Hillary Ad: Who Do You Want Answering The White House Phone At 3 a.m.?
Hillary Clinton has a new ad in Texas, making what is perhaps her most forceful argument yet against Barack Obama on national security:
"It's 3 a.m., and your children are safe and asleep," the announcer says. "But there's a phone in the White House, and it's ringing — something's happening in the world. Your vote will decide who answers that call."
The mother looking in on her children, worried about their safety, is a clear play for the so-called "security mom" vote. Should Barack Obama ultimately win the Democratic nomination, it's hard not to picture John McCain's campaign running an ad very much like this one.
Late Update: The Obama campaign issues a withering response.















As Chris Matthews pointed out this morning, it is all about fear.
Honestly, I'd rather have a president who was calm, collected, and had good judgment, as opposed to a president who has a history of poor judgment, and generally gets angry and erratic when the pressure is on. On, and I wouldn't want a president who would pick up the phone and blame the media for everything.
February 29, 2008 9:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
The problem is, when McCain airs an ad like that, it won't be viewed by just Democrats. The rest of the country, which is not following the Dem campaign as closely as you are, is going to see an ad like that. Sounds like you don't remember Goldwater.
February 29, 2008 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Goldwater? Yeah, I have dim but fond memories. Goldwater was a plain-speaking Republican Senator from Arizona. And he lost, big-time.
February 29, 2008 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Huh? If McCain airs an add like that, the American public should be concerned that he is too old to get out of bed in the middle of the night.
February 29, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know what Rich? There is no excuse for such a stupid (ageist) comment about anyone, including McCain.
March 1, 2008 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Just when you thought HRC could not go any lower she simply amazes!
Go HRC!
Keith
February 29, 2008 9:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
ah, if only. now her campaign is threatening to sue the texas democratic party over the state's prima-caucus:
http://www.kansascity.com/449/story/510802.html
lordy, i wish she'd go away already.
February 29, 2008 10:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Who do you want answering the phone...
bill? or me??
February 29, 2008 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
She let it ring five times before picking it up. Lazy.
Could have missed the call. THEN WHERE WOULD WE BE?
tsk tsk, Hillary.
A country could launch its entire nuclear arsenal in the time it takes for a phone to make five rings. How safe does that make you feel?
February 29, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
What I want to know is why she's answering the phone at 0300 in lipstick and a gold necklace. Is she even sober at that point? Or did she burn the first five rings getting dolled up to hash out the particulars of the resurgent Somali genocide?
March 1, 2008 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's been reported that the Republicans have been learning from the Clinton campaign's tactics in this presidential race, so this ad is very helpful to them.
February 29, 2008 9:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Talk about Hillary taking down the democratic party. Before this thing started, the lies of the repugs were very well known. We ran Rove and Gozo out of town. USA scandal was revealing lie after lie, the horrendous Blackwater thing. The dems would have had it all tied up. No one would believe anything the repgus said.
But now here comes Hillary. So when Obama wins the nomination, the repugs can point to Hillary's bogus charges and say "See even other democrats belive this, it must be true"
Way to go Hill, you've just breathed new life into a broken Republican slime machine.
Thanks alot.
February 29, 2008 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
flufferwink said, "It's been reported that the Republicans have been learning from the Clinton campaign's tactics in this presidential race, so this ad is very helpful to them."
Helpful how? So far, the Clinton attack tactics have all been miserable failures. It reminds me of the brave, doomed test pilots in Tom Wolfe's book The Right Stuff, who as they went down would say things like "Trying engine restart sequence... negative. Trying right wing flaps... no response. Tried ejector button... no go."
It is silly to pretend that Karl Rove and the Republicans need Hillary to demonstrate for them the virtues of going negative on Obama, especially when she is doing so with such spectacular ineffectiveness.
February 29, 2008 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
How very Rethuglican of her. So 2004. Desperation is oozing from it.
February 29, 2008 9:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Some one who did not vote for a Reckless and Catastrophic War, and who does not claim that they were duped by George W. Bush. That is who I want answering that phone call!
February 29, 2008 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, gee, let's hope the Karl Rove playbook doesn't get worn out in the hands of the Clinton campaign.....
February 29, 2008 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
How clueless can the Hillary campaign be? People would certainly not want someone who voted for the biggest foreign policy blunder in American history to answer that phone.
It's just like her sympathy for the maimed veterans. She put them there. Don't exploit them for your campaign.
February 29, 2008 9:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's a great ad.
And the answer to the ad's question for me is simple: I would want President Obama to answer the phone.
February 29, 2008 10:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here, here!
February 29, 2008 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
I would definitely want someone who knows what's going on in the world and knows the danger the country is in. One poster said that "she put us there"; I don't think so. She may have voted for the war, but so did Obama, he just does not want to admit it. After all, New York was attacked and Hillary is the Senator of NY, so I think she should agree to defend our country. She and nobody else did that we stay in Iraq spending trillons of dollars and losing many lives. I know though that if Hillary had been president when we entered Iraq, we would have been out of there a long time ago.
Go Hillary, I am with you!
February 29, 2008 10:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
> New York was attacked and Hillary
> is the Senator of NY, so I think
> she should agree to defend our country
To Cora1971: when did Iraq attack NY?
~ Jess
February 29, 2008 12:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
The question is not when did Iraq attack NY. It is where did Iraq attack NY. It attacked New York in retarded neocon fantasy land and the adjoining Hillary fantasy land where this is an add that wins her votes.
February 29, 2008 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm also glad that Hillary is so willing to use desperate attacks against our nominee in order to help the Republicans take him down (it still won't work).
I seriously think she has decided to take the spite route, if she can't win, no one will.
That does seem to be how she is playing.
February 29, 2008 9:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
She needs an out. I could care less if it's a spiteful one, as long as it leads to an out with enough time to consolidate the party as a whole.
