Agreed. I don't have the exact quote, but quite a few months ago the New York Times had an article about Hillary's foreign relations experience and when they mentioned Ireland, they explained that all she did was gather Catholic and Protestant women in Ireland into one church, and then she gave a lecture.

I'll try to dig the news reference up.

You guys must be sexist.

More from that article

"I remember a meeting that I pulled together in Belfast, in the town hall there, bringing together for the first time Catholics and Protestants from both traditions, having them sitting a room where they had never been before with each other because they don’t go to school together, they don’t live together and it was only in large measure because I really asked them to come that they were there.

"And I wasn’t sure it was going to be very successful and finally a Catholic woman on one side of the table said, ’You know, every time my husband leaves for work in the morning I worry he won’t come home at night.

"And then a Protestant woman on the other side said, ’Every time my son tries to go out at night I worry he won’t come home again’. And suddenly instead of seeing each other as caricatures and stereotypes they saw each other as human beings and the slow, hard work of peace-making could move forward."

There is no record of a meeting at Belfast City Hall, though Mrs Clinton attended a ceremony there when her husband turned on the Christmas tree lights in November 1995. The former First Lady appears to be referring a 50-minute event the same day, arranged by the US Consulate, the same day at the Lamp Lighter Café on the city’s Ormeau Road.

The "Belfast Telegraph" reported the next day that the café meeting was crammed with reporters, cameramen and Secret Service agents. Conversation "seemed a little bit stilted, a little prepared at times" and Mrs Clinton admired a stainless steel tea pot, which was duly given to her, for keeping the brew "so nice and hot".

Hillary Clinton meeting with Belfast women in 1995 and the teapot she admired
Hillary Clinton meeting with Belfast women
in 1995 and the teapot she admired

Among those attending were women from groups representing single parents, relationship counsellors, youth workers and a cultural society. In her 2003 autobiography "Living History", Mrs Clinton wrote about the meeting in some detail but made no claim that it was significant.

Rather than it being the first time the women had met, Mrs Clinton wrote: "Because they were willing to work across the religious divide, they had found common ground." Mary Fox, the wife of a former IRA prisoner and one of the seven women at the meeting, said she had been there on behalf of the Footprints community centre. "It was quite a political change for the women’s sector after the visit of Hillary Clinton. We would love to see her as president. She spoke to each of us and was very interested in our work. She was lovely."

Mr McDevitt said: "I’ve always had a theory that these people were already well networked. Maybe they needed a bit of bringing together and she [Mrs Clinton] was an ideal focus point." Once a peace deal was in place, Mrs Clinton supported women politicians and was always available if they visited Washington "to give them a pat on the back, give them moral support", he added.

Yeah, I can see this is something you'd want to ridicule Hillary Clinton for.

{not}

Alao from the article:

"I don’t know there was much she did apart from accompanying Bill [Clinton] going around," he said. Her recent statements about being deeply involved were merely "the sort of thing people put in their canvassing leaflets" during elections. "She visited when things were happening, saw what was going on, she can certainly say it was part of her experience. I don’t want to rain on the thing for her but being a cheerleader for something is slightly different from being a principal player."

Wow, so the Obama campaign is against peace now?

Just taking the hysterical reasoning I see here and applying it the other way.

Hillray didn't claim to be a driving force, that's her detractors putting words in her mouth, and it's at least as slimey as the tactics they accuse her of.

Sorry.

Helping in a peace process isn't a thing she should be getting slammed on.

Try again.

Helping in a peace process isn't a thing she should be getting slammed on.

Again, workerbee, she's not getting slammed for "helping" in the peace process.

She's getting slammed for exaggerating her record.

She had tea, in a cafe that was crammed with reporters and cameramen, according to the article. In her autobiography she didn't describe it as having any particular significance in terms of helping the peace process. It was a social event. The fact that the cafe was "crammed" with reporters and cameramen tells you a lot about it, too. It was a photo op, not an attempt to hold serious discussions or negotiations. It was tea, in a cafe, with some people who were peripherally involved in the peace process.

But now suddenly it transforms into a meeting in City Hall (I guess "tea in a cafe" didn't sound presidential) and it's suddenly one of the key things she cites to explain why she's "experienced" enough to be commander in chief.

She's getting slammed for exaggerating her record because this exaggeration is part of the sleazy tactics she's using against Obama, i.e., endorsing McCain over Obama.

