« Hillary Campaign Chief: There's "Nothing Negative" About New Ad Showing Bin Laden | Home | Gallup: Obama Back In Lead Over Hillary »
Obama Camp On New Hillary Ad: "We Already Have A President Who Plays The Politics Of Fear"
Here, from Obama campaign spokesperson Bill Burton, is the Obama camp's official response to the new Hillary ad flashing Bin Laden imagery:
"When Senator Clinton voted with President Bush to authorize the war in Iraq, she made a tragically bad decision that diverted our military from the terrorists who attacked us, and allowed Osama bin Laden to escape and regenerate his terrorist network. It's ironic that she would borrow the President's tactics in her own campaign and invoke bin Laden to score political points. We already have a President who plays the politics of fear, and we don't need another."
It's one of the Obama camp's most explicit and direct accusations yet that Hillary is employing campaign tactics that are indistinguishable from Rove's trademark fear-mongering.
Late Update: It's worth pointing out that this statement appears to blame Hillary for allowing Bin Laden to escape. The point, of course, is that the Iraq War diverted resources from Afghanistan, which led to Bin Laden's escape and the regeneration of his terror network, but this ties Hillary to the escape in a surprisingly direct way.
Advertisement















HILLARY TURDBLOSSOM CLINTON HAS PASSED
THE FEAR MONGER IN CHIEF THRESHOLD.
April 21, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
rotflmao
April 21, 2008 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
After seven years of the War of Terror on the American people by this administration, how can an ad with a couple of seconds of bin Laden in a 10 second montage of catastrophes be tagged as fear mongering? Obama may take issue with the ad for showing a glimpse of Osama. He would appear a bit paranoid to do so but that is a political option. (In fact, his spokesman's response blames Clinton for Osama getting away!). For his supporters to contend that this is rank fear mongering is utter non-sense, though. If anyone needs an explanation of why fretting over this ad is absurd, they need to step away from the computer and turn off the TV for a while.
A candidate who shows some of the problems that the president will face and claims to be the one to solve them is playing dirty? Clinton comes out with an ad showing Katrina, terrorism, war, etc. and asks voters to choose the candidate they think is prepared. Obama comes out with an ad claiming that mandates under Clinton’s health care will be forced on those who can’t afford them. Which ad is the scariest?
April 21, 2008 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
He has finally called her on all of the fearmongering she has done throughout this campaign. The evidence of this is everywhere starting with an appearance in NH where she played the Al Qaeda card.
She noted that 1 day after Gordon Brown took office there were attempted double bombing in Glasgow and Scotland.
Somehow she twisted this to scare voters. It worked. All of the polls were wrong and she won NH, on one premise - fear:
"I don't think it was by accident that al-Qaeda decided to test the new prime minister immediately. They watch our elections as closely as we do, maybe more than some of our fellows citizens do. Let's not forget you're hiring a president not just to do what a candidate says during the election, you want a president to be there when the chips are down."
In other words, the terrorists will surely attack us if a "less experienced" president is elected. So vote for Senator Obama if you want the evildoers to kill us all. She continued this meme incessantly.
Sorry, even a couple of seconds of Bin Laden in her commercial shows how blatant she is in her attempts to literally "scare" up votes. Obama is rightfully pointing this out to the PA voters.
How anyone can defend Hillary fearmongering after the Bush Administration and this disastrous war is just beyond me.
April 22, 2008 7:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
You probably won't see this, mageduley; I just saw your response. But I agree with you about Clinton's playing the hawk previously like when she asked who would be prepared for another terrorist attack. I certainly don't defend that and have spoken against it (I've also spoken against Obama's AIPAC speech and other incidences where he talked tough to pander to Israel). But to hype this ad as fear mongering, right before the primary, is a stretch, to say the least.
April 23, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is Howard Cossell reporting
Clinton throws one below the belt...
BUT NO,
OBAMA counters with a Roundhouse,
AND DOWN GOES HILLARY!!!
April 21, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
The proper Cosellian intonation is
" and .... down .... goes .... Hillary!"