February 29, 2008 10:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Or put another way:
"Vote Hillary or your children are gonna die!"
Way to look like a Republican.
Wouldn't it be great if instead of Hillary at the end it was Mark Penn on the phone?
February 29, 2008 9:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm going to guess it will be either Bill or an intern.
February 29, 2008 9:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
The poor woman is channeling SNL again.
February 29, 2008 9:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Uncool, wwjb.
As uncool as this ad is, Clinton campaign.
February 29, 2008 9:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
...someone who is so experienced, she doesn't even need to read the NIE before voting to give George Bush the authority to invade another country?
February 29, 2008 9:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
List of people who find this ad convincing:
a) People who were already for her
b) People who've haven't seen any of the one on one debates with Obama.
c) Complete dumbasses who believe anything their told in an advertisement or an email.
List of people who will not find this ad convincing:
Everyone else.
Heckuva job, Penny.
February 29, 2008 9:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
And, speaking of complete dumbasses, I meant "they're," not "their."
Christ, I've been trying to make myself stop making that mistake since elementary school, with little success, as you see.
February 29, 2008 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Outrageous ad! The soft music does not hide the playing on terror fears that we've experienced for the last 8 years. Who is behaving like Karl Rove in this election?
I thought I could still vote for her if she won the Dem nominee. However, if she's going to run like a Republican, I'll oblige her and vote for the real republican McCain (or more likely Nadar) in the unlikely event she wins the nomination. Shameful ad that proves all her critics right: she'll do or say anything to win. I use to think she would make a good president, but she constantly demonstrates to the contrary. Because of this ad, I donated more money to Obama. And I just bookmarked Nadar's and McCain's website. I've voted Democrat all my life (including Bill twice), but I will never vote for a Clinton again with this sort of Republican-like fear-mongering.
February 29, 2008 9:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Guess she didn't think "Karl Rove's playbook" wasn't so shameful after all.
February 29, 2008 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
My first response was, "Jesus Christ Hillary, have you no shame left", but then it dawned on me that Obama will in fact see very similar ads as this one in the general, if not from McCain directly, then from his surrogates.
Basically, Hillary's campaign has become an extension and a potential launching pad for McCain's. In that respect it hurts. But provided Hillary doesn't continue long past the 5th, she's actually giving Obama a chance to refute and define himself against some of McCain's potentially more damning character attacks.
And the best part for Hillary at least is she's got the ultimate get out of jail free card. After this is over, just apologize, blame everything on Mark Penn and say how much she's found her voice once again, and won't give it up this time. Perfect way to exit the race with some grace with giving Obama a platform to further define himself in the minds of voters.
At least that how I'm choosing to read this in my rose-colored glasses, TGIF mode.
February 29, 2008 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
FEARMONGERING!!!
Hillary's most consistent message throughout this campaign has been fearmongering...she has implicitly engaged this Bush meme too many times. Asking about the new leader in UK and how he had to handle a terror threat right after assuming office, then saying America is safer due to Bush's policies and now this.
Nothing but fear. What we should be fearful of is Hillary at the helm. Hillary has a track record of poor judgment and so does McCain for all their 'experience'
Barack needs to run a counterpounch ad that answers this fear with the right judgment at the right time trumping experience with WRONG judgment.
Do we really want to entrust our future to those who were WRONG...what good is all that experience if they make huge strategic blunders that cost American lives and drain our treasury?
We have lost lives and have no money to make American lives safe and secure .... America is being sucked down into a vortex of hell due to all their EXPERIENCE and piss poor judgments.
Obama said it best...it is not enough to be ready on day one...we need leaders who are RIGHT on day one.
February 29, 2008 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Obama were a more traditional pol, I could see them running an ad featuring all of her public meltdown moments during the campaign and closing with: do you really want her answering the phone in a crisis?
I know he won't, but still.
February 29, 2008 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Was Tom Tancredo's ad staff was recently offered positions with the Clinton campaign?
February 29, 2008 9:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is is just me or does this ad also say that Hillary sleeps in a suite, jewelry & makeup?
February 29, 2008 9:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
It basically is saying that she doesn't sleep.
Something I wouldn't doubt the way her campaign has been looking of late.
February 29, 2008 9:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
What she doesn't understand is that people are tired of this. They are tired of being afraid.
February 29, 2008 9:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
God, what a ridiculous ad this. Does she not realize that most American people are beyond this kind of fear tactic? We're on to people who try to sway us with fear - it doesn't work anymore. What are we going to choose - fear or hope? I think the American people are ready to go with hope. This ad just shows how much a candidate of the status quo she is, how much of a change agent she is NOT. Good luck with this one, Hillary.
February 29, 2008 9:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Someone who will answer the damn phone instead of throwing a hissy fit about why the have to always answer it and "the first questions".
February 29, 2008 9:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
ROFLMAO!
February 29, 2008 10:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, I could make a great parody of this ad. Hillary answers the phone and its Bill on the line with loud music and female voices in the background. "Hi Babe, I'm gonna home be a little late tonight." Let me count the ways.
February 29, 2008 9:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, please get on that. I would love to see 10 or 15 youtube clips by Saturday.
Could be:
-Bill's voice, at the party, like you said;
-"I don't mind answering, but why do I always get the first question?" like Liam suggested;
-"Hello? Wait one second, Prime Minister Olmert-- Bill, get off the other phone! I can hear you breathing!"
-"Hello, ADT Home Security? I think there's a problem. Our lines must have crossed or something, because I think I'm in your ad.
-Lobbyists. Lots and lots of lobbyists.
-"Hello, President Medv-Medeve, uh, Mdvev--whatever."
-"Yes, I do believe my refrigerator is running. Why do you ask?"
-"I wish I hadn't agreed to give all my 'Hillraisers' my direct number."
February 29, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
oh... this is great.. may i?
