By John McCormick
NOTE: This item will be updated throughout the morning.
Speaking to a sea of union members wearing orange T-shirts, Sen. Hillary Clinton received numerous standing ovations this morning during a speech in Chicago where she pledged her commitment to health care for all.
"There is hardly a square foot of America that doesn't have your fingerprints on it," the New York Democrat told about 1,000 members of the Laborers' International Union of North America. "You have built the infrastructure, and now we are going to have to build some more."
Clinton was the first of three presidential candidates expected to speak today at the Sheraton Chicago Hotel & Towers. Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards and Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware are expected later in the morning, and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson is on Tuesday's schedule.
Sen. Barack Obama, meanwhile, bypassed the audience in his home city, instead traveling to Wall Street today to deliver an economic speech. The Illinois Democrat said last month that he would skip most candidate forums because they were getting in the way of his speaking directly to voters.
Clinton made the stop in Chicago after appearing Sunday afternoon with five other Democratic presidential candidates in Iowa. She was set to immediately return to the first-in-the-nation caucus state to unveil her health care plan.
"We need to get to a point where health care is a right, not a privilege," she told the construction union members. "We have to take on the special interests to get this done."
Clinton said she has lengthy experience in taking on Republicans, one of several lines she offered that drew a standing ovation.
"I have been in their gun sites more than 15 years," she said. "But guess what, I'm still standing."
Clinton hammered at President Bush, saying he has run the country in a way reminiscent of the robber barons of the industrial age.
"They call it the ownership society," she said. "I call it the you're on your own society."
Clinton pledged more work for the construction workers if she is elected president.
"We all saw the tragedy in Minnesota, but the fact is that one bridge is one of 60,000 that are in need of serious repair," she said. "We don't need any more warnings. We don't need any more commission reports. We just need an infrastructure policy that is fully funded in America."
Clinton repeatedly stressed her experience for the job, saying she knew "a little bit about how hard" it is to be president.
"Following George Bush and Dick Cheney, oh my goodness," she said. "I'll tell you what, I'm not sure we know all the damage that has been done. It's going to be a huge clean up effort. I'm going to put out the word: laborers, come to Washington. Bring all your tools."
Clinton also confronted a question that might have been on the minds of the almost entirely male audience.
"There may be a few people that say, 'Well, are we ready for a woman president?'" she said. "All I can tell you is I think we are ready for this woman to be president."
The union is not expected to endorse any of the candidates for some time, but hopes instead to mobilize and educate its half million members about the issues and candidates.







Comments
When is Hillary going to turn buying my groceries into "a right, not a privilege." I need those even more than health insurance. Perhaps throw in my car insurance while your at it?
Posted by: kurt | September 17, 2007 11:09 AM
And in a poll that RNC Bruce doesn't want you to read:
"All those Republicans who say they are begging for Hillary Rodham Clinton to be the Democrats' presidential nominee? Don't believe 'em.
National Journal asked its panel of Republican insiders and found more than half (52 percent) think Clinton would be the "strongest general election candidate" Democrats could put up. Trailing well behind, former Sen. John Edwards and Sen. Barack Obama were the choice of 18 percent each.
The Republicans find Mr. Edwards more formidable than the Democrats do. Only 11 percent of the Democratic insiders surveyed by National Journal thought he was the strongest choice for their party, while 21 percent chose Obama and 55 percent said Clinton is their best hope.
As for the Republican presidential field, 37 percent of both Democratic and Republican insiders said Rudolph W. Giuliani is the strongest candidate, with Mitt Romney a close second.
Insiders on both sides have been skeptical of Fred Thompson for months, and it shows in this poll. Just 14 percent of Democratic operatives surveyed, and 9 percent of the Republicans, thought he was the best candidate.
The poll included 76 Democratic insiders and 82 Republican insiders."
-- Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times
And we all know what a "liberal media" source the Washington Times is...
Posted by: BC | September 17, 2007 11:52 AM
BC posts "And in a poll.."
Except it isn't a poll, it's at best a survey. And the survey wasn't taken by the Washington Times, but rather by the left-wing National Journal. And the survey sample is neither random nor large enough to be statistically credible.
So poster "BC" manages to get everything in his posting incorrect.
Since Clinton is suddenly recycling her failed 1994 proposals, the question must be asked: if this issue is so important, if this law is so "needed", how come she hasn't introduced such a proposal in her years as a senator? Please, Clintoonites, explain to me why she hasn't done squat to legislate for what she (but not the Constitution) terms a "right"? And why she only makes this speech at a time when she's trying to outbid other Democrat candidates for Left-Dem support?
Posted by: Bruce | September 17, 2007 3:26 PM
And why she only makes this speech at a time when she's trying to outbid other Democrat candidates for Left-Dem support?
Posted by: Bruce | September 17, 2007 3:26 PM
Bruce comments = propaganda
Posted by: Logic Prisoner | September 17, 2007 4:59 PM
Perhaps I'm not understanding her, but
wouldn't Hillary's proposal for everyone to have health insurance only make the
insurance companies more wealthy than they are? Whose benefit is she looking out for, citizens or her corporate donors?
Posted by: Sheffield | September 17, 2007 8:32 PM
Bruce, what's the difference between a "survey" and a "poll" in your opinion?
Also, nowhere did I say that the survey/poll was taken by the Washington Times - I posted that the Washington times was my source used and referenced.
But thanks for trying to ignore the point people away from the topic of the Times story because you didn't like it.
Posted by: BC | September 18, 2007 11:16 AM