Thanks for the memories
April 21, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
And mine should read "Cosell."
BUT NO,
I F-ed up!
April 21, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL
April 21, 2008 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Talk about preaching to the converted.
I just wish we had a President who understood the concept, and meaning, of irony.
April 21, 2008 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is good news FOR HOWARD COSELL!!!
April 21, 2008 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Appropriate, since Joe Frazier is from Philadelphia.
April 21, 2008 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a great response because it's true.
April 21, 2008 12:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
About time they called them on this.
I wanted them to call Hillary on her Rovian fear mongering in January, before the New Hampshire primary.
Long overdue.
April 21, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
KAPOW!
April 21, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Obama camp should file this one away for the fall, too.
April 21, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's response should be "Remember when Hillary was a Democrat? . . . "
April 21, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Was she ever? I think her party is Clintonian (which is Republican Lite).
April 21, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
lol...classic.....bonneville
April 21, 2008 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Huzzah!
April 21, 2008 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
The truth hurts.
April 21, 2008 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
If it walks like a duck...
April 21, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's what I was going to say. It's the simple, unvarnished, indisputable truth.
April 21, 2008 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great, keep whining to lose the supers and the nomination.
She should run more attack ads to attack this whining.
mcwar will , you can bet on it.
Weak on national security is a huge weakness for Obama.
April 21, 2008 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, so it would be much better if he was just wrong on national security, like Hillary?
And uh, Hillary is the queen of whine. Playing the victim card is Hillary's favorite tactic.
April 21, 2008 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Say "G'night" Shrillary.
You're DONE!
FINISHED!
KAPUT!!!!!
IT'S ALL O-VER, BOOM-BOOM-BOOM-BOOM-BOOM!
April 21, 2008 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
She cannot win.
Try saying that yourself several hundred times til it sinks in.
She cannot win.
It's impossible.
and she's broke which the SDs know. She's maxed out her donors.
Obama has $51 million left. The SDs also know that.
April 21, 2008 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Gotaloofah - why aren't you demanding Hillary denounce and reject PA Gov Ed Rendell, great friend and praiser of Farrakhan?
What? Because you have no balls? Oh, okay. Never mind then.
April 21, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Weak on national security is a huge weakness for Obama.
So let's cave in on Republican foreign policy demands every chance we get! FOUR MORE WARS! FOUR MORE WARS!
April 21, 2008 2:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
She took the midnight train goin anywhere
....
April 21, 2008 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes because we all know we want a president to threaten other countries with nuclear obliteration. That will keep America safe. Go Hillary!
April 22, 2008 7:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are the Obama folks going to put the footage of Bill Clinton in 2004 in a response ad or are they just hoping to get it on tonight's news broadcasts in PA?
P.S. Change the image at the end of the ad from Hillary to McCain and they've already cut one of his fall commercials for him. Thanks Hill...NOT!
April 21, 2008 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK Hillary -- in response, I just sent yet another $ contribution, as part of the Obama Minute (http://www.anobamaminute.com/).
Back at ya, honey.
April 21, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
P.P.S. If Hillary and all those other finger-to-the-wind Democrats hadn't voted for Bush's war in 2002, we might have gotten Bin Laden by now!
April 21, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Next she is going to set her hair on fire to show how tough she is.
April 21, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
That didn't work for Ralph Perk.
April 21, 2008 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
He hit the nail on the head.
April 21, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Hillary runs on this platform in the GE (If she makes it), then McCain's Camp will eat her alive on this issue.
This shows that her strategy is short-sided, or long term (2012)
April 21, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton's ad is great.
Not all Democrats wish to bury our heads in the sand and pretend that we're going to someday join hands with Bin Laden and sing Kumbaya, no matter how many speeches "The Precious" wants to make.
April 21, 2008 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
invading iraq caused us to take our eye off the ball, hence osama is still at large. this is a good argument against mcWar, but hillary could never use it, for obvious reasons.