-- "Papa John's pizza, this is Hillary..."
-- "Yes, this is the Congressional Page helpdesk..."
-- "Six prawns is hardly a galaxy..."
-- "I'd call having just half a bottle of oxies left an emergency, damnit!..."
-- "Get me the President..."
-- "Batman?..."
-- "Fine, then yes Rahm, this is a booty call! Are you happy now?..."
-- "35 years experience... right.. yes... I'm currently making 200k, but I'd like to make more... commission based I could do..."
-- "Rosebud!!!!"
February 29, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Give them credit for drumming up a good ad. Yes it is fear mongering but nonetheless it is effective and will help keep women on her side, in particular. Whether Clinton did this or not, these sorts of ads would be launched by the Republicans and hopefully this can give Obama an early start towards figuring out a solid retort. He has to broaden his support beyond the mandate for change so that folks associate him with good judgment. He has been established as the non-experience candidate and now he has to turn that into the good judgment candidate, or something like that.
February 29, 2008 9:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Does anyone else have a negative mental image of what Hillary would look like if woken up in the middle of the night? Calm cool and collected are not the adjectives that come to my mind.....
February 29, 2008 9:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Doesn't she understand that trying to pawn off fear and desperation only makes her look fearful and desperate?
Not presidential.
February 29, 2008 10:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
JohnAH...yes it is you...that post was sexist pandering as much as her ad is fearmonging.
Who gives a shyt whether she is dressed and has on jewelry and makeup when she makes a decision to take this country to war?
Do you think you would be more secure knowing she made that friggin decision with no bra on boobs down to her knees and a thong under her granny nightgown, or what?
GEEZ!! get real
We are talking about national security for pete sakes and you want to ask about Revlon and Tiffany's?
Unbelievable.
February 29, 2008 10:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
vicissitudes - Sexist? Give me a break! My comment would have been the same if Obama showed up at the end of the ad wearing a suit and tie. I'm not a Hillary hater by any means and certainly not sexist.
I was just posting that struck me funny and nothing more.
February 29, 2008 12:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
First, news of such a call wouldn't reach George Bush until after he's had his coffee and morning constitutional, and even then, you'd have to wait 7 minutes for him to snap out of a shocked stupor.
Hillary would immediately start calculating the political ramifications, perhaps ahead of actually figuring out what to do.
McCain would have bombers and fighters scrambled before stepping into his slippers.
And we're supposed to think Obama would wake up bleary-eyed, confused, just wanting to get back to his dreams? Gimmie a break.
February 29, 2008 10:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
WOW...
Another George Bush....
February 29, 2008 10:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
No Joke. What is really eerie is the way she has run this campaign is very similary to the way GWB has conducted the Iraq War:
(I saw this on another blog but worth repeating)
1. Both were arrogant enough to think that they will just walk over the competition.
2. Both had the unfounded confidence that once they beat the so called opposition they will be greeted with flowers, no matter what it takes to win.
3. Both did not do any grass root work to find out what the ground reality is.
4. Both are adamant that their strategy was sound.
5. Both never anticipated a long drawn out battle.
6. Both surround themselves with 'yes-men'.
7. Both are reluctant to change their strategy because that would be tantamount to accepting that there was/is something wrong with it in the first place.
It is 3am, who do you want answering the phone? She already had her phone moment, when she voted for the war.
February 29, 2008 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
If you didn't know anything about this ad, the state of the campaign or the Constitution, a person might fairly conclude that the ad was proposing that viewers support a third term for President Bush.
I think folks in Senator Clinton's campaign are completely detached from reality. Not that he needs it or that I can really afford it, but I'm going to Obama's website NOW and sending him another $50. And I am doing it solely because of this outrageous, indefensible ad.
February 29, 2008 10:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary approves this ad about protecting children, while she also approves of continuing the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas which maim and kill children abroad. Schizoid, anyone?
February 29, 2008 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
I used to think that the Republicans' hate of Hillary was kind of irrational and over the top. After the way she's campaigned in this primary, I understand.
February 29, 2008 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good job advocating for McCain's presidency, Hillary.
Seriously, WTF?!?
February 29, 2008 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Who you want to answer the phone at the White House at 3 a.m. when aliens are coming to abduct your children out of their beds?
I thought Mulder and Scully were going to burst in and save the kids.
Is this a commercial showing that Hillary is actually a robot? it's 3 a.m. and she has full makeup and jewelry on.
February 29, 2008 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am a constituent of Senator Clinton. I just called her office to complain at this conduct by my Senator.
Clintonites -- I'd like to hear how you feel about your candidate spending 100s of thousands of your dollars to run this ad.
February 29, 2008 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hate to break it to everyone...
but this ALREADY WAS a John McCain ad from January '08
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPadP7eAO9Y
February 29, 2008 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
OMG- she plagiarized John McCain's ad
February 29, 2008 10:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.wavlist.com/tv/010/3hellos.wav
February 29, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
This one is even better
http://www.wavlist.com/tv/010/3hellos2.wav
February 29, 2008 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is a joke. It's really not a Hillary ad because it helps Obama too much in that my first reaction was I certainly don't want someone answering that phone who voted to go to war in Iraq (and took five years before she realized it was a mistake to be regretted.)
February 29, 2008 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
This the bipolar lady from Hell who is going to protect us all!
Gosh, I feel safer already.
February 29, 2008 10:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Any of Hillary's lines against Obama could be used against Hillary by McCain. You want a president with experience? Foreign policy credentials? A tough fighter? McCain has Hillary beaten on all fronts.
February 29, 2008 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is she setting up a special line right now, so we can phone her and check to see if she answers?
Or is this just "words" and not action?
February 29, 2008 10:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Can we agree that this is not exactly an "argument" for her candidacy. In these the waning moments of the Clinton campaign it may be the only strategy available to her, but to call this blatant emotional manipulation an argument is to show how seriously our political dialogue has deteriorated.
