Mediaboss Marketing

With campuses emptied and University life brought to a halt, student journalism is in a tough spot right now. Were asking our readers to please support the work of our current staff, as well as the next generation of Pitt student journalists, by donating here. Thank you for your support!

Here we are again. Its time for us to, for the 56th time, decide between two old, white guys to lead our nation.

For many liberals, especially young voters, the pain of having to vote for an old, white guy who is not Bernie Sanders is still fresh. Even those who do not agree with Sen. Sanders platform can agree that he had some of the most robust and expansive policy platforms in modern history universal healthcare, funding for college and debt forgiveness, to name a few.

The same cannot be said for the presumptive Democratic nominee, former Vice President Joe Biden. While he has proposed a few ideas on issues like immigration and gun violence, his campaign is largely banking on support for a return to the status quo meaning Joe will take us back to a pre-Trump era of economic prosperity and social progress.

But there is a reason President Donald Trump won in 2016 the status quo was not good enough for a large number of Americans. Instead of proposing new and exciting policies that can mobilize millions of Americans, Biden is repeating the flaws of 2016 Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. The last presidential election demonstrated that simply saying Im not as bad as Trump wont suffice. Biden needs actual policies and reforms to unite America against President Trump. Wake up, Joe its time to do some work.

During the primaries, Bidens strategy seemed to be simply to outlast the others. Riding on a wave of nostalgia for the Obama era, he flung his way to the forefront of the conversation among moderate Democrats and stayed there. He had the funding and grandpa-charm to stick it out until his major opponents, like Sen. Sanders, ran out of money and steam.

He didnt ruffle feathers, but rather tried to rely on voters united interest in defeating Trump. His main strategy seems to be just existing as an alternative to the current administration. He is banking on our sensibilities.

Clearly this strategy worked in the primary, but theres reason to believe it wont work in the general election. Pete Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Ind., articulated in a March 2019 radio interview that this strategy was what ultimately cost Democrats the last election.

We spent, I think, way too much time on our side talking about him, Buttigieg said. Our whole message was dont vote for him because he is terrible. And even because he is, that is not a message.

Say what you want about Sen. Sanders, but he truly embodied a movement. He showed radical courage at a time when, clearly, it was easier to simply bask in Trumps shortcomings. But Hillarys loss demonstrated that playing it safe can only take you so far, and now more than ever, Democrats must go further.

Biden is almost serving as a lame duck candidate a passive politician who is more focused on legacy than active policy making. Unlike most lame ducks, he isnt nearing the end of a second term. Now is the time he should be ramping up his campaign, not sliding further into the shadows.

At the end of the day, an extremely progressive agenda did not win this primary. But no one can deny that campaigns with clear objectives have the ability to mobilize. In order to draw Bernie voters over to the more moderate ticket, he needs to make this objective-based approach line up with his ideals.

Im not saying that Biden needs to adopt radical policies like Sanders, since that would be a radical change of course from the strategies that allowed him to sweep many primaries but he should take a more proactive approach. There are relatively simple ways for Biden to steer his campaign on the right course.

First, speak out! Biden has been slow to call out the missteps of pretty much anyone but Trump. In an effort not to alienate Republican voters who may be willing to cross party lines in November, Biden has largely stayed silent on the missteps of Republican lawmakers.

As the Republican-led state legislature in Wisconsin refused to delay in-person voting amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, Sen. Sanders protested the decision and did not hold any get-out-the-vote events.

People should not be forced to put their lives on the line to vote, Sanders said. The state should delay Tuesdays vote, extend early voting and work to move entirely to vote-by-mail.

Biden, on the other hand, made no such protests, urging citizens to please vote. He neglected to call out Republican recklessness and blatant endangerment of their citizens. While this strategy makes sense, as it keeps him from falling on Republicans bad sides, it makes him seem unwilling to stand up for himself and the best interests of the American people. Standing up for citizens most basic needs amidst obvious wrongdoing is a simple way for him to show he has the chutzpah for the oval office.

Next, Biden should opt for a progressive vice president. The easiest way to show he is willing to work towards reforms is picking a running mate who will ensure it. Former contenders for Bidens spot, like Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar, are consistently in the conversation.

