New Obama Ad In Pennsylvania Hits Back At Hillary Over "Small Town" Flap
Here, less than 24 hours later, is Obama's Pennsylvania ad responding to Hillary's spot from yesterday hitting him for the "small town" comments...
The spot shows Hillary getting booed for criticizing him, with a narrator saying:
"There's a reason people are rejecting Hillary Clinton's attacks. Because the same old Washington politics won't lower the price of gas or help our struggling economy. Barack Obama will represent all Americans. He offers a new approach."
Full script after the jump.
HILLARY CLINTON: I know that many of you, like me... were disappointed by recent remarks that he made. (jeers)
ANNOUNCER: There's a reason people are rejecting Hillary Clinton's attacks. Because the same old Washington politics won't lower the price of gas or help our struggling economy. Barack Obama will represent all Americans. He offers a new approach.
OBAMA: When we get past the politics of division and distraction and we start actually focusing on what we have in common, there's nothing we can't accomplish...
I'm Barack Obama and I approve this message.
Good for them for capitalizing on those boos.
Hard as hell for her to hit back against that - without further alienating voters..
His campaign rocks.
April 15, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, go Obama. Making an ad about those boos will totally "lower the price of gas" and "help our struggling economy".
lol
April 15, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
You must fail at basic arithmetic
April 15, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is nothing new for BHO. He started attacking HRC using tactics straight out of Rove's playbook when he began pointing out that HRC was unelectable due to her high unfavorable ratings (which, by the way, BHO has now matched due to his own stellar performance for the past 2 months and revelations about his questionable past have surfaced). Now HRC is bringing up the same unelectable argument against BHO. Paybacks are hell.
April 16, 2008 2:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Are you working the 2nd shift for gotalife or MarginalPlayer?
HRC bitterness for losing the nomination is so unseemly.
So is your self-righteousness.
Breathtaking, but hilarious.
April 15, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now that's a low blow.
April 15, 2008 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, I've got to agree with you. I don't agree with you much (at least where Clinton and Obama are involved), but you're definitely no troll (unlike the other two mentioned).
April 15, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
You've got it all wrong buckeye nation, it's your candidate who is self-righteous. I'll also throw in arrogant, self-centered, out-of-touch, condescending, ignorant and borderline unpatriotic for good measure and to clarify the record.
Try and mix in some substantive information the next time you post your garbage in here troll-boy.
April 16, 2008 2:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. Just like ads that say PA people aren't bitter will.
April 15, 2008 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree.See, the thing is, Hillary has long alienated the voters such that even die her own voters are now realising what a dishonest and divisive person she is.The proof of that is in the overall numbers.Sen Obama still leads her and looks the more straight forward and morally acceptable candidate.He gets my vote for charisma,understanding of where America needs to go right now and most of all the candidate who rescognises and accepts his own weaknesses instead of denying them.
April 16, 2008 3:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
His campaign rocks, and Barack is how I roll!
April 15, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pwned.
April 15, 2008 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL the hypocrisy is brilliant.
"When we get past the politics of division and distraction and we start actually focusing on what we have in common" 20 seconds after engaging in the politics of division and distraction by showing a crowd booing Hillary.
Priceless.
April 15, 2008 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Was she booed or not? Wasn't it Hillary's continued pushing of this nontroversy that epitomized the politics of division and distraction? Shame on Obama for calling her on it...
April 15, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
The point, is that they both have engaged in personal attacks. Obama just pretends that he isn't - even in an ad that has no purpose other than personally attacking Hillary by using a crowd's [possibly digitally amplified] boos. That's funny. The number of people on here that seem to lap it up without thinking for themselves, however, is just sad.
April 15, 2008 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
How is this a personal attack? Because he's responding to her Republican talking points?
April 15, 2008 4:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is really quite a stretch to call this an "attack," and totally beyond reason to call it a "personal attack." Did you actually watch the ad? It is much more about him than about her.
April 15, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
The first third of the ad shows Hillary getting booed. I find it really bizarre that you're trying to argue it isn't a perfect example of the "politics of division and distraction".