February 29, 2008 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sounds a lot like the old "mushroom cloud" ad...
February 29, 2008 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why is that mother fully dressed at 3 am? And does Hillary really wear a necklace in the middle of the night? Geez.
February 29, 2008 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's the voiceover guy who does all the big blockbuster action movies, isn't it?
February 29, 2008 10:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Rapid Response Ad from Obama Campaign:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ag8gOXZulXg
February 29, 2008 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's 3am and "something's happening in the world", jeez how weak is that? There's more likely to be "something" happening in the world if we elect another president who thinks "coercive diplomacy" is a policy we ought to continue. That might have worked in Serbia and could work in Sudan but as we've seen in Iraq, not so good. She doesn't seem to understand the predicament we're in these days. I'm not interested in electing a president who is hellbent on proving how tough she can be as CinC with the blood of our soldiers.
BTW notice the little horn flourish at the end. Right out of the movie Patton. George C. Scott surveys the wreckage on the battlefield and growls
"God help me, I love it so!"
February 29, 2008 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Who Do You Want Answering The White House Phone At 3 a.m.?
President Obama.
Great photo of Senator Obama playing hoops with the troops in Africa here.
February 29, 2008 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree JeffLord,
Obama should use this ad to raise more money to clobber her with.
I am sending him another $100.00
Hillary makes me nauseated.
Fear ads, virtually never sell the product. It is like those ads they do for security home alarms where they show folks being bugularized in the middle of the night.
Fear does not prompt RATIONAL decision making. Folks seldom make the right choices out of fear they instead tend to ignore it if they can and rationalize it away as not being that great. Recall, how GWBush ignored the PDB with the subject 'Obama determined to attack"? He did nothing and they couldn't 'beleive' such it was unfathomable to them. FEAR is not an effective change agent.
Folks tell themselves the rate of crime in their area is low and do NOT buy the home security alarm out of fear. Just like GW Bush ignored the possibilty of any attack on American soil, and continued to read my Pet Goat when told of the ACTUAL attack. Fear is paralyzing.
People act when it is to their benefit. When someone talks about preventing crime and being proactive they are far more likely to purchase the home security alarm than they are when someone attempts to PREY on their FEARS. Just as Bush pro-actively (pre-emptively) atttack Iraq instead.
There is nothing to FEAR but FEAR itself and anyone who uses FEAR is to be FEARED as they are IRRATIONAL!! Look at Hillary's actions to date on this campaign trail...she is becoming more and more schizo...this ad here is proof-positive she is over the edge.
If she was so much about solutions, she would have run an ad on what she her solutions are and not this...
If Barack is about hope/words ....Hillary is about fear/theunknown
I'll take hope any day over fear.
Going to call all my friends and tell them to donate soem more money to Barack to...so that we CAN sleep at night knowing that the person in the Oval office has the testicular fortitude not only to acts but the judgment to do so RIGHTLY and effectively.
maybe he deserves $150.00 for that peace of mind.
After all...it is priceless.
February 29, 2008 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hadn't thought of the fact that this ad has zero to do with "solutions." What a great point. And like so many other times in her campaign, by straining in one area like this, she raises questions about the credibility of the other. Once Obama clinches the nomination for certain, I'll feel sad about what happened to HRC. But right now I'm angry with her -- not obsessively angry or anything like that -- but really disappointed and determined to not let cheap stunts like this succeed.
February 29, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, like what is she implying? That Obama wouldn't answer the phone? Talk about Rovian tactics.
February 29, 2008 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
I want the only candidate left in either party with decent judgment to answer the phone. You know, Barack Obama.
He might - gasp - think before he starts bombing. And if he did decide military action was appropriate, I have confidence that he would attack the right country.
February 29, 2008 10:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama supporters, get a grip.
For all of you who think this ad means that Hillary = Karl Rove, please tell me, what kind of ad do you think Hillary SHOULD be running against Obama? Do tell.
February 29, 2008 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
I dunno, how about one that a McCain supporter didn't already run 2 months ago??? That would be a good start.
You can't blame Obama for plagiarism and then trip all over yourself plagiarizing Edwards, Bill and McCain within 3 weeks of the claim.
Hillary '08
insert another campaign's words here.
February 29, 2008 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Hillary were to knock Obama out the race with this ad in OHIO...what would she use against MCCain in the general...she certainly couldn't make this argument against McCain...more likely he would use this same ad against her...far more effectively.
February 29, 2008 10:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
The answer to that is the "35 years" claim will finally be examined in the general, like it has not been in the primary.
The media swallowed Clinton's claim of "35 years" experience whole: she will not get that deference in the general.
The "35 years experience" will fall apart, and quickly, when John McCain eventually raises it.
It isn't hard to debunk. Anyone who can add can do it.
February 29, 2008 10:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
looks like hillary's campaign thought highly of bill kristol's advice to "use the politics of fear."
so am i the only one who saw this ad as somewhat racialized? white kids safe and protected in their beds drums up images of a scary black man trying to break into the house.
February 29, 2008 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Has anyone in the Clinton campaign wondered if perhaps the reason the "experience" argument hasn't worked is because it's factually false, on a very basic level?
The fact is, Hillary Clinton was not the President. She has a Senate record. That's it. Her claims as co-President are subject to doubt, and completely unverifiable.
Perhaps it's not so much that this is a "change" election, but instead that thinking Americans never really bought the "35 years" Clinton resume-padding to begin with.
I know I never did. She was the First Lady. An important role, but claiming "executive experience" based on that position is sort of silly.
February 29, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Surely even the freakiest of control-freak Presidents would employ someone to answer the White House phones for them ?
Ready from Day One to be a late night telephonist ?
February 29, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Eric, how exactly is this an argument against Obama's national security credentials? Is he not going to answer the phone at 3:00 AM and if he does, will he have to open his address book to figure out who he is speaking with? No. What this ad is, is the desperate attempt of a dying campaign to scare people to its side.