April 21, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, half of them - the Republican half, to which Hillary-Joe belongs, wants to pretend that bin Laden isn't where he is and he wasn't there when we had him surrounded - and let him go.
Seems Hillary-Joe has joined the Anxiety Closet set.
They just like to bring out bin Laden around election time and wave him back and forth in front of voters a couple of times.
This used to be called The Bloody Shirt tactic.
April 21, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
No... there are some Democrats who want to keep sending active duty military like me into harm's way in order to prove that might makes right.
I won't be the reason that you are macho any longer. Quit using me and troops like me as human shields in some ridiculous quest to prove that Democrats are tough. This isn't just Chess, and troops aren't just pawns.
April 21, 2008 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
NEW gallup poll has Barack up!
http://www.gallup.com/poll/106678/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Regains-Lead-Over-Clinton-49-42.aspx
April 21, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
And all the Clintonistas and their apologists were crowing about their:
"ONE POINT LEAD in Saturday's latest Gallup Tracking Poll."
Upon further review...."never mind"
LOL
April 21, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
GREAT RESPONSE
Oh and Ed Rendell praises Farrakan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXum_-8I1TA
April 21, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
ohhhhhhhh Shit.......Im sending this to Keith O and every other MSM outlet.....
April 21, 2008 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do that. I'm pretty flabbergasted...I knew Rendell went off-message, but wow...
April 21, 2008 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
denounce! reject!
April 21, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
HRC is acting with more desperation than Rudy when asked to go 30 minues without saying 9/11
April 21, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
However Clinton's commercial will reach the voting masses while Obama is busy countering via the internet. She knows she was vulnerable with this one which is why she didn't release it until today so Obama wouldn't have time to air a rebuttal.
All that matters for Hillary is the here and now - she needs to win Pennsylvania and win big. This ad will never get proper dissection because the vote and aftermath will be the story for the next 4-5 days, and come next week the focus will be on Indiana and North Carolina.
So there was little to no risk of fallout and potential for high reward. Score one for the Clinton Camp.
April 21, 2008 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
My political experience tells me that an ad released the day before voting has zero affect on voting the following day.
Too little too late.
Score one for Mark Penn & Associates for fooling the Clintonistas into thinking this was smart.
The fallout against Clinton vis-a-vis the Superdelegates will be palpable and devastating.
April 21, 2008 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Baracknophobia: Got to tar (pun not intended) that black man because you know, the fear of an African-American in the White House is equal to Usama Bin Laden.
April 21, 2008 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
And we have a GOP nominee who will play the politics of fear. Obama, you have to be able to deal with the real world, not some dreamed of political nirvana. Why is it that Obama hasn't pointed to any past presidential campaigns that weren't negative? With all Obama's talk of running a positive campaign, why hasn't he pointed out examples of how well that has worked in the past? BECAUSE THERE AREN'T ANY!
Obama, get your head out of the clouds and deal with politics as they exist.
April 21, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another cogent appeal for Clinton. Yes, vote for the nastiest! Vote for the one who's not afraid of the gutter -- after all, she's been there before! Vote for Hillary and get the kind of politics you've come to expect.
SSDD.
April 21, 2008 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Say "G'night" Otto,
Shrillary is DONE!
April 21, 2008 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Otto, has John McCain shown that he can win the battle of wits? Using how Barrack(a black male) would respond to a well known former first lady who had an real chance to be the first woman President(we know how much that means to people) and comparing that to how they would respond to Grampa to me is a little warped. Im sure you know your comparing apples and oranges.
April 21, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, I can point to about 30 contests where a positive campaign has worked just fine for him. ;-)
April 21, 2008 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yea. In Obama's senate race, his opponent actually said "Jesus Christ would not vote for Barack Obama"
Obama won a landslide.
April 22, 2008 8:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama back up in Gallup 49%-42%
http://www.gallup.com/poll/106678/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Regains-Lead-Over-Clinton-49-42.aspx
April 21, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, that was quick.
April 21, 2008 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
awesome response -- man, if he could get a quick ad up that just reads this response verbatim -- a 15 sec ad that follows each time this Clinton ad pops up! Too much to ask for, of course, but can't help dreaming.