April 15, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
To point out that somebody is attempting to distract you is not a distraction itself. It is the very opposite of a distraction. I feel silly having to explain this rather elementary point, but I am at a loss as to what other response your argument might merit. She is engaging in a divisive distraction and he is simply trying to set that distraction aside in order that the conversation might return to real issues. To attempt to characterize that effort to get the conversation re-focused on the issues as a "division" or a "distraction" rather beggars credulity.
April 15, 2008 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Foreigner, to be exact the people aren't calling out "boo" they are calling out "no" to Hillary's suggesting that people were offended by the comments Obama made at his fund raiser.
April 15, 2008 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I find it really strange that you are attacking Obama for playing a clip of Hillary being divisive.
It is his fault she said that and got a negative response for saying it?
April 15, 2008 10:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um, I think what he's doing is called defense. True, the best defense is a good offense. But it's still what it is.
April 15, 2008 5:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Me thinks you are conflating a 30 second commercial with an actual stump speech. Commercials are dumb and short for a reason.
The act of pointing our division, and then claiming you will not be divisive is all there is time for. Illustrate, Contrast.
April 15, 2008 9:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL the hypocrisy is brilliant.
Is this your M.O.(ala your comment on Obama's Rev. Wright response)?
Anytime Obama hits back in a devastatingly effective manner, it's hypocritical?
THAT is a LOL!
April 15, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
The point he is trying to make is that BHO has been attacking HRC for months now. He's a politician and he couldn't be successful unless he acted like one. The fact that he has duped people like you into thinking he isn't a typical politician is more of a reflection on the intellectual shortcomings of his fanatical supporters (like you), that it is on his ability to brainwash receptive individuals. That's true of any cult.
April 16, 2008 2:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Be serious, do. Sen Clinton made that particular speech because she thought that it would help her chances. As such, Sen Obama is simply doing her a favor by giving it more play. If it was divisive and distracting, then the divisiveness and distraction of it is entirely of Sen Clinton's making. He did not force her to say those things.
April 15, 2008 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then surely by this same reasoning you must admit that HRC, playing ads of BHO saying that small-town folks are clinging to guns and religion because they are bitter, is being done in the same spirit.
April 16, 2008 2:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know. I thought those quotes were just a little bit tacky. Just my thoughts.
April 15, 2008 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, that's gotta hurt!
April 15, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't remember the boos being that loud on the clips I saw...
where the boos amplified for the spot, or is there a better clip of the original speech I missed?
Obama has to be careful, too. The reason this has got much traction is people are sick of it.
My advice has always been: do not play into Hillary's victim campaign.
April 15, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am sure that those boos were amplified, as I could barely hear them in the original video.
April 15, 2008 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do look forward to the Hillary campaign complaining about amplified boos. That would be such a winner argument.
April 15, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
You mean you're not outraged that Obama would stoop so low?
April 15, 2008 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not outraged, but as I said, I'm disappointed.
I think the ad fails on many levels, as I argue above, and in addition gives Hillary more ammunition to play the victim.
No need for this. People are sick of these kinds of politics, and frankly, Obama should be above it. It's sad that Clinton is dragging her down.
Just make a positive ad. Don't mention "bittergate" (god, I hate that term) or Hillary at all!
April 15, 2008 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really, though, the ad is overwhelmingly positive. It is not really an attack ad against Sen Clinton. The message being conveyed is that Sen Obama cares about PA voters and will work to lower gasoline prices and end job losses if he is president. Mind you, I am not in favor of lowering gasoline prices, but I dare say that most undecided voters are, so overall I think that it is a good ad.
April 15, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you, SC, for demonstrating that it's completely possible to support Obama without irrationally defending every last thing he does to the teeth!
April 15, 2008 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Replace 'irrationally' with 'rabidly' there. Sounds a little better :-)
April 15, 2008 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
what is the point of you?
April 15, 2008 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
What truly amazes me, is that Clinton supporters will slam Obama for being even slightly "normal politics" but never say a word when their candidate and campaign talks about "His statements are fair game" and set about to make commercials about one sentence.
Classic: Your candidate is supposed to be better than mine, so when he gets even close to her low level, it is obvious that he is no better. Talk about screwed up standards.
