OK, I’ll bite. ManiacMan seems to be saying (1) the Clinton quote in question reflects a paternalistic attitude, government deciding for people what is or is not good for them and for society as a whole, and (2) such an attitude “leans” towards socialism. Leaving (1) aside, (2) is definitely not true. All kinds of not-in-any-way socialist political movements and tendencies have shown a paternalistic attitude, including the British Tories/Conservatives with their traditional preference for rule by an educated elite “clerisy”; the British utilitarians and their political expression, the Liberals (ostensibly classical liberal/libertarian, but, like any political theory or movement based on “rationality,” still plenty elitist and paternalistic in their own way – you can’t trust the masses to know what’s “rational”); the early-20th-Century American Progressive Movement (on the one hand enlightened and professionalistic and technocratic as well as direct-democratic, on the other hand deeply suspicious of mass democracy and of letting the ignorant vote); ordinary vanilla American liberals from the New Deal through the '70s; and the current Bush Admin with its obsession with WH autonomy, secrecy, freedom from Congressional oversight, and its general let-us-informed-authorities-handle-this attitude.
In fact, this is a much worse paternalistic attitude because in the case we are talking about with Hillary, the people are basically giving this power to the government knowingly. In the cases you list above, the people are giving up this power unknowingly…i.e., we don’t know what decisions the government is making for us because they are kept secret (at least until the press reports them based on leaks, in which case the some of the same conservatives who decry paternalism start screaming that the media outlets involved are treasonous).
Just so. Some political movements are more elitist/paternalistic than others, but paternalism is the besetting sin of anyone who holds political power or seeks it for any reason. Even anarchists are guilty of deciding for the rest of us that we would be better off without the state, and if we disagree that only goes to show our ignorance. And, of course, all government is by its nature an elitist enterprise (in the institutional, not necessarily the social, sense).