While these names are popular among his moderate base, they dont have much support among the progressive voters that Biden needs to mobilize. Alternatively, leaders like Stacey Abrams and Elizabeth Warren do have ample support among party members. By picking a running mate who champions reform, Biden can demonstrate willingness to improve the status quo and boast about a team that is capable of accomplishing it.

If Bernie Sanders campaign proved anything, it is that voters, particularly young ones, want a movement, a rally cry or a mission to unite behind. The shortcomings of Hillary Clintons campaign demonstrated the dangers of ignoring these needs. If Democrats want a win this November, Biden needs to come up with a plan that takes him out of the shadows and onto the soap box.

Write to Julia at jrk142@pitt.edu.

Read the rest here:
Opinion | What Biden can learn from Clinton and Sanders - University of Pittsburgh The Pitt News

Get all the latest news on coronavirus and more delivered daily to your inbox.Sign up here.

A prominent Democratic lawyer who represented Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign is threatening to sue the state of Nevada unless it immediately suspends prosecutionsforballot harvesting before the June 9 primary, among a slew of other demands, according to a letterobtained by Fox News on Tuesday.

Marc Elias, now representing the Nevada Democratic Party, also called for a substantial expansion to in-person voting access in the upcoming primary though just days ago, he said it was a "national disgrace" that Wisconsin was moving ahead with in-person voting amid the coronavirus pandemic. In both cases, he cited health concerns.

Democrats had feared that low turnout in Wisconsin would hurt their chances, while they have a more optimistic outlook in Nevada.

READ ELIAS' FULL LETTER....HOW BALLOT HARVESTING HELPED DEMS ROUT GOP IN CALIFORNIA

Writing on April 10 to Nevada Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske, a Republican, Elias first took aim atNevada Revised Statutes section 293.330(4), which prohibits ballot harvesting and permits only certain individuals, like family members, to return ballots. Ballot harvesting, or the practice of allowing political operatives and others to collect voters ballots and turn them in en masse to polling stations, has drawn bipartisan concerns of fraud from election watchers.

In his letter, Elias argued that "many Nevada voters will not be able to return their mail-in ballots themselves and do not have family members or are separated from these family members because of social distancing who can do so for them."

"We ask that your office and the office of the Nevada Attorney General immediately announce a suspension of prosecutions under this statute for all elections for which mail-in balloting will be the primary means of voting in the state," Elias said.

At the same time, Eliascalled for Nevada to stop throwing out ballots when signatures on voters' ballots appear different from those on voters' registrations, saying "lay election officials have never had the necessary expertise" to make an accurate determination.

Robert Forrestal, left, wears a full face chemical shield to protect against the spread of coronavirus, as he votes Tuesday, April 7, 2020, at the Janesville Mall in Janesville, Wis. (Angela Major/The Janesville Gazette via AP)

"In an environment where the vast majority of Nevada voters will be casting a mail-in ballot for the first time, there is the real possibility that hundreds of thousands of Nevada voters could be disenfranchised due to the arbitrary determinations of these untrained officials," Elias wrote. In the alternative,Elias said that those found to have mismatched or missing signatures should be given an additional two weeks, instead of the normal one-week deadline, to clarify the matter.

Elias also demanded that Nevada "require mail-in ballots be sent to all registered voters in Nevada, not just those in an active status." Elias asserted that state election law doesn't distinguish between the two categories of voters.

Republicans have argued that many states fail to adequately clean up their voter rolls. Last year, California was forced to remove 1.5 million ineligible voters after a court settlement last year when California's rolls showed a registration of 112 percent.

Further, Elias urged that Nevada "require more than just one in-person vote center per county in the States most populous counties as well as those with geographically distant population centers."

"Nevada voters have a proud tradition of voting in person either during the early voting period or on election day," Elias wrote. "Having only a single in-person location in each county poses certain risks and hardships to voters in various circumstancesvoters in dense urban communities, for example, will be forced into dangerously overcrowded polling places, while rural voters will have to travel unreasonable distances just to cast their ballots."

On April 6, though, Elias called it a "national disgrace" that "may well cost lives" when the Wisconsin Supreme Court blocked an order to shut down in-person voting there. "No one should have to chose between voting and their health," Elias wrote on Twitter.

Elias, among other things, is known for his role hiringprivate research firm Fusion GPS to probe Donald Trump during the 2016 campaign efforts which resulted in the discredited anti-Trump dossier.

