Print

Email story

Comment

Letter to the editor

Politics

Politifact.com: Sorting out the truth in politics

By Robert Farley, Times staff writer
Published February 28, 2008

Sure, but is that a bad thing?

The statement

"Could I just point out that . . . I seem to get the first question all the time?"

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Tuesday during a Democratic debate in Cleveland
 

The ruling

Suggesting that she's being treated more harshly by the press than her opponent, Clinton noted toward the start of a debate with Sen. Barack Obama that she often has to answer the first question in televised debates. The comment was surprising in tone and content, coming abruptly after a long back-and-forth on health care and in answer to a question about who's right on NAFTA. Thing is, Clinton is right. She has received the first question in five of the six debates this year. Still, it's funny that Clinton would complain about getting the first question all the time. In a debate format, isn't it a good thing to go first? "In terms of receiving the first question, I have not seen people make a big deal about that," said Gordon R. Mitchell, University of Pittsburgh professor and director of the William Pitt Debating Union, one of the nation's oldest debate organizations. "There are issues about who gets to speak first in terms of opening speeches and closing speeches ... but in this format, where there were a series of questions ... if there was an advantage or disadvantage to receiving the first question, it quickly was counteracted by the many followup questions that evened things out." Mitchell thinks Clinton was "actually trying to say, 'Hey, I always get all of the hard questions.'"Amy Hollyfield, Times staff writer
Yes, dormant while Obama campaigns

The statement

"He chairs the subcommittee on Europe. ... He's held not one substantive hearing to do oversight."

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Tuesday during a Democratic debate in Cleveland
 

The ruling

Clinton charged that Sen. Barack Obama has been so busy running for president, he hasn't done much of anything as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on European Affairs. Although Obama acknowledged the point during the debate, we sought to confirm the subcommittee's activities. Congressional records show, and spokesmen for several members confirm, the subcommittee has not held any policy hearings since Obama was appointed chair in early 2007. The chair sets the agenda and Obama could have asked to hold a hearing on NATO and its role in Afghanistan. But Clinton's claim, while technically true, is unfair, said Andrew J. Fischer, a spokesman for Republican Sen. Richard Lugar, the committee's ranking Republican. Fischer said something as major as NATO's role in Afghanistan would typically be held before the full Foreign Relations Committee. In fact, the Foreign Relations Committee held a Jan. 31 hearing on Afghanistan and NATO was a part of the discussion. Obama attended a Democratic debate in California that day. Clinton is not on the committee. Still, Clinton is right when she says Obama's subcommittee has been largely dormant while Obama has campaigned for president.

For more rulings on the candidates' statements, go to Politifact.com

[Last modified February 28, 2008, 00:31:25]