She's getting slammed for exaggerating her record because it's such an extreme exaggeration it doesn't even make sense for her own campaign. If somehow she gets the nomination, you know McCain is going to throw those words right back in her face. She's been in elected office fewer years than Obama and what she's trying to count are her years as First Lady. All McCain has to do is juxtapose pictures of Hillary having tea in that cafe and admiring that teapot, against images of his own extensive experience.

Why would she do this? Because it's not about making a case for herself. They didn't even think it through enough to have examples ready to go when they were asked just what "experience" she was referring to! It's not about making a case for herself it's about tearing down Obama, by effectively endorsing McCain.

That's what she's getting slammed for.

Hey! Who remembers the Republican attacks on Gore in 2000 regarding his so-called penchant for exaggeration?

The instances cited against Gore were miniscule compared to HRC's outrageous claims of essentially inheriting everything good about her husband's administration and claiming "private reservations" about the bad. We all know that the Clinton campaign is building this facade of experience vs inexperience

Obama needs to tattoo Clinton with the absurditity of her outrageous exaggerations. This should be easy - just pick her points apart, one by one by one.

How silly to be claiming that she contributed to peace in Northern Ireland? How? By drinking green beer on StPatrick's Day?

What about her lofty claims to delivering a feminist speech at an international women's conference in China with some suggestions that the Chinese clean up their act on female infanticide for one is hardly heroic stuff. What were the Chinese going to do....throw her into jail? Or would they refuse to send us any more Barbie Dolls for the shelves of Walmart, where she sat on the board, and a company that we all know has been the leader in exploiting the new WTO infrastructure - NAFTA included.

Then there's 7 vs 11 years of elected public office experience? How is 7 more than 11? And let's ask if she had a security clearance during her White House years? If she replies, "No. But . . . ", then we have her trapped by her own rhetoric. If she says that the President shared with her in private, then it raises a boatload of questions about who will be actually pulling the strings in her White House. Can she guarantee that Bill will NOT have a security clearance in actuality and in spirit? Will she confirm that she will not betray national security in revealing protected information to her husband?

Let's ask if the heretofor missing billing records for her Rose Law Firm work that mysteriously appeared on furniture in the White House were placed there after a 3am phone call.

The baggage is so heavy on the Clinton's that it will sink them as long as it becomes waterlogged. Obama has all of the ammunition he needs to raise reasonable doubts about the risks of another Clinton term.

There is a growing groundswell of suspicion as to why Hillary and her surrogates resort to the kind of deflective tactics used by people who'd rather avoid the subject of why she has yet to produce her tax returns and the archived records of her time spent as First Lady. That interest has intensified since she made the $5 million loan to her campaign. Instead of denigrating Senator Obama, one would think, it would be the path of the least resistance for her to come clean with this request?!?!

I will give her the benefit of the doubt that she will keep her word to release the aforementioned documents "on or before April 15th" for public consumption. However, with the Pennsylvania Primary Election taking place on April 22nd, my gut tells me, based on Hillary's past performance, that April 15th will come and go with a broken promise..... hoping no one will notice.

What strikes me about Hilary's whole campaign is that it is loaded with references to Bills accomplishments. Who is really running, Hillary or Bill? This is particularly relevant to the 3a.m. phone call add. What is this add really about? It is about who is in the bed with Hillary there to help. This is the hidden message in that add and it really rubs me wrong.

Buddy, the late chocolate lab first dog, would likely have remembered more about these middle of the night disturbances than Hillary. Remember that it was Buddy who was Bill's only friend at 1660 Pennsylvania Avenue for the last three years of his term.

More likely at 3:00am Hillary was probably busy elsewhere sticking pins into the eyes of voodoo dolls of Bill and Monica, cursing Bill's womanizing ways for jeopardizing her planned Senate bid and derailing her onw plans for achieving the pinnacle of political power.

I say let Hillary and surrogates keep on spurting this ridiculous and tatseless bile. They have already crossed the line and the point of diminishing returns. History will report this as the body blow in the self-destruction of the Clinton myth.

And don't even dream that there will be a joint ticket. Obama cannot afford to be dragged down by Clinton. He will select a man with military credentials. Guaranteed. She cannot secure sufficient delegates to win the nomination, so it's silly to talk about who will be her VP nominee.

HELLLLOOO all you Clinton bashers! She didn't say she brought "peace" to Ireland. She said she brought "peas". Thats right. Home grown peas. Delicious.