Elias did not respond to a request for comment from Fox News, but Republicans argued that the letter exposed Democratic partisanship.

Democrats hypocrisy knows no bounds,"Republican National Committee (RNC) Chief of Staff Richard Walters told Fox News. "The same people who were fear mongering about in-person voting last week are suddenly demanding more opportunities for in-person voting.

WHAT'S BALLOT HARVESTING?

Elias did appear to be citing health concerns in both cases, however-- first by criticizing Wisconsin for having in-person voting at all, and later by arguing that limited polling locations In Nevada would force voters into overcrowded spaces.

But Walters pointed to the ballot-harvesting request as part of a bigger scheme.

Walters added: Democrats entire strategy is to legalize ballot harvesting nationwide, and this letter proves it. Sending far-left activists door-to-door to collect ballots not only jeopardizes peoples health, it threatens the security of their ballot. The last thing our country needs during a time of crisis is to weaken confidence in our elections, but that is exactly what would happen if Democrats get their way.

Bridget McDonald, right, receives a ballot from poll worker Patty Piek-Groth on Tuesday, April 7, 2020, at the Janesville Mall in Janesville, Wis. (Angela Major/The Janesville Gazette via AP)

In 2018, despiteholding substantial leads on Election Day, many Republican candidates in California saw their advantage shrink, and then disappear, as late-arriving Democratic votes were counted in the weeks following the election. Many observers pointed to the Democrats' use of ballot harvestingas a key to their success in the elections.

Anecdotally there was a lot of evidence that ballot harvesting was going on, Neal Kelley, the registrar for voters in Southern Californias Orange County, told Fox News.

In Orange County once seen as a Republican stronghold in the state every House seat went to a Democrat after an unprecedented 250,000 vote-by-mail drop-offs were counted, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

People were carrying in stacks of 100 and 200 of them. We had had multiple people calling to ask if these people were allowed to do this, Kelley said.

California had recently legalized ballot harvesting ahead of the election. In 2019, a GOP operative in North Carolina was arrested related to allegedballot harvesting, which is prohibited in thatstate.

"GET RID OF BALLOT HARVESTING, IT IS RAMPANT WITH FRAUD," President Trump wrote on Twitter on Tuesday morning."THE USA MUST HAVE VOTER I.D., THE ONLY WAY TO GET AN HONEST COUNT!"

Fox News' Andrew O'Reilly contributed to this report.

Visit link:
Ex-Clinton lawyer threatens to sue Nevada unless ballot harvesting permitted - Fox News

Sen. Amy Klobuchar at the Democratic primary debate in Charleston, S.C., February 25, 2020. (Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)Process of elimination suggests shes Bidens most logical option.

In normal times, the vice presidency is not supposed to be worth a warm bucket of, um, spit. But these are not normal times.

A global plague has shut down much of American society. The virus is particularly deadly to the elderly, and the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee will turn 78 later this year. In November, voters will want more than anything a VP who is ready on a moments notice to lead the country out of a crisis. So the Democratic veepstakes is suddenly much more important than it otherwise would be.

Joe Biden has pledged to name a woman as his running mate, and he has indicated that he would very much like that woman to be an African American. Stacey Abrams checks both boxes, and she is auditioning for the job. But while she might excite the Democratic base, a failed gubernatorial candidate who has never held a public office more powerful than state legislator obviously has no chance of getting the nod during the present pandemic. Maybe the coronavirus will, against all odds, abate in the coming months. But it would be an act of political insanity for a geriatric presidential nominee to select a former state legislator as his running mate under the current circumstances.

If Biden wants his VP to be a black woman, then, he is left with only one real choice: Kamala Harris. While the California senator has three years of experience as a senator and six years more as her states attorney general, her presidential campaign was a disaster, doomed by vacillation and equivocation on important matters of policy. She proved herself capable of delivering scripted attacks during debates, but her most famous such attack came at Bidens expense: She hit him on his past opposition to forced busing, practically calling him a racist. That would be difficult, to say the least, for her to explain away were Biden to choose her. It shouldnt be an insurmountable obstacle, and she still makes sense on paper. But her primary performance failed to generate much enthusiasm among Democrats, and her indecisiveness made her seem unready to step up in a crisis.