Some quick observations:
1. You will not see Obama standing in front of a mic screaming that HRC is using Rovian tactics. He'll be calm and explain why he thinks these kind of ads are bad for the American people, who will once again see a leader who will handle problems appropriately.
2. This, along with the Clinton's possible TX lawsuit, will be their story of the day. Fear and threats will define their last weekend before their potential last primaries. Obama's story will be his raising $50+ million dollars in 29 days, thus wiping out the little good news HRC has had for some time.
3. I suspect Obama will get a nice jump on March fundraising after his camp sends out word that Clinton is trying to scare and sue it's way to victory.
4. Keith Olbermann is gonna come down hard on Clinton. Can't wait to see it.
February 29, 2008 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks -- that's an excellent ad and only reaffirms my confidence in the quality of the Obama campaign and its ability to take on and defeat McCain.
February 29, 2008 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Re above: This was a response to:
"Rapid Response Ad from Obama Campaign:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ag8gOXZulXg"
Posted by cmpnwtr
February 29, 2008 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
When is Obama going to get around to saying:
"I promise you today that as your President I will never attempt to intimidate and control you with fear. Fear is the enemy of the American people as we struggle to solve the many problems that beset us. We must face our future realistically and with sober vigilance, that is true, but never, never with fear in our hearts. Fear spawns cowardice, weakness, shame, and ultimately defeat, and those who would try to rule us with fear are making us worse, not better. Against those who would exploit us with worry and dread, I call upon this great nation to re-discover its Courage, the courage of Valley Forge, the courage of Emancipation, the courage of New Frontiers. Fear is our enemy. Courage is the virtue that will lead us from darkness into the light. Let us once again be brave!"
Hurrah!
Okay, it's shade too purple, but you get the idea.
February 29, 2008 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, one of Obama's best lines in his stump speech is when he criticizes the Bush administration for using 9/11 to play on people's fears. He has already spoken out clearly on this and everything he said about Bush applies to this Hillary ad.
February 29, 2008 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, I just saw McCain's "Experience, Courage, Trust" banner. Has he already captured the word "courage"? Damn!
February 29, 2008 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
"No passion so effectually robs the mind of all its powers of acting and reasoning as fear."
— Edmund Burke
"People react to fear, not love — they don't teach that in Sunday School, but it's true."
— Richard M. Nixon
February 29, 2008 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wish I was better with video editing. I'd love to make a spoof on this, except that there would be an old guy (who looks very much like McCain) lying in bed, with a bunch of geriatric medicines on the night table. The old guy snores away while the phone rings and rings and rings...
February 29, 2008 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's 3am in the morning. A phone is ringing in the White House...
*** Hello?! Hi honey. Sssh! Try to be quiet. She's sleeping in the other room. Yeah... of course I care for you! It really turned me on too. I'm still smoking the cigars... You think you're being followed by a reporter? You *have* taken the dress to a dry cleaners, right? They're just poking around... if we all stick together, then nobody will ever find out, right? What? You need some money? Maybe I can get you a job in the State Department, though it would be helpful if you were to write some kind of statement that I can keep on record, where you deny everything... ***
February 29, 2008 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
I guess we should start calling her Mizzz 9/11. Pathetic.
February 29, 2008 10:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe I have misjudged Hillary.
Perhaps, she is running these ads as that is her way of making sure the Dem nominee is ready to handle the GOP.
Maybe the DLC asked Hillary to do this now sense she is going to be the loser they want her to throw whatever she can at Barack that the GOP will so that the party can see how well he will hold up under the GOP onslaught, whether it is fearmongering about national security, a lack of experience, his oratory or the big bad muslim black nationalist named Hussein.
That must be it. Hillary is helping the Democrats by making sure he is prepared to take on all that the GOP will throw at him.
She made a deal that if he crumbles under her GOP Rovian tactics..SHE gets to be the nominee...IF not she will be lauded for ensuring that our Dem nominee has the fortitude and fight to take on the swiftboating GOP unlike Kerry.
That must be it. That is Hillary's new role.
Hopefully, she will prove to the GOP that these tactics will not work for them either...that is her strategy...she is doing it FOR the good of the PARTY.
February 29, 2008 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Or maybe she's competing with Joe Lieberman for the VP nod on the McCain ticket.
... after all, she *DID* campaign repeatedly for Lieberman, instead of for the actual Democratic candidate, right?!
February 29, 2008 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'll see that Obama donation and raise you $50, vicissitudes!
It's the last day of the month for Obama... let's put him so out in front that Hillary has no option but to admit the inevitable.
Ultimately, her concession will be for the good of the party, so that we can start to bring the party back together... some of her supporters need to wise up and see that Obama and Hillary are practically identical, policy-wise, rather than threatening to vote McCain.
And, let's not kid ourselves, the worst thing she has to look forward to is being the first female Senate Majority Leader. That's win-win, especially considering the influence she would have on all legislation.
February 29, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
It looks like the Clinton campaign is moderating comments on YouTube, so if you don't have something positive to say about the video, you don't need to bother commenting at all.
Like, for instance, if you wanted to post a comment like, say... "Cheap fearmongering from the Lee Atwater wing of the Democratic Party" you wouldn't need to bother.
February 29, 2008 10:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
You can still go to YouTube and downrate the video, though. Just click on the "YouTube" logo on the screen above.
February 29, 2008 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
I just went there. If they're moderating comments(and you can comment), they have yet to find any they'd be willing to post.
Mine was along the lines of, "Who would you want protecting America from a dumbass Republican president about to make a bloody costly mistake based on BS info? Oh, that's right, that already happened."
