Hillary Clinton didn't explicitly say Barack Obama was a Democrat-in-Bush-clothing, but . . .

[bigtree]

February 3, 2008, 9:08 am

Clinton Lays Out Differences With Obama

By Patrick Healy

ABOARD THE CLINTON PLANE OVER ARIZONA – Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton did not explicitly say that Senator Barack Obama was a Democrat-in-Bush-clothing, but she sure left that impression during a news conference on Saturday evening that dwelled heavily on the Feb. 5 nominating contests.

Mrs. Clinton was asked if part of her argument against Mr. Obama was that he hadn’t been specific about his plans for the country. She replied that she herself had been “very specific” because she believed the next president had to be held accountable for delivering on his or her campaign promises.

And then:

“We cannot afford to elect someone, as we did with George Bush, and then be somewhat surprised by the decisions that are made and the directions that he leads the country,” Mrs. Clinton said. “The best way to avoid that is to have a candidate who will tell you what she will do, and then is held accountable for doing it once she’s in office. That’s the way I like to run my campaign, and that’s the kind of president I’ll be.”

I keyed off her remarks on Saturday morning – that her presidency would not be “a leap of faith” – and asked if she believed there was any risk for voters or America in an Obama presidency.

“Well, I have said on many previous occasions that I’m not asking voters to take a leap of faith – you know where I stand, you know my record, I’ve been vetted, I’ve been tested, probably more than anybody in the country who is in politics right now,” Mrs. Clinton said.

With that out of the way, I pressed my question again, but Mrs. Clinton was having none of it.

“I’m making the positive case for myself, and that is a really strong argument as to how best to win the general election and have a president to deliver on what the campaign is about,” she said. “And I think that’s important this time. We need a campaign that’s about the real issues facing the country; people expect to have their problems fixed. I think my campaign has offered that.”


more: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/clinton-lays-out-differences-with-obama/


. . .this is hardball politics from the former First Lady, not for sensitive folks. I like it.

[Windy]

1. Don't think this is a good move for her. Will only help her to keep her base

that wasn't going anywhere anyway.

[Thrill]

2. All she has is her base. Which is a problem in the GE

But hey that may be all she needs to get the nomination. Not good for us for the GE

[bigtree]

3. Obama has his weaknesses, but they're regional, not centered on differences with interest groups

And, do you really think Obama will be able to successfully 'reach out' after the right defines him, like they did each and every one of our nominees? He'll need that base.

[WinkyDink]

4. Would it not be the other way around, phrase-wise? "A Bush in Democratic clothing"?

[Colobo]

5. Hillary should be careful.

[bigtree]

6. nope.

this isn't tidily winks. I like the fighting spirit. Don't act like Obama is on the road trying to 'unify' with Clinton. He's hitting hard as well. Watch Face the Nation.