What about Elizabeth Warren? If Biden wants ideological balance on the ticket, the senator from Massachusetts makes the most sense. But does he really need ideological balance?

For most of the left, Bidens pledges to lower the Medicare-eligibility age to 60, establish a public option for health care, and defeat Donald Trump will be enough. Bernie Sanderss most alienated, angry, hardcore supporters are not going to turn out because of Warren; they hate her just as much as they hate Biden. The greater number of 2016 Sanders voters who didnt turn out for Hillary Clinton in key Midwestern states could be swayed by Warren, but my hunch is that they were turned off more by Clintons persona than her ideology, and its hard to see how Warren would connect with them on a cultural level. More importantly, Warrens pledges to radically transform the nations economy could scare away the moderate suburbanites who powered Democrats successful 2018 effort to retake the House and Biden really cant afford to lose those voters in 2020.

All of which suggests that a relatively moderate woman from the Midwest would make much more sense as Bidens VP.

Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer has gotten a lot of attention in recent weeks, but a fair amount of it has been negative. Whitmer only has one year of experience as governor, and voters may come to view Michigans especially stringent lockdown restrictions as arbitrary and excessive in the coming months. She seems like a long-shot for the second spot on the national ticket.

The darkhorse VP nominee from the Midwest is Tammy Baldwin, who has been a senator from the potentially decisive, perpetually polarized swing state of Wisconsin for the last seven years, and won re-election in 2018 by eleven points even as GOP governor Scott Walker lost his bid for a fourth term by just one point. The existence of BaldwinWalker voters, plus the fact that Baldwin was the first openly gay women in Congress, must be attractive to Democrats. The major drawback is that Baldwin has never endured the national spotlight.

That leaves just one name: Amy Klobuchar, the Minnesota senator who is still the leading contender for the job. She wont scare away crucial suburban voters the way that Warren would and Harris might. She is serving her 14th year in the Senate, so she has experience, and having run for the presidency this cycle, she has survived the scrutiny of a national campaign.

There are other senators Biden could select, of course: Tammy Duckworth of Illinois is a veteran and a Purple Heart recipient. Catherine Cortez-Masto of Nevada makes a fair amount of sense if Biden decides his path to victory depends more on the Southwest than on Wisconsin.

But neither Duckworth, Cortez-Masto, nor Baldwin has been tested on a national stage the way Klobuchar was. The Minnesota senator was far from flawless during the primaries, and she had some (literally) shaky performances. But she also proved herself more than capable of knifing an earnest and smooth-talking Indiana politician on the debate stage when it counted, a skill that might come in handy this fall.

Biden has four months to make a final decision, but at the moment Klobuchar remains his most logical pick.

Continued here:
Why Amy Klobuchar Is the Front-runner in the Democratic Veepstakes - National Review

Politicians' response to the Wuhan coronavirus is a bit of a headscratcher. China lied about the virus, did everything in their power to keep the rest of the world from finding out, all in a move to protect their public image (as if it was stellar to begin with). Instead of listening to Taiwan's warningsabout this virus and the impact it could have on the globe, the World Health Organization turned a blind eye. Back in January the WHO even went so far as to say the coronavirus was nottransmitted from human-to-human. We quickly found out that was a lie and that the WHO was covering for the Chinese Communist Party. In fact, the WHO disagreed with President Donald Trump when he halted flights to and from China as a means of preventing the spread of the virus.

When the president announced earlier this week that he was suspending the United States' funding for the organization, Democrats became irate. Apparently they think the WHO is doing great work. It's like they missed the memo and the blatant disregard that took place at the beginning of this pandemic (back when it was just an epidemic).

Not only did Bill and Melinda Gates oppose the suspension, but so did former Secretary of State and twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Apparently the WHO is really doing the people's work, at least in Hillary's mind.

But people were quick to point out the WHO's failure and Clinton's partisan blinders that created this "hot take."

What this pandemic has shown is that Democrats are stillwilling to put their partisanship at the forefront of all of their major decisions if it means opposing Trump. They've put the American people at greater risk all because they want to get back at the president. Just look at what happened when there was the bipartisan, bicameral stimulus agreement. Nancy Pelosi came in at the last minute and blew the whole thing up for a leftist wish list.