Vote for Hillary - we already know she is a low class politician.
April 15, 2008 9:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am saddened that things have gotten to this stage. However, what's good for the goose, is good for the gander. This ad does not come out of the blue; it is a direct response to Hillary's attack ad with the pseudo-outraged pseudo-Pennsylvanians. If Hillary wants to play Tonya Harding, she needs to understand that Obama will not take it lying down.
April 15, 2008 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Indeed. Kerry tried that approach and look what it got us.
April 15, 2008 6:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
It sounds like they used the audio from the recording of someone in the crowd.
April 15, 2008 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
As is usually the case, there mics just for the speakers (and they are directional in order NOT to pick up audience noise) and then mics for the audience and we hear some mix of the two. They can be mixed to create different effects - obviously. It is not an easy thing to take a sound within a premixed track and make just that one part louder without making the rest louder. SO, only the people in the room at the time heard what really happened, but clearly there was booing and it was recored. How unfair this mix is probably depends on which candidate you support. Since I support Obama, I'd have to say the mix is probably dead on, if not understated!
April 15, 2008 6:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Everyone see this??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTavf76cPC0
April 15, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great speech! Thanks for posting it!
April 15, 2008 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Awesome story and well stated by Barack.
Too bad the news won't play this over and over.
April 15, 2008 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yesss! See, this ad subverts the premise of that person Josh is quoting on the TPM front. I don't buy it that Rev. Wright or "bitter" or whatever the next lame-o scary thing is that gets dragged in has in any way damaged Sen. Obama with anyone who was ever going to vote for him in the primary or general election season. If Rev. Wright or bitter do it for you, you weren't coming aboard in the first place. Really.
April 15, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
A good read from a "bitter" columnist.
http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/17652829.html
April 15, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent. Shows her up for being shameless and then turns it around to the issues and to Obama's message of changing business as usual and politics as usual.
April 15, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I clearly heard the boos on the video I saw the other day.
April 15, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
So did I. And so did CNN, which is why they made it a news story yesterday.
April 15, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
On some clips I saw, you could barely hear the boos and jeers, on others they came through loud and clear, especially when HRC said, "I know many of you are upset by what Senator Obama said."
You could clearly hear several say "No."
April 15, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fair enough, but that really tells us nothing about whether or not the boos were amplified. After all, it could just be that the feed you heard on CNN was amplified. That said, the issue is rather beside the point. Given that she had a microphone and the crowd did not, it is only to be expected that the crowds reaction, no matter how loud, would be hard to hear on a tape unless it is amplified. In other words, it is not like this is some sort of distortion of the event even if the crowd sound is amplified.
April 15, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is what it might've sounded like if the mikes had been in the audience rather than on the podium. Fair enough. As the Clinton camp believes is totally fair, whatever it is, you can use it.
April 15, 2008 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Love it -- needless to say, that was a nice gift from AAM yesterday. She'd learned her lesson by the evening, though -- she didn't mention it at all at the J-J dinner.
April 15, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Outstanding ad. Put the focus on the issues, not all this BS about bitterness, Wright, and Rezko.
Americans don't care about that stuff. They want to know about where the candidates stand on the issues and what they'll do for them. This is what Obama needs to close with in PA.
April 15, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Be serious, do. Sen Clinton made that particular speech because she thought that it would help her chances. As such, Sen Obama is simply doing her a favor by giving it more play. If it was divisive and distracting, then the divisiveness and distraction of it is entirely of Sen Clinton's making. He did not force her to say those things.
April 15, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's clever in that he uses her hammering at this issue to make the central message of his campaign: unifying a divided country and changing the political culture. And the boos in the crowd are sort of a reposte to the people in her ad saying they were offended.
I thought her ad was one of her better "attack" ads because "real" people spoke. (Or were they actors?) But overall, there's a chance this will all backfire on Team Clinton because it's still a Democratic primary, after all. And she needs to win a her share of the liberal Democratic vote to win big in the state. The whole thrust of her picking up this argument seems to go against that. But at this point, they need to gamble, don't they?