April 21, 2008 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is mcwar's strongest issue.
Obama is whining but Clinton can counter.
This will show the supers Obama whines too much, has too many radical friends and is weak on national security.
He is handing over the nomination to Clinton because he see he is not ready to take on the gop.
Not even close.
He might as well go ahead and drop out and go back to the beach.
April 21, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why do I always get the first question?!
April 21, 2008 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're doing more whining than E&J Gallo.
April 21, 2008 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Say "G'night" gotnolife,
Shrillary's DONE!
April 21, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Obama has Radical friends, lets say like Farrakhan, and Ed Rendel is on video praising Farrakhan, could we say that Hillary has radical friends as well.........Of course not, that would be ridiculous......lol...
April 21, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
You do realize your candidate has all but been mathematically eliminated at this point and a 10-point PA win doesn't change that fact, don't you, shitforbrains?
April 21, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
No no no! Goatlife said 30 point spread. I'm holding him to it! If he loses he has to go back to Little Green Footballs with Mr Softee.
April 21, 2008 1:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fighting the Wrong Enemy:
Hillary votes for war in Iraq.
Hillary says she and John McCain are ready on day one.
Hillary smears Obama.
Video of this should be Obama's televised response, and he ought to go national with it today. Pennsylvania is the immediate audience, but NC and IN are coming up, and the real fight is to get the national party to put an end to Hillary Clinton's destructiveness.
It is time for the round house punch on completely legit issues.
April 21, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
They should have mentioned that the Clintons failed to pull the trigger on Bin Laden when they had the chance.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/04/clinton-missed-chance-to-get-b.php
Sorry, she has no credibility on this issue.
April 21, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wish someone could tell me where she has any credibility?
April 21, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I swear to God, gotalife. If Hillary Clinton shat a big fat turd on your face, you would thank her for the shower of sweet smelling chocolate daisies.
As I have said before... you can squeeze your eyes shut. You can stomp your foot and scream that it isn't so. But Barack Obama is the next Democratic nominee for President and will be the next President of the United States. Hillary wouldn't be fighting so hard if she didn't know Obama would win in the fall. She would bow out gracefully and bide her time for 2012. But President Obama wouldn't lose a 2012 primary.
Yes We Can! Yes We Have! Yes We Did! Yes We Will!
April 21, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!!!!!
You go -
April 21, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Every Presidential election it's the same thing. People say how tired they are of negative politics. People say how much they hate the negative ads. And every election some analyst points out that it is the negative ads that people respond to. It has never failed.
And what exactly is a "positive campaign". "My opponent is a good candidate, but I'm better". Is that it? A candidate HAS to point out the other candidate's weaknesses, because no one else will. We may not like what negative politics reveals about ourselves, but it's closer to the truth than all this sweetness and light BS. All this lofty talk is just designed to dupe naive Obama supporters. And if you have any question that Obama has remained "above it all", then you are in denial.
Who said Hillary Clinton will "literally do anything to win? The Obama campaign.
Who said she is "attempting to deceive the American people"? The Obama campaign.
Who said she has a secret 20-year plan to become president? Barack Obama.
Who called Hillary a "calculating, poll-tested, divisive figure"? Barack Obama.
Who called Hillary "one of the most secretive politicians in America"? Barack Obama's campaign manager.
Who said Hillary Clinton's campaign is "playing politics with war"? The Obama campaign.
Who said John McCain is seen as more honest and trustworthy than Hillary Clinton? Barack Obama's campaign spokesman.
Who called Hillary Clinton "dishonest"? Barack Obama
Who referred to Hillary Clinton as "a monster"?
Obama's top adviser.
Who said Hillary Clinton "stands for nothing"? Barack Obama.
Who said of Hillary Clinton, "The american people are not going to elect a president they do not trust"? Obama's campaign manager.
Who claimed Hillary Clinton "consistently" and "deliberately" misleads the American people? Obama's campaign spokesman.
Who mocked Hillary Clinton as "Annie Oakley"? Barack Obama.
