Free Armageddon by Dick Morris, Eileen McGann Page B

back to the beginning of time, and I think a marriage is as a marriage has always been, between a man and a woman.” 45 Indeed, Hillary supported her husband’s decision to sign the now infamous (to the Left) Defense of Marriage Act, designed to make sure states without gay marriage did not have to give “full faith and credit” to gay marriages in other states.
    In the 2008 campaign for president, she moved somewhat to the left as she turned to face a primary challenge from Barack Obama. At that time, during a debate sponsored by a gay-oriented television station, she was asked, “What is at the heart of your opposition tosame-sex marriage?” 46 She bobbed and weaved, but let her opposition stand saying, “Well, I prefer to think of it as being very positive about civil unions. You know, it’s a personal position. How we get to full equality is the debate we’re having, and I am absolutely in favor of civil unions with full equality of benefits, rights, and privileges.” 47
    By 2016, facing an all-out challenge from Vermont Socialist Bernie Sanders, she abandoned all reservations in a full-throated defense of gay marriage, saying, “LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender] Americans are our colleagues, our teachers, our soldiers, our friends, our loved ones. And they are full and equal citizens, and they deserve the rights of citizenship. That includes marriage. That’s why I support marriage for lesbian and gay couples. I support it personally and as a matter of policy and law, embedded in a broader effort to advance equality and opportunity for LGBT Americans and all Americans.” 48
Free Trade Agreements
    The signature foreign policy achievement of the Clinton administration was the ratification, in 1993, of NAFTA, providing for free trade among the United States, Mexico, and Canada. In her memoir, Living History , published in 2003, Hillary strongly supported NAFTA: “Creating a free trade zone in North America—the largest free trade zone in the world—would expand U.S. exports, create jobs and ensure that our economy was reaping the benefits, not the burdens, of globalization. Although unpopular with labor unions, expanding trade opportunities was an important administration goal.” 49
    But when the Bush administration extended NAFTA to Central America in CAFTA in 2006, she voted against it. As public attitudes toward NAFTA soured (See our Chapter Four on how badly we have done under NAFTA), she began to criticize the accord and called for a moratorium on trade deals: At a debate hosted by CNN in November 2007, Clinton said, “NAFTA was a mistake to the extent that it did not deliver on what we had hoped it would, and that’s why I call for a trade timeout.” 50
    But the mother of all trade flip-flops came in 2015, when Hillary Clinton opposed ratification of a trade deal she helped to negotiate and had strongly endorsed—the TPP. This trade deal, discussed later in this book, links the United States with Chile, Peru, Mexico, Canada, Japan, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Australia, and New Zealand. Not only does it eliminate tariffs, but it also limits our flexibility to adopt food and other regulations in our own country.
    Hillary loved TPP before she started to run for president. In 2012, she praised it to the skies during a visit to Australia: “So it’s fair to say that our economies are entwined, and we need to keep upping our game both bilaterally and with partners across the region through agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership or TPP. Australia is a critical partner. This TPP sets the gold standard in trade agreements to open free, transparent, fair trade, the kind of environment that has the rule of law and a level playing field. And when negotiated, this agreement will cover 40 percent of the world’s total trade and build in strong protections for workers and the environment.” 51
    As secretary of state, Hillary positively gushed about the benefits of the TPP,