April 15, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gosh, they did not seem like real people to me. That said, I am not a PA voter, so I suppose it does not matter what I think on this subject.
April 15, 2008 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
well, they certainly were not actors - or at least not very good ones. More likely they sent a crew out on the street and asked people to repeat lines back to them. So it's real people (an Obama supporter would have said no), but it's about as spontaneous as an infomercial (which is to say, not at all.) I though her add really fell flat when the "People" were praising her...that really sounded un-authentic.
April 15, 2008 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
A very good ad, in my humble opinion. Of course, I am thorough-going Obama supporter, so perhaps my judgement is clouded, but I think that it was surprisingly effective, given its brevity.
April 15, 2008 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Idle thought. For a lot of reasons we all can name, I think that Sen. Obama should insist that BOTH Sen. Clinton and Sen. McCain be in any debates that get on the schedule.
April 15, 2008 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Supposedly good Indiana numbers to come out ~ 5 pm EST via LA Times/Bloomberg.
"The big surprise emerged from Indiana, which also holds its primary on May 6. So far, little polling has been conducted there, but what has been done has been positive for Clinton. No so with these new numbers."
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/04/upcoming-new-la.html
April 15, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd be encouraged if LA Times/Bloomberg didn't have a record in this election that makes Zogby and ARG look like wizards.
April 15, 2008 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
5 point lead from the Hoosiers.
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-poll16apr16,0,794499.story
And the latest SurveyUSA report card gives LA Times a better rating than Rasmussen, which gets quoted here all the time.
http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/surveyusa-report-cards/
I'll take it!
April 15, 2008 5:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, well, IS HE WEARING A FLAG PIN, OR NOT!!???@!!!
That's what bitter people really want to know.
And, REZKO REZKO REZKO REZKO REZKO REZKO REZKO REKZO .
Jeremiah Wright said that Pope Benedict was second cousin to Osama bin Laden today.
There. Just thought I'd preempt raek today.
April 15, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is no new approach, just divisive politics as usual.
Don't insult us with this bs, drop out.
April 15, 2008 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary, you hear that? Gotalife just told you to drop out.
Man, times are bleak, aren't they?
April 15, 2008 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll probably get some flack on this, but I agree that it doesn't suit Obama.
No need for him to drop out though, sorry!
April 15, 2008 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that it doesn't suit him; but it enables him to then go back on message and every time Clinton's campaign brings it back up he can look back over his shoulder like: "are you still trying to win that argument?"
It serves as a nice closing to his side of this topic and allows him to move on and talk about the actual issues that matter to people.
April 15, 2008 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is divisive and insulting.
This not a different kind of politics and you know it.
Be real for once and admit it.
April 15, 2008 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
got a life, don't know how to live it, better ID.
April 15, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
gotalife, don't expect the majority of the obamatrons to listen to reasoning. BHO has been divisive from the get-go. He's attended a racially-divisive church for more than 20 years, had as a friend the racially-divisive Wright, airs divisive ads like this one, uses phrases like 'typical white person', tells small-town folks they 'cling' to religion and guns out of bitterness, just to name a few.
He's about as divisive as they come in terms of politics. But he should know how to do that well, as he comes from the world of old-school, knee-cappin' Chicago-style politics.
Is it any wonder that about 30% of HRC voters will vote for the republican candidate in November if he's the democratic nominee? That's a tell-tale sign of his divisiveness, but not one the obamatrons will ever listen to... they've been thoroughly programmed.
April 16, 2008 2:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
I love the ad; just as her ad wants to grow the outrage, this ad helps grow the rejection of the attack.
I don't recall Obama ever attacking Hillary with this sort of gotcha politics. I could be wrong. Maybe in Iowa. Who knows? What I do know is that he didn't exploit her Bosnia flap into a commercial and he could have. She gave him the "shame on you barack obama" for his mailer that said she supported NAFTA and since then we've learned that SHE SUPPORTED NAFTA.
She is old.
He is new.
He is trying to keep the door open to bring her supporters in his camp when the nomination is settled. Maybe it is time to put her away in tomorrow night's debate.
BTW: gotalife, are you suggesting Obama drop out or Hillary? Why would the candidate in the lead drop out when he also has the most money? And she isn't going anywhere until June unless she goes broke. (I know I just controdicted myself; he can put her away in an "it is all over but the crying" sort of way but she won't drop out officially until june or the convention.)
April 15, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama engaged in "gotcha politics" in the worst way in South Carolina, when he released pages of talking points to the press over the 'it took a president to get it done" line, claiming that Hillary was belittling martin luthor king. He apologised for it later on an MSNBC debate when he was called out on it, but the damage was done.
April 15, 2008 5:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Foreigner
you really like to twist and distort the facts. Obama did not release pages of talking points. He release pages of HILLIARY's and HER Campaign surrogates RACIST statements.
One big fact here is that we know he could not have compiled FOUR pages of racist remarks if Hillary or her surrogates had not made them.
Obama apologized because he wanted to put the issue behind him and not focus on race and that was the quickest and fastest way to do that.
Fighting fire WITH fire is NOT attacking anyone or playing 'gotcha' it is called DEFENSE and COUNTERPUNCHING.
Which is the HUGE difference between the campaigns. Obama doesn't throw punches but he does throw a mean counterpounch and has no problem playing defense.
He only goes on the offense about POLICY not distractions, and politics of personal destruction.
Hillay has that down to a science...thus we have been discussing 'bitter' for FOUR days instead of Economic policies and Bill's Columbian CAFTA deal and his CHINA deals as well as Hillary's NAFTA lies.
April 15, 2008 7:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think a lot of people have been waiting for Obama to really take a good hit. You know, the people who say he needs to show he's got some spine, show he can fight back. So I think this can actually win him some votes, and it certainly won't lose him any. I like the idea of his kinder gentler politics, but even Jesus threw the money changers out of the temple. And the rest is just whining and distortion and nah nah nah nah games.
April 15, 2008 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it is time for Obama to hit hard. 5-7 days before the primary, he needs to start slapping her around. Draw some blood.
This does not mean going negative. Going negative is when you say bad things. Pointing out how your opponent is full of it and pandering to the voter is not new, but it is not necessarily negative.
The reason why I advocate for this, is he needs to control the news cycle all the way into the PA primaries. Make it so that HRC and crew are so busy defending, that the can hardly pull the "drop something new one day before the vote" technique. He can pull out all the stops with all of his surrogates.
I am sick of people on this site and in HRC's campaign using the bitch-slap move, and then whining when Obama slaps back. He needs to knock her around for the next 6 days. She claims she can take it, so lets see it a little bit. Again, there is a difference between negative and hard hitting.
Don't get me wrong, HRC's mouthpiece Get-A-Life will scream like a little baby, but somehow this idea that one party can play hard but the other cannot is BS. Negative and hard are only conflated when Hillary is complaining about it. "SHAME ON YOU OBAMA" is a case in point. She got offended when he pointed out some of her BS. Tough cookies. If you do not want to be questioned, do not go into politics.
April 15, 2008 9:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the thing - I know I bitched, and I know all the liberals around me bitched, loud and long when Kerry didn't fight back. That was the general, but since Hillary seems to think this is the general, the comparison stands.
We wanted a fighter, dammit. I did, anyway. Well, he is one, but he does it the right way every time. If you let him explain himself - he always makes sense and he's always calm and pretty good natured about things.
Victim I don't see.
April 15, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree TenaX
In fact, I think Obama needs to start hitting Clinton VERY hard, she is trying her damndest to make him unelectable in the general.
As much as I want Obama to win the nomination and general is as much as I do not want Hillary too. So if her new strategy is take him down if she can't have the nomination, then Obama needs to respond in kind.
Let them both walk away completely bloodied withoug a chance in hell in the general before she leaves him bloodied up and tries to use that as ammo to steal the nomination.
I say HELL NO...Hit back and hit back HARD.
Hillary's gloves have been off for a good long while. Every since her commander in chief nasty remarks about her and McCain passing the threshold test.
Obama needs to take off the gloves and use the money to knock her clean out the race.
It is time to get viscious with her. I mean very viscious. He needs to bring out all the Clinton dirty launder and he needs to start with her PAC lobbyist money, Bill's CAFTA Columbian deal, Penn's CAFTA columbian deal as well as the Tunzla remarks.
It is time for Hillary to GO!!!!!!
April 15, 2008 7:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, keep money to waste on this crap.
Pathetic.
April 15, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oops,
Keep sending him money to waste on this divisive crap.
April 15, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the suggestion. I just sent an additional $25.
April 15, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
So far, all the whining I've heard has come from Hillary and I can't see how you make yourself into a victim if you aren't whining about being one.
April 15, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, threadlice, I just sent Obama another $50 for that.
April 15, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary heard the boos. She drank it up. When it comes to booze Hillary wears a Crown Royal.
April 15, 2008 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was driving today and playing my little game as I listen to Air America. As soon as I hear a slam against Hillary, I switch stations. Today I had fun switching back occasionally to see how long it would be before I'd hear another Hillary slam. I tuned in during the Ed Schultz show. Remember Ed Schultz? He's the one who forced Obama to apologize for the "McCain is a warmonger" remark Schultz had made as he was warming up the crowd before an Obama appearance. Schultz is a non-stop Hillary basher like Randi Rhodes, but lacks her intellect.
So here's how it went today as I tuned in and tuned out of the Ed Schultz show on Air America radio:
[Tune In] "... so she lands in Bosnia" [Tune Out]
a bit later
[Tune In] "... when one of her supporters is actually saying that a black man can't ever get elected in" [Tune Out]
a bit later
[Tune In] "... but I mean this tells you what kind of person she is that will say anything. I mean, HOW LOW CAN YOU GO???" [Tune Out]
That last one, coming from Ed Schultz, really made me laugh.
April 15, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why would anyone be listening to Air America? Was NPR's reception disrupted in your neck of the woods, or some such?
April 15, 2008 5:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ed Schulz is not a part of Air America. He is with Jones Media. Some stations that carry Air America also air Ed. Schultz's syndicated program.
Otto is just trying to falsely tie Ed Schultz to Randi Rhodes.
Typical Clinton supporter disinformation ploy. Ed. Schultz has never worked for Air America.
April 15, 2008 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Try tuning into Taylor Marsh (that is, if anyone outside LA carries her). She'll make Ed Schultz sound like a Hillary apologist.
It will whet your Obama hate all the way to orgasm.
April 15, 2008 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary's Top Gun in Pennsylvania, Governor Ed. Rendell said this about White Pennsylvania voters, on February 12, 2008, in an on the record interview.
Why did Hillary not chastise her Top Gun for talking about White people, in such 'an elitist way". Hypocrite, thy name is HilAnny Oakley Clinton.
Here is what Rendell said about White voters in his state;
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
By Tony Norman, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Gov. Ed "Don't Call Me 'Fast Eddie' " Rendell met with the editorial board of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette last week to talk about his latest budget. But before turning the meeting over to his number-crunchers, our voluble governor weighed in on the primary fight between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama and what the Illinois senator could expect from the good people of Pennsylvania at the polls:
"You've got conservative whites here, and I think there are some whites who are probably not ready to vote for an African-American candidate," he said bluntly. Our eyes only met briefly, perhaps because the governor wanted to spare the only black guy in the room from feeling self-conscious for backing an obvious loser. "I believe, looking at the returns in my election, that had Lynn Swann [2006 Republican gubernatorial candidate] been the identical candidate that he was --well-spoken [note: Mr. Rendell did not call the brother "articulate"], charismatic, good-looking -- but white instead of black, instead of winning by 22 points, I would have won by 17 or so."
I know I have a habit of sometimes zoning out in these meetings, but it sounded to me like Mr. Rendell had unilaterally declared Pennsylvania to be Alabama circa 1963. Was he suggesting that Pennsylvanians are uniquely racist in ways that folks in the states Mr. Obama has won so far aren't? By the way, Mr. Obama won Alabama on Super Tuesday, thank you very much!
April 15, 2008 5:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
There goes Otto again - thinking our entire existence as liberals and therefore, Obama's, rises and falls with Air America.
That is so last year's Bill O'Reilly, Otto, honestly.
April 15, 2008 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I knew Annie Oakley. Annie's grandmother was a friend of mine. Hillary; you are no Annie Oakley!" Senator John McCain
April 15, 2008 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Could you hear my boo in the background, just kidding, but I did boo her here at home.
April 15, 2008 5:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's see now:
- People booing Hillary as she tries to manipulate them with her politics of division.
- Explaining to the viewers that voters are showing that they're tired of the politics of division, hence the booing.
Try as I might, I just can't imagine being too stupid to grasp that. Shillaries are a special breed.
April 15, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
He didn't hammer on Hillary, he did political ju jitsu - he used her smearing him to bring the thing around back to him original point.
Brilliant.
I love this man's campaign.
April 15, 2008 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
On a visceral level, I don't like the beginning of the ad. But I agree there's no personal attack here and, remember, Clinton chose to run her ad pushing this line even after she got booed on it. She could have taken the hint and not went after him further.
I would run this ad only for a short time, just enough to make sure it's what people think of whenever they see Clinton's ad. Then dump it quick so people don't see you as trying to cash in on it or associate you with the tedium of all this.
As far as the rest of the ad goes, I like what he's doing here and elsewhere today, transitioning from the frustration theme, which isn't a long-term winner, back to his core message.
April 15, 2008 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you're right about running it for a short time.
April 15, 2008 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
bdh -- Couldn't agree more. Given that his campaign is predicated on hope and uplift, it felt a little unseemly to watch this ad (even if I did take some perverse pleasure in hearing Hillary booed for her nastiness). That said, she was the person responsible for this entire false and misleading line of attack. I can't fault him for defending himself, and combined with the fact that the rest of the ad was completely positive, the opening salvo became a bit more palatable as a short riff on America rejecting the same oldd politics. Like you, I hope he does not run this one for too long. Release it into the ether, then quickly shift back to emphasizing his attributes, without even acknowledging her.
April 15, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
"him original point" I'm starting to speak in creole now.
Sorry. His.
April 15, 2008 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Woo! Both barrels, baby. Time for some beeahs an' some Wild Turkey, alls. Gobble Gobble!
April 15, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
That last one, coming from Ed Schultz, really made me laugh.
Outside he's laughing. Inside he's crying.
I think I'd be physically ill if I were a Clinton supporter at this point. It's gotta be tough.
April 15, 2008 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
The ad has two aims. One is to close down the "bitter" debate and pivot back toward economic issues, which he's quite good at. But the the other target is the uncommitted superdelegates. He is showing them that he will not take a punch without punching back. "You hit me and within 24 hours, I will swing back. I will not be swifted. I will respond." Taking that second target into account, I think the ad is fantastic. It does give me every confidence that no matter what the GOP throws at Obama -- and we all knew they would in the general -- he will swing right back with equal or greater force. The party should be relieved to have a candidate with such a fast, deft touch.
April 15, 2008 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
SCMadden - tell you what, I agree he shouldn't push it any further and I think this should be the last ad he releases in Pa for sure.
April 15, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
If the louder boos in this clip came from a recording within the crowd, well.......good.....this is about the people there, no?
The editing out of the crowd noise by the media at Dean's Iowa event made his yelling seem a lot worse than it was and hurt Dean. So the media changed that audio for a certain effect.
So maybe we have heard an earlier clip of the crowd booing at Hillary in which the MSM also changed the audio, editing down that crowd's booing
Karma is funny sometimes.
April 15, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
In the upper thread, I just read a jaw-dropping comment.
A man in an audience at an Obama function in Pennsylvania asked Obama if he didn't think Clinton's charges of "elitism" weren't awfully close to saying he is "uppity."
Karma, she is a bitch.
The questioner was a white man, in case that matters to anyone.
April 15, 2008 5:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Translation:
White Obama supporter (and likely plant) plays the race card.
Just another day in Obamanation.
Obama for the nation is an abomination.
Clinton must be the nominee for the sake of the party and the country.