Who said, "We've been very measured in terms of how we talk about Senator Clinton"? Barack Obama.
April 21, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
So?
April 21, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well duh - it's a campaign, asshole.
At least he doesn't accuse her of: not being patriotic enough by not wearing a lapel flag pin, consorting with known terrorists, maybe being a Marxist, since he's an "elitist," being too female to win, ....
I could keep going but everyone already knows she's campaigning like a pig.
April 21, 2008 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
1. She's proven throughout this campaign that she will do anything.
2. She certainly has been NAFTA and the Bosnia (misspeak) come to mind immediately. But there's the abortion mailer (where she claimed that Obama refused/unwilling to protect a woman's right to choose) and that he's leaving 15 million in the cold. Deception at its finest.
3. All the available evidence suggests that she has wanted to be president for the last 20 years. Inevitable. Claims of betrayal by Obama endorsers. Claims of co-presidency (Strength and Experience).
4. Calculating (now anti-NAFTA, pandering press releases to individual ethic/racial/religious groups). Poll-tested (MARK PENN was her chief strategist). Divisive (check the most recent Gallup Poll spelling this out in excrutiating detail).
5. She is playing politics with war. See the latest ad, her 3 am ad.
6. See the Gallup poll (and a various number of other polls) establishing this FACT.
7. See above. She has been.
8. Finally, you got one right.
9. One word: triangulation.
10. Again, see polls referenced above.
11. See any of the foregoing for evidence of the consistency of her dishonest attacks.
12. You are on a roll her, 2 out of 12.
13. Two in a row!!!!! He has been very measured in his response to her. But, then he's a Democrat and is thinking about the Democratic Party. She's, well....
As I said above, the truth hurts. Maybe you should stop whining and maybe shoot an email to the Clinton campaign and urge her to run a campaign more befitting the Democratic icon she used to be--if she remembers.
April 21, 2008 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe I missed it, but I'm pretty sure everything on your OCD list was a reaction to something that woman said, did, threw, lied about first, in some form or another.
This thing went negative in N.H. with the lying fliers about abortion and then the subtle racial shit in N.C. from Bill and her other surrogates -- and ever since Feb 5th, this thing ting has only run a negative campaign.
Everything since then has been a reaction to your thing.
April 21, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
If she can't stand the heat, she should get out of the kitchen.
April 21, 2008 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Was anything that the Obama camp said about Hillary untrue?
Oh snap!
April 21, 2008 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is not attacking if it is all true:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_mcgO3Iva0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xiiwWQSy8Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJ2nVor0bSI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exsmFDYyK4U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGXQElOq-j0
I've got more if you need it. :)
April 23, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!!
April 21, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
"she made a tragically bad decision that diverted our military from the terrorists who attacked us, and allowed Osama bin Laden to escape and regenerate his terrorist network"
Exactly!
April 21, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whiny Obama and his whiny bunch of whiny whiners whine some more.
Shut Up!
April 21, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dumbilical, Stop your whining!
April 21, 2008 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
lol...thats great Opus
April 21, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
The truth burns the stupid.
April 21, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, not only has she lost my respect for her, now I am just ashamed of her. What a waste of talent.
April 21, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's the bottom line right there.
It's such a waste and it pisses me off because she's the first woman who has gotten this far and what she's doing with it is just cringe-inducing for me.
April 21, 2008 1:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. Waste of talent in a badly run campaign. She could have been inevitable, had she run the campaign differently.
I'm not an Clinton supporter, but I don't like seeing the campaign turn into Rove-Bush 2000 and 2004. In that sense, it's good to see how Clinton responds to a real challenge and real pressure. And the result isn't very palatable.
Better we find out now than when she's in the White House.
April 21, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now if we can just get the MSM to actually cover the smackdown, that would be good.
April 21, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was wondering what the Hillary campaign would spring on us the day before the PA primary. I guess this is it? It's repulsive, but not really anything earthshattering. Holding up a photo of bin Laden only serves to remind people that she supported the Iraq diversion that has prevented us from going after him.