Editor's Note: Want to support Townhall so we can keep telling the truth about China and the virus they unleashed on the world? Join Townhall VIP and use the promo code WUHAN to get 25% off VIP membership!

Read more here:
Eye Roll: Hillary Swoops In to Save the WHO - Townhall

Described as the first major U.S. female political figure since Eleanor Roosevelt, Hillary Rodham Clinton (born 1947) was considered a force to be reckoned with in American politics. Married to Bill Clinton, the 42nd president of the United States, she figured prominently in the Clinton administration with substantial influence on domestic policy-making.

A First Lady with an independent professional identity, Hillary Rodham Clinton had experience as a corporate lawyer, a tenacious fighter for educational reform, a nationally recognized expert on children's legal rights, and a director of both corporate and nonprofit boards. Hillary Diane Rodham was born on October 26, 1947, in Chicago, Illinois. She grew up with two younger male siblings in Park Ridge, a conservative, upper-class suburb north of the city. Her parents, Hugh and Dorothy Howell Rodham, reared their three children with traditional mid-American values that stressed family, church, school,and social obligations that evolved from the adage that "to whom much is given, much is expected."

As a youth Rodham was influenced by her religious training in Methodism, with its emphasis on personal salvation and active applied Christianity. A seminal influence in her teen years was a youth minister, the Reverend Don Jones, who introduced Rodham and her peers to some of the issues, causes, and movements of the time and who encouraged involvement in direct social action. It was under Jones's guidance that she read religious philosophers such as Soren Kierkegaard and Dietrich Bonhoeffer; babysat the children of migrant farm workers; and met the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., when he came to Chicago on a speaking tour.

Rodham attended the public schools of Park Ridge and in 1965 enrolled in Wellesley College, where she majored in political science and took a minor in psychology. Her undergraduate years were important to her developing world view and growing sense of personal empowerment. An exceptional communicator, she was a catalyst for many of the movements for change occurring on the Wellesley campus and was involved also in a number of off-campus activities. She spent her final undergraduate summer in Washington, D.C., working for the House Republican Conference and returned to campus to spend her senior year as president of the student government. Graduating with highest distinction in 1969, Rodham gave the first student address delivered during commencement in the history of the college. In the fall she enrolled in Yale University Law School, where she was among 30 women in the class of 1972.

Rodham's experiences at Yale helped to focus her areas of interest and commitment toward issues related to children, particularly poor and disadvantaged ones. She became acquainted with Marian Wright Edelman, a civil rights attorney who headed up the Washington Research Project, a non-profit group based in Washington, D.C., later to be known as the Children's Defense Fund. Spending a summer internship in Washington, D.C., Rodham was assigned by Edelman to Walter Mondale's Senate subcommittee, which was studying the plight of migrant families. In subsequent years at Yale she volunteered to work in the Yale Child Studies Center and the Yale-New Haven Hospital, assisted the New Haven Legal Assistance Association, and engaged in several other projects aimed at improving understanding of, and effecting improvements in, the legal system where children were concerned. An extra year of study at Yale prior to her graduation in 1973 further refined her expertise in child law issues.

After graduation Rodham moved to Washington and took a full-time position with the Children's Defense Fund. As staff attorney, she worked on juvenile justice problems, traveling the country comparing census data with school populations and becoming involved in litigations related to juvenile issues. In January 1974 she was chosen as one of 43 lawyers handpicked to work on the legal staff of the House Judiciary Committee, which was charged with preparing impeachment proceedings against President Richard Nixon resulting from the Watergate scandal. When Nixon resigned on August 9, 1974, and the legal staff disbanded, she accepted a teaching position at the University of Arkansas Law School. It was in Arkansas in 1975 that she married Bill Clinton, whom she had met while attending Yale.

Two years after their marriage Bill Clinton became attorney general of Arkansas, and the couple moved to Little Rock. In 1977 Hillary Clinton joined the prestigious Rose Law Firm, said to be one of the oldest law firms west of the Mississippi River, and became involved in an area of law known as "intellectual property." Her primary focus, however, remained in the area of children's rights, and she helped found Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families. She continued to write on the rights of children, revising an earlier article published in the Harvard Educational Review. The revised essay, "Children's Rights: A Legal Perspective," appearing in Children Rights: Contemporary Perspectives, developed and refined her arguments for the implementation of children's legal rights. She also was appointed by President Jimmy Carter to the board of the Legal Services Corporation in Washington (1978 to 1981), a federally-funded program that provided legal assistance to the poor. In January 1978, following her husband's successful bid for the governorship, Clinton became Arkansas' first lady. Later that year she also became the first woman ever to become a partner in the Rose Law Firm. InFebruary 1980 she gave birth to a daughter, Chelsea Victoria.