She failed us in October, 2002. Even though her husband had been hounded by the neocons to invade Iraq, she didn't connect the dots to Bush's neocons (no dots, actually, most were the same dudes)? Was she stupid enough at the time to think the vote wasn't REALLY a vote for war, because surely Bush would act based on the facts and reason?
February 29, 2008 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, it's pretty amazing. The video currently has the lowest rating possible and there are ZERO comments. I assume every comment they've received is along the lines of "go f**k yourself."
February 29, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.wavlist.com/tv/010/3hellos.wav
February 29, 2008 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
This was supposed to be in reply to
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/hillary_ad_who_do_you_want_ans.php#comment-2622612
I had all the checks in the little boxes yet ....
arrrghhh
February 29, 2008 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
How about the subtle racism at play here?
It's the same imagery and pushes the same buttons as home alarm system ads: look at your precious little white girl sleeping peacefully. If you don't buy our alarm/vote for me, you're at the mercy of some scary black man.
February 29, 2008 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton couldn't handle a threat from a chain smoking, coke snorting black junior senator whose name rhymes with Obama. Now I'm supposed to believe she knows best how to handle a global emergency? Pull-eeze.
This ranks right up there with Clinton's claim that she is best equipped to handle the right wing smear machine.
Instead of playing drinking games with John McCain on the taxpayer's dime and schmoozing with Alphonse D'Amato at private luncheons, maybe Clinton should have paid more attention to people like me.
February 29, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't understand your first paragraph. What or who are you referring to?
Maybe try again, with a little less vitriol?
February 29, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I will say this for Clinton - her plagarized version of this ad is way better than McCain's. Are we really supposed to be worried about these clowns?
February 29, 2008 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
According to CNN
"In 1984, the Walter Mondale campaign hit challenger Gary Hart with a "red phone" ad, showing a "crisis" phone ringing, suggesting Hart wasn't the right person to be running things in a crisis."
February 29, 2008 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Merle,
Unfortunately I have to agree with you.
Those innonence sleeping baby faces strike more fear in our hearts than that 'out of date, key striking of an urgent message' that McCain scrolls up the screen in his ad.
I suppose that is a gender difference? She is reaching out to strike fear in the heart of moms while McCain was reaching out to men as decision makers and protectors of the homeland?
It also may be an age difference as McCain would be reaching out to the time when urgent news and death notices came in the form of telegrams.
The generation gap that Hillary fell into with her 'change you can xerox' comment...the genration born in the 80s knows nothing about xeroxing anything...they just copy/cut and paste.
February 29, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that the add seems more like something mccain should be running than hillary- makes me want to vote for him
February 29, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
She's up against a wall. The strongest point of differentiation between them is their experience. What else is she supposed to do? Is it fear mongering? Sure. However, it's not a bad ad. And it pales in comparison to the crap the current occupant's administration has pulled over the past seven years.
February 29, 2008 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Now one of Clinton's laws of politics is this: If one candidate's trying to scare you and the other one's trying to get you to think, if one candidate's appealing to your fears and the other one's appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope."
-Bill Clinton
February 29, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Now one of Clinton's laws of politics is this:
If one candidate's trying to scare you and the other one's trying to get you to think,
if one candidate's appealing to your fears and the other one's appealing to your hopes,
you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope."
-Bill Clinton, 2004
so, i guess bill's going to be giving his super delegate vote to obama, then, eh?
February 29, 2008 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
What a great find.
Where did you get this quote???
February 29, 2008 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Hillary still had a chance of winning the nomination without going nuclear (i.e. - trying to seat the Florida and Michigan delegates, and even this probably wouldn't make a difference) this ad might be semi-excusable.
The fact that she doesn't, and is willing to attack the all-but-certian Democratic nominee with this line of attack makes Andrew Sullivans claim that the Clintons are soulless sociopaths almost beleivable
February 29, 2008 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
And, on a small point, aren' all the kids in that ad white? Which America is HRC living in?
February 29, 2008 11:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary's next ad will feature her driving a tank.
February 29, 2008 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
counter ad:
Hillary and Bill sleeping in the same bed (for once). Phone rings, a semi-awake Hillary turns on the light, answers.
Hillary: Hello? The president of the United States? Calling for me? Yes, operator. (pause) Good evening Mr. President, how may I be of service?
We hear someone speaking on the other end, but can't make out the words.
Hillary: So we need to invade? Right now? Because you THINK they may have model airplanes outfitted with biological weapons? (pause) A slam dunk, huh? (pause) Well, OK, sounds good to me. You can certainly count on my vote, sir. (pause) Goodnight.
Bill: (semi-awake) Wazzup, Hill?
Hillary: Nothing important, go back to sleep. Turns out the light.
February 29, 2008 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
The argument that journalists should focus on things like facts and policy isn't based on the premise that character and personality don't matter. It's based on the simple fact that the American people are far better at assessing character and personality than Chris Matthews and Maureen Dowd and Matt Drudge and Mark Halperin. And it's based on the fact that NBC and The New York Times have the time and resources to determine if the candidates' statements are true and consistent and logical -- but voters don't.
February 29, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
The part of this ad that I like the best is the fade away with Hillary answering the phone. My only question would be which one of the 'all hat no cattle' gang that couldn't shoot straight is she is talking to? It wouldn't be Texas Terry McAuliffe would it? That old veteran cowpuncher of yesteryear? Maybe it's Hopalong Penn. Maybe she's asking him for a rebate. No. I know who it is. Its The Lone Ickes. It has to be! Who else would answer the phone at 3:00AM? She's probably reminding him about what happens to guys like Webb Hubbell. Of course it is possible that someone is calling HER at 3:00AM. But who would call Hillary at three in the morning? Maybe its AMEX. Or some 'blue-collar' franchise deli in Iowa that got stiffed. Or her husband saying he's got a job that just won't end and he'll be a little bit late tonight. It could be anyone when you think about it. I won't say it could be Chelsea-O confused about the time-zone differences from Hawaii. The general public is not allowed to go there. You know family first! Did they take the photo 20 seconds before she starts crying or twenty seconds after? Or maybe this isn't one of the crying spots. Is there a best time to call? Before a cry? After? Do you mean to tell me that after raising 35 cool ones in February they still can't afford call answering? Who do we want to be there to answer the phone? Don't any of these people have message machines? Actually I can say I would prefer to have Barack Obama answering the phone on my behalf. The reason for this is simple. Of all the qualities that make him appealing, the one that is most often overlooked but most important is his ability to listen and respond without sounding like a sound-bite script. You know, the sorts of responses that are crafted to dazzle people of limited intelligence. When Obama answers a question, whether you agree or disagree with what he has said, it is clear that he has listened to what what asked. George McGovern had the same quality which is a rarity in American politicws. He answers questions directly and he rarely if ever begins an answer with a complaint.