Of course, Benizar Bhutto and many others in the Middle East maintained that bin Laden died in December 2001, so maybe he's just the GOP/Hillary boogey man now anyway.
All in all, a pretty weak "Monday surprise" that probably wasn't worth the debt she incurred to air it.
April 21, 2008 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's what I'm happy about. If that's their PA surprise, the Clinton campaign is not only out of money -- it's out of ammunition. They'll win PA, hopefully by a small margin, then limp off into oblivion. Hooray!
I tend to think that their use of 2-second image of bin Laden, as opposed to, say, the "3 a.m." ad, reflects a dressing-down they got from the Democratic Party bigwigs to stop trying to destroy our nominee. Still, they can't find anything worse to say about Obama than Rev. Wright and "bitter"gate? Everyone (except gotalife and Otto) has already had it up to here with those stories. They'll be old news in the fall. So maybe there was a silver lining to Clinton's strategy of pulling out all the stops. They're practising for the Republican smear campaign? And that's all they can come up with? I think Obama has this well in hand ...
April 22, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whether he is dead or alive - doesn't matter. They do use him as a boogey man. This used to be called: Waving the Bloody Shirt.
You drag something out of the anxiety closet at election time and wave it back and forth in front of the voters a few times at the last minute.
That's all bin Laden is for our leadership anymore.
April 21, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Obama weren't distracted by having to run against Clinton and McCain, he would have taken out bin Laden by now!
April 21, 2008 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
HILLARY TURDBLOSSOM CLINTON
WINGED BIN LADEN AT TUZLA AIRPORT.
April 21, 2008 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
If A caused B which caused C, it follows that A caused C. Obama is right on this score and the beauty of his point is that it applies equally to McSame. In other words, the attack in the primary works in the general. Unlike Hillary, whose primary attacks undermine the general.
April 21, 2008 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder if the 2004 Campaign footage that Josh has up on the main page is considered fair use? It would be rather poignant for team Obama to just run it as a campaign spot with very little comment...
April 21, 2008 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Echo chamber.
April 21, 2008 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm seriously confused that Matt Drudge would post that Hill's got an 11-point lead. It's internal voting by her campaign, no? And today Obama has recouped his lead in a national Gallup poll, right? I thought he made his bones bludgeoning Bill Clinton during "Monicagate"? Drudge is still right-of-center and no lover of Hillary (look at all the negative articles about her that he posts on his website). Is he hoping by posting that headline that he'll motivate PA voters to go to the poll and vote against her? She needs a double digit win in PA but as of last week, polling didn't have it there. I know Josh wrote about this but it's a seriously weird headline post for Matt Drudge in my view.
April 21, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm seriously confused as to why anyone pays any attention to Drudge.
April 21, 2008 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bingo Tena....
April 21, 2008 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Late Update: The Clinton campaign is adamantly denying the existence of any such internal poll --and accusing Drudge of trying to inflate expectations for Hillary in Pennsylvania. --gs
So, Drudge is trying to punk PA voters to vote against Hillary. Sweet.
April 21, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's just more of Hillary's reverse scorched earth policy. Burn everything in front of you so there's nothing left for the democrats to use next fall. Maybe she should just sign up with McSame; at least she would get paid for trashing her party.
April 21, 2008 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
The OBama campaign's reaction to this ad concerns me - you know most of the silliness from the Obama spectrum of the Democratic party has come from his supporters but not the from official campaign - and I don't hold Obama accountable for the people who support him.
But it's the campaign that is making the fear-mongering claim. Puh-leeez, if Obama is not ready to face an ad about real crises without whining, he's not ready to face the crises themselves. That's too bad because it look like he is the likely nominee and his response makes him look weak and pathetic.
April 21, 2008 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, you're a Clinton supporter and entitled to your view, but I'm guessing we can agree that we do already have a fear-mongering President, and that we don't need four more years of the same.
April 22, 2008 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton ads seem to be the least of Obama's worries with the stuff the Republicans are putting out on Obama to win congressional elections.
April 25, 2008 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink