Why?

SEN. CLINTON: Well, I believe that my record of uniting New York, of
going to the Senate, when people said I wouldn't work with Republicans
and Republicans wouldn't work with me, is evidence. You know, I am
willing to find common ground wherever I can, Tim, but I also know you
have to stand your ground. I don't believe that the political system in
Washington will immediately just lie down and give up. You know it better
than anybody. The interests are deeply entrenched. You know, they've gone
after me consistently for 16 years and I bear some scars from that
because I have stood up against them on universal healthcare, for
example. I'm proud of those scars because yes, I will find common ground
and create solutions to our problems, but I am against a lot of what
those on the other side want to do to our country.

MR. RUSSERT: A lot of Democrats have--are concerned about that, as to
whether you can win a general election. Again, this is New Hampshire.
Who's most likely to win the general election? Again, they say Obama by a
margin of 44 to 35. The Wall Street Journal and NBC News had a poll where
we matched Clinton-Huckabee to Obama-Huckabee. Let me take you through
that. Clinton is 46; Huckabee 44. Obama is 48; Huckabee's 32. And when
you look at the independent voters, it's Clinton 35, Huckabee 46; Obama
wins independents 40 to 35. Obama gets 20 percent of the Republican vote.
Why is that? Why is there--independents and Republican resistance to you?

SEN. CLINTON: You know, Tim, one think I think everybody should've
learned after New Hampshire is let's not pay so much attention to polls,
you know. We need to let voters actually make up their minds, and voters
who will see and judge each of us in the Democratic primary and then in
the general election. You know, there are other polls we could put up
done by other networks and other kinds of outlets that have different
results. I don't pay much attention to any of that. I think that the fact
is that we're taking our case to the American people. We're taking it on
a day-by-day, week-by-week basis. And I'm very--you know, I'm very
gratified by the positive response. But I didn't pay attention to polls
before New Hampshire and I'm not going to start paying attention to it
after New Hampshire.

Whoever is nominated, and it's likely to be Senator Obama or myself, will
get a fresh look by the people of America, will get an increased amount
of, you know, questions about who we are and where we're from. Because
all of a sudden it becomes real. You've covered this for a long time. You
know, when my husband ran in '92, he finally clinched the nomination in
June in California. He was running third behind President Bush and behind
Ross Perot. Others of our candidates on both sides of the aisle start out
behind and wage a winning campaign.

So I think what people who are concerned about electability should be
looking at is number one, who can be the best president, the best
president from day one, who is prepared, who has taken tough positions,
because you're going to have to take them. You know, Senator Obama voted
present 130 times in the state Senate. When you're president, you can't
vote present. You have to make a decision. Sometimes it's a split second
decision. You don't have time to, you know, think about it. You've got to
actually decide. So I'm going to take the case to the country as the
nominee that I've been tested, I've been proven. I have the experience we
need to make the changes we want and I think that's a winning case, and,
you know, whomever the Republicans nominate.

MR. RUSSERT: In Iowa, you expressed concern that the time of the caucus
prevented a lot of shift workers from voting, they were disenfranchised.

SEN. CLINTON: Right.

MR. RUSSERT: You may confront the same thing in Nevada. They have now
scheduled, the state party there, to have caucuses at the place of work
so that shift workers can show up. Many people, minorities particularly,
supporters of yours, have filed a suit to try to stop having those caucus
locations at the workplace. Do you support that suit?

SEN. CLINTON: Well, first of all, I don't think it's supporters of mine.
There seems to be some misunderstanding about that. I was asked yesterday
in Reno. The teachers union who brought the suit has not endorsed me, and
so I think their concern is to have as many people participate as
possible, which is certainly what it should be. This is now in the
courts. The courts and the state party will have to work it out. But I
don't want to disenfranchise anybody. I want...

MR. RUSSERT: So why not drop the lawsuit and let people vote?

SEN. CLINTON: Well, that's up to the people who brought it.

MR. RUSSERT: Well, what's your view?

SEN. CLINTON: But Tim, as I understand it, there are a lot of people
working at many places who won't be able to work. The places for doing
the caucus are not at their workplace across the state. I mean,
that's--the caucus idea is for neighbors to get together to argue and
talk about their choices. The problem is that if you have a limited
period of time, as I've pointed out long before anything happened in
Nevada, you're going to essentially leave people out who can't be there
during those one to two hour periods of time. And so, you know, I haven't
read the lawsuit. The coverage of it seems to suggest that some people
are saying, "Well, wait a minute, what about us? Those are not our
workplaces. We have to be at work. How are we going to participate?" It's
up to the courts to work that out.

MR. RUSSERT: Doris Kearns Goodwin said, "What's the biggest public
adversity a person has ever faced?" What's yours?

SEN. CLINTON: Well, I think we all know that, we lived through it, didn't
we, and it's something that was very painful and very hurtful.

MR. RUSSERT: What did you learn from it?

SEN. CLINTON: Well, you know, first of all, it is who I am as a person. I
belive that you have to withstand whatever problems come your way. You
have to make the decisions that are best for you. You're going to get a
lot of advice coming from many different quarters to do things that don't
feel right to you, that don't reflect who you are and what your values
are. So you have to be grounded in who you are and what you believe. And
you're not always going to make the right decisions, but you have to be
guided by what you think is important, and that's what I've done.

MR. RUSSERT: Senator Clinton, we thank you very much for joining us here
in South Carolina and sharing your views, and we'll see you Tuesday night
in Nevada.

SEN. CLINTON: Thank you. Good to see you.

MR. RUSSERT: And we'll be right back.

(Announcements)

MR. TIM RUSSERT: Clinton, Edwards, Obama debate at 9 p.m., Tuesday night
on MSNBC. A special thanks to the great folks here at WIS in South
Carolina. What a great partner and team you are and we'll see you next
weekend because if it's Sunday, it's MEET THE PRESS.