And by the way, speaking of complaints, I thought Hillary was the children's advocate. Why is she now exploiting children to convey her latest message meant to appeal to people's fears and stupidity?
February 29, 2008 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama gives a good speech, but who is he? What has he done?
What does he stand for? What has he accomplished?
He was in the game TWO YEARS when he decided he was the most
qualified person to lead America - that doesn't seem egotistical to you?
Hillary has eight years in the White House and seven in the senate and some
people claim she's not qualified, so how does Obama clear that hurdle?
February 29, 2008 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
What is it about the Clinton's years, that gave our country 8 great years, you people hate so much? BTW, what changes is Obama going to make, anyone know?
February 29, 2008 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
cseper - The changes that Obama brings is that he is not going to go ugly just for political wins because in the end, nobody will work with you. Hillary has great ideas and is very smart, but there is not a Republican in Congress who will support anything that she puts on the table no matter how good it is.
Obama on the other hand has the potential to have Bill Clinton type approval ratings which makes it much harder for members of Congress to treat him poorly because it means that their constituents back home have strong support for the President.
I don't believe that most of the polarizing feelings toward Hillary by the Right are really her fault; but they are real and she would face a huge uphill fight to get over 50% approval ratings no matter how strong her positions are.
February 29, 2008 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
3:00 a.m. next Wednesday morning can't come soon enough!
February 29, 2008 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
This ad is so disturbing. I certainly would never wish someone who airs this ad to answer that call. But just think how much this hurts the Democratic Party. If she has to concede to Obama, she's going so far that I don't see how she turns back and say: I support him for president. And if Obama has to concede, how could he endorse someone who has attacked him that way? Really, the Clintons may think they're more important than the party, but breaking it into peaces is not the way you win the White House.
February 29, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think she's planning on conceding to Obama. This is a suicide mission, and Hillary's willing to take the entire party down with her. If she can't win, I don't think she really cares what happens. In fact, I'd be willing to guess that, like her pal Joe Lieberman, she probably prefers McCain over Obama.
Hillary's trashing the Democratic Party, which is reason enough not to vote for her.
February 29, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here is my complete point by point analysis of her ad, my response, and a preview of Hillary's next fearmongering ad:
http://thepersonalispolitical.tumblr.com/post/27622528
February 29, 2008 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
HEY: Would someone who hasn't tried to post a comment on YouTube yet please go there and post a positive one? Something along the lines of: "This is by far the finest political ad I have ever seen in my entire life."
I just want to see if they'll post a positive comment. They sure aren't posting in the negative ones.
February 29, 2008 12:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Geez, Hillary - how long are you gonna let that phone ring?! Pick it Up! Something's happening in the world!
Who would I want to answer that phone? Someone who will pick it up on the 3rd ring or sooner.
Kid Zemo
February 29, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
To hrebendorf:
I agree with you, but we have to talk about history then. Hillary might be willing to blow the party up if she can't win the nomination, but her husband is facing a history check. He has been one of the most recognized democratic leaders, and now his wife is playing with the party's integrity? She must recall at every step she takes that she's running as a Clinton... if she blows up the party, she blows up the name.
February 29, 2008 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the name's already toast. How are they going to recover from this campaign? I just don't think it's possible.
February 29, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who do I want answering that phone? Anybody except Hillary Clinton. I can't belive she thinks we would be more comfortable with her answering that phone. I want some one who wont have their polster on the extension giving political advice about a strategic decision. She has proven that is the way she makes decisions about war and peace.
February 29, 2008 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary will pick up the phone at 3.00AM, dressed in a business suit and pearls, working the late shift just like waitresses and nurses. Those late hours of hers will pay off soon, when she and Maggie Williams catch up on getting Hillary's Tax Returns released, and when they finally figure out how both of them lost FBI files that they should not have ever had.
February 29, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really thought some Hillary supporters were just paranoid but you guys really do exclude our comments. At least I feel better knowing there are a lot of other progressives out there that support Hillary but our voices have been muted. Do you sleep well at night?
February 29, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
???
I can read your comments just fine.
Please, defend the ad.
February 29, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Man, SNL has to be licking their chops.
Worst ad of the primary season. (For the Democrats, at least.) It's not even effective from a storytelling standpoint.
February 29, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK, this is the only rational explanation for the way Hillary is running her Campaign:
She has already conceded, and now is trying to help Obama by "vetting" him against Republican attack ads.
After he win the Presidency, she'll get a high post in the cabinet, and point fingers at McCain and say "got you!"
But, seriously, can ANYONE, especially Hillary supporters, understand this strategy of taking up Republican talking points?
Anyone?
February 29, 2008 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Typo: After he wins the Presidency, she'll get a high post in the cabinet, and they will both point fingers at McCain and say "got you!"
February 29, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
ooohhhhh... that ad is such fear mongering... so scarey.... just like the Daisy ad....
Get real. It is a very effective ad. Calm and cool and asks a very important question. I hope the Obama supporters (and I will be one if he wins the nomination) can toughen up a bit by the general election. McCain and the Republicans will be running a scorched earth campaign.
