...regarding her support of Tata Consultancy Services, outsourcing company from India:

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-buffalo30jul30,1,3833592.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

"...Joining Tata Consultancy's chief executive at a downtown hotel, Clinton announced that the company would open a software development office in Buffalo and form a research partnership with a local university. Tata told a newspaper that it might hire as many as 200 people."

"...Clinton is successfully wooing wealthy Indian Americans, many of them business leaders with close ties to their native country and an interest in protecting outsourcing laws and expanding access to worker visas."

So what?

You sheep happily accepted a moronic ex-drunk, with a family association with America's #1 most wanted, as President, you think anybody's going to care about Hillary's association with Tata??

It's not as if it's an important infracton, like a blowjob in the oval office.

Yanno, I do wonder what the reaction would be if the Democrats could learn to let things go. Imagine if just once someone said "Hey, he committed perjury - of course he should be impeached. But if he was impeachable then only an idiot would cut the current guy all the slack he's gotten"

Very strange move for somebody looking to get elected president using something involving votes from citizens.

Is that recent?  She is out, for me, if she is (still) doing that.  That leaves me w/Edwards, if I change my party status.

Edwards is the only of the three I can say represents the little guy, little-guy American that is.  No Clinton for me, even against a Repub.  I am in LA, and I figure at least half of programmers here are H1-B, which is okay in some respects, but it's not okay to 'represent' that segment when running for prez.  Gimme a break.

Good question on is it recent.

The article came out Monday and requires LATimes account but I found this reprint:

http://www.indolink.com/displayArticleS.php?id=073007045024

Says the deal was 2003, but she was still defending it in 2005.

Then finally:

"Clinton, it says, has acknowledged the strains on American workers and called for more job-training programmes. But her words seemed to distance her from those who would end outsourcing. Increased US job losses, she said, could cause Americans to 'seek more protection against what they view as unfair competition'.

"The Tata deal, she said in a 2005 stop in India, exemplified the cooperation that would 'help to prevent the kind of negative feelings that could be stirred up' by critics of the global marketplace. She called those critics 'short-sighted.'

"Today, on the campaign trail, Clinton often strikes a different tone. Addressing union audiences and Democratic crowds, she does not highlight her support for expanding foreign-worker visas.

Instead, Clinton often laments a system that, as she told a government workers union last month, rewards companies for 'moving our jobs overseas,' the Los Angeles Times said."

This quote is good: "[Hillary] said she had tried "to stand against the tide of outsourcing."

By doing... ?

I'd like to see Hillary in a "Got Money?" t-shirt.

She lost my vote standing on a stage with Jack Thompson, so fuck her anyway.

Hey, maybe if she verified that Tata workers would be making 70k+ to start (minimum), I could see it.  Yeah, right.

Yeah 2003 no less, practically the bottom for the tech-market, or just above it.  I had forgotten about that, but remembered once you brought it up.

"out of the closet"?  Darn, she's GAY?!  After all this time?