April 15, 2008 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Awesome ad. Why should Obama be expected to play nice? Hillary's been twisting his words at every turn. Good for him for showing it backfiring on her. The Empress is wearing no clothes. Time to display her for exactly what she is.
April 15, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
He is playing nice, he could make ads like Hillary where he shows a clip of Hillary lying or something then have actors say how this makes them hate Hillary or something.
April 15, 2008 6:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know someone who went to the Steelworkers speech that's used in the ad. I'm going to ask him about the boos. Even if they amplified them (which I doubt, because I saw another clip yesterday), it's not like they're making them up.
IMO, Rendell is right on his observation about many PA voters, and wrong on his candidate choice.
(Posted this on another thread, ao forgive me if I'm repeating myself to you: I went door-knocking for Obama in a middle/lower-middle class Pittsburgh suburb Saturday. Most people were polite, very few were Obama supporters (and these were just Dems), and one 82-year-old man told me he would not vote for either the "jive n***er or the f**king bi*ch.")
Ah, vox populi. I'm looking (praying) for a knockout blow from Obama in the debate tomorrow. As Bill so chivalrously pointed out recently, ol' Hill is 60, after all. I think she's ripe for it.
April 15, 2008 6:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
You could call this an example of Obama "hitting back" at Hillary. Or you could call it an example of how Obama is still on the defensive against his own words. How you see the ad probably depends on your viewpoint before you saw the ad.
I couldn't help noticing how in the ad Obama wants us to focus on what we have in common, and how that contrasts with how he spoke in San Francisco, which displayed a far more "us and them" mentality.
April 15, 2008 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
If she had not brought the subject up, there would have been no AD...Get it?
This is a response not an "Attack"
April 15, 2008 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
And I have the resources and a disciplined organization to do it.
April 15, 2008 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Me thinks you are conflating a 30 second commercial with an actual stump speech.
April 15, 2008 9:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think the boos were amplified.
If anything, the ones we've heard before may have had the mikes in the audience turned off or down, as others have said.
They did this with the "Dean scream".
Instead of playing the actual audio and video of a large audience of supporters waving flags and SCREAMING on top of their lungs, they instead turned off the audience speakers and zoomed in to a close up of Dean, cutting out the visual of the very large crowd.
Then they played this version thousands of times and it was a mission accomplished for the media.
Kudos to the expertise and wisdom of the Obama camp for nipping this in the bud.
April 15, 2008 9:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I liked the ad. It left a positive feeling for me. Nice Steelworkers banner behind in one shot.
This is really another instance of Hillary contriving more garbage or increasing its noxiousness to throw at Obama. But she should be learning by now that she looks slimy from all the splashback. And it looks good to the voters that he is resiliant.
I agree with several commenters above who find that this is not a negative ad, or, at worst, a well-deserved positive negative ad. What it would mean for Obama to go negative, which it looks like he avoids at nearly all costs, would be for him to start shouting or subtly implying or feeding stories to the media under the table about Hillary being a liar, based on the Tuzla storys. Or for him to start shouting about her husband being a disbarred lawyer for lying under oath. Or bringing up the threat of blackmail associated with her husbands wandering habits or all of the money they have accumulated and their taste for high life and company. He doesn't even bring these things up obliquely and it appears that even his spinners don't get too far into this slop. Hillary's spinners, on the other hand, are like something the dog finds and rolls himself around in.
And for many of us who were Clinton supporters, her viciousness, when it doesn't make us angry, genuinely makes us sad.
April 15, 2008 9:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good for him.
Party insiders have been fretting about whether or not he'd be able to hit back in the general.
I'd say that was a pretty good hit.
April 15, 2008 10:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I heard a clip of the Hillary statement and the boos on NPR. Sounded round the same to me.
I think the ad was effective.
Against the Republicans.
For they are the masters
of the politics of division.
April 15, 2008 10:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sure the people of Pennsylvania are delighted with all the heavy advertising Obama is doing in their state.
April 15, 2008 11:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
As a PA voter from a smaller town, the only thing I see bitter is Hillary's attitude that she lost her chance to be President. Go Flyers!! (and Obama!)
April 16, 2008 8:52 AM | Reply | Permalink