In her 11 years as first lady of Arkansas, Clinton continued to pursue activities aimed at public service and policy reforms in the state. In her husband's second term she served as chair of the Arkansas Education Standards Committee, established to study the state's educational system and to recommend changes in the standards for public schools. Released to the public in September 1983, the standards report was controversial in several aspects, although it would eventually become state law. In 1985 Hillary Clinton also gave leadership to the establishment in Arkansas of the Home Instruction Program for Pre-School Youngsters (HIPPY). The program, which brought instruction and tutorials into impoverished homes to teach four-and five-year-olds, became one of the largest programs in the country, with over 2,400 mothers participating.

In 1987 she was elected chairperson of the board of the Children's Defense Fund and of the New World Foundation, a philanthropic organization headquartered in New York that had helped launch the Children's Defense Fund. In that year, too, Hillary and Bill Clinton were awarded the National Humanitarian Award by the National Conference of Christians and Jews. Enjoying a national prominence, Hillary Clinton held directorships on the boards of directors of several corporations, including Wal-Mart, TCBY Enterprises (yogurt), and Lafarge (cement). She would also be cited by the National Law Journal in 1988, and again in 1991, as one of the "One Hundred Most Influential Lawyers in America."

Analyses of Clinton were varied; however, they generally pointed to her "spiritual center" and her "continuous textured development." People magazine, as one example, noted that "her social concern and her political thought rest on a spiritual foundation" (January 25, 1993). The "politics of virtue" according to the The New York Times Magazine, informed the actions of the newest First Lady (May 23, 1993).

As the wife of the president of the United States Clinton remained an advocate for many of the programs and issues to which she earlier devoted her time and professional expertise. Her stated goal of "making a difference" in the world led her to press for reforms in many aspects of the American system, including health care and child welfare. Hers is said to be "the most purely voiced expression of the collective spirit of the Clinton administration, a spirit that is notable for the long reach of its reformist ambitions ." (The New York Times, May 23, 1993). She provided leadership in a number of areas, with the most notable appointment in the first year of the Clinton administration being head of the Task Force on National Health Care, with responsibility for preparing legislation, lobbying proposals before Congress, and marshaling strategy for passage of a comprehensive reform package.

Her White House agenda beyond health care reform included promoting diversity in personnel appointmentsan effort she began with her role in the transition groupand pushing for children's issues. With an office in the White House's west wing, close to the center of power, Clinton was expected to remold the role of First Lady for the 21st century.

Clinton has remained an active and vital figure in the White House throughout her husband's presidency. In August of 1995, Hillary Clinton was invited to deliver the keynote address at the United Nations International Conference on Women near Beijing, China. Early in 1996 Clinton and her daughter Chelsea made a goodwill trip to South Asia, addressing women's issues in Pakistan and India.

In November 1996 Bill Clinton was re-elected president of the United States. In that same year Hillary Clinton published her first book entitled It Takes a Village: And Other Lessons Children Teach Us.

Several biographies provide coverage of Hillary Rodham Clinton's personal and professional life as well as her philosophical development and early tenure in the White House. These include the following: Norman King, Hillary: Her True Story (1993); Donnie Radcliffe, Hillary Rodham Clinton: A First Lady for Our Time (1993); and Judith Warner, Hillary Clinton: The Inside Story (1993). Short biographical articles and political analyses are found in a variety of magazines and newspapers. Recommended among these are Patricia O'Brien, "The First Lady with a Career?" Working Woman (August 1992); Margaret Carlson, "All Eyes on Hillary," TIME (September 14, 1992); Michael Kelly, "Saint Hillary," The New York Times Magazine (May 23, 1993); and "The Clintons: Taking Their Measure," U.S. News and World Report (January 31, 1994). Additional information may be obtained from the White House web site at http: //www.whitehouse.com.

The rest is here:
Hillary Clinton Facts - YourDictionary