February 29, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, that's our point. It sounds just like a Republican ad.
And Obama handled it very well, linking Hillary, Bush and McCain all together.
But, I still want to see a defense of the ad. How is this a good ad for Hillary? It reminds people of her bad judgement. It reminds them of Bush /Cheney / McCain scare tactics.
This is a typical ad you'd see in the general against the Democrat, but NOT a good ad for a Democratic Primary.
I honestly don't get what Clinton was thinking. If I was a Hillary supporter, I'd be pissed, because she just lost votes with this ad.
February 29, 2008 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, obviously you arent a Hillary supporter. It makes perfect sense to me. How does it remind you of Bush? Can you do anything but repeat the memes everyone else is saying? How is it scarey to you? How will it bring down the Democratic party? Do you think McCain hasnt thought of this months ago?
Do you remember the McGovern campaign? How about when Kennedy and Johnson were going toe to toe? And please no broad generalities about bringing the party down or how we are what we have been waiting for.
February 29, 2008 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Vote McCain: Because with a 71-year-old prostate, he'll be up at 3 anyway.
February 29, 2008 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does the president even pick up the phone in the White House?
February 29, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just to be clear, as an Obama supporter, I love this ad.
I'm trying to think of best case scenarios for Hillary:
1. The ad stirs up controversy, so it gets played for free by the news networks. This could actually end up hurting her, but, hey, no such thing as bad publicity right? Right?
2. She actually scares up some votes and wins Ohio and Texas. Oh, boy, we just proved to the Republicans that scare ads work on Democrats, and we'll lose in the general.
I'm not one of those people who think that Denver is going to be a repeat of Chicago, 1968 or anything, but the uglier this campaign gets, the more likely that we'll have a unified front against McCain in the general. Just food for thought.
February 29, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
ugh, too many typos today. "the uglier this campaign gets, the LESS likely that we'll have a unified front against McCain in the general..."
February 29, 2008 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I want to believe this won't be '68 also, but I'm having a hard time gaming this out. Is the plan a) barely win Ohio and Rhode Island, sue Texas, dismiss Vermont, b) claim to have gained the momentum and coast off free MSM momentumism, c) squeak out a win in PA, dismiss NC for being black,
here is where things become fuzzy for me... i'd like some help...
d) with TX delegates tied up in a lawsuit, make a moral equivalence with the Florida and Michigan delegates... talking points might be something like "we want ALL the delegates to be seated... Obama simply wants HIS delegates seated from TX"... seize on the manufactured confusion to claim the candidates are tied, e) twist arms to win superdelegates
February 29, 2008 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Three things I noticed about this ad:
1. The announcer's voice is like a giant roll of warm, Charmin tissue.
2. The swelling, emotive violins playing a subtly military style theme.
3. The mother who looks like she just got home from work, at 3:00 am.
February 29, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
[quote=3. The mother who looks like she just got home from work, at 3:00 am.[/quote]
LOL, Nice catch.
February 29, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
This ad is not an attack ad, it is a contrast ad,where the campaign is attempting to imply she has the right characteristics to take action when it's needed. I don't find it offensive, and certainly not worth the scathing criticism to which it has been subjected.There are, in fact, weaknesses in Obama's record which are exploitable, but, somehow, all criticism, no matter how gentle, is greeted with rancor.
Let's face it. The only words the anti-Hillary forces might accept from her campaign without carping criticism are "I give up". Even in that circumstance, someone would be sure to write that she was a quitter.
February 29, 2008 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
What is it contrasting?
Obama's inability to protect America?
I wonder if McCain ran the ad against Hillary you would feel the same way.
But, I get it, Hillary supporters now approve Rove-like fear ads.
Oh, well, as I said I can't see this doing anything but hurting Hillary...
February 29, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
In any case, Hillary can still compete without losing all her dignity. If she gives up after losing Texas, I will think she is smart, not a quitter.
February 29, 2008 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is no "red phone" in this ad.
Read comments here:
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/002916.php
February 29, 2008 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
The ad’s question spurs questions. What about civil defense responses, including orderly evacuations and orders to take shelter? What about massive retaliation, possibly resulting in MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction), when a detected event may or may not be an attack underway against the USA ? What if the call requires a decision whether or not to launch a strike against al-Qaeda leadership when resulting civilian deaths are highly likely? What specifically in a candidate’s education, training, and professional experience makes that candidate the better choice for making such decisions quickly?
February 29, 2008 7:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I feel so foolish... All these years I thought Bill was answering the red phone ... who knew?
February 29, 2008 10:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
> After all, New York was attacked and
> Hillary is the Senator of NY, so I
> think she should agree to defend our country.
So, New York was attacked by a team with no Iraqis on it from an organization that had, at that time, very few Iraqi members and was hunted mercilessly by the dictator of Iraq wherever it appear in his nation. Hillary voted to give George W. Bush authorization to attack Iraq and this protected New York.... how?
sPh
February 29, 2008 10:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Senator Clinton did not find time to read the available intelligence prior to granting George W. Bush her permission to invade Iraq should he choose to, would she settle for a sparse version of the facts in an urgent decision-making situation as President, and then act according to her prior inclinations?
March 1, 2008 1:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is three o'clock in the morning. President Clinton II answers the phone at at the White House. She says, "Hello!" The person on the other end of the phone line explains the situation. President Clinton says, "Why do I always get the first question?"
March 1, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Some strategies are born of necessity.
The Clinton camp has nothing left: She can no longer win the nomination by running on her strengths. Worse, she has to somehow manufacture conditions which would cause a total collapse in the Obama campaign.
Hence the ads.
However, as others have observed, this is a taste of things to come. I only hope the damage being done to the party by this type of campaigning can be undone.
cheers,
DD
March 1, 2008 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink