Obama makes Hillary look like a fool in response to attack ad in Wisconsin

[Araxen]

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid353515028/bctid1418509422

[saltpoint]

1. The ad is artfully done, IMO, and asserts his virtues without

any mud-splattering.

The Reich endorsement is especially effective.

[jkshaw]

3. Penn is burying Hillary

Why does she follow his game plan? She managed to shut Bill up, why can't she shut up this awful excuse for a person? I understand also that the campaign had an actual shouting fight over campaign ads. I wondered when I read the account whether Hillary was there to hear it.

[saltpoint]

7. Hi, jkshaw. Penn isn't exactly the prototype for how to win

friends on the playground, is he.

I think Sen. Clinton is a far stronger candidate the farther away she stands as possible from her husband's political chums.

Of all the available strategists, I have no idea what she sees in Penn.

[jkshaw]

11. Nice, Crusoe,

your use of the word playground reminds me of bully and actually he rather looks like a bully, and from what I read of his behavior toward Hillary's people, he IS a bully.

[saltpoint]

12. Which brings it around again to why she lets him hang around.

I think she could have done a lot better hiring any number of other people.

[Hieronymus]

87. She's allowed thugs to ruin her reputation ... she should be happy ...

as a senator and former first lady.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

109. Oh, please give Bill some credit

He's helping!

[Olney Blue]

6. Yes, it's a good ad. And you have to admit that the two ads are not

exactly fist fights.

Hi OC! I finally decided to vote for Hillary, after an agonizing decision process.
I really like Obama too.

[saltpoint]

9. Olney Blue, very good to see you as always. You owe no

apologies for your choice. Strong cases can be made for either to win in November, and that's just the thing we need to accomplish.

I'm damn sick of the last 8 years with that jabbering hyena in the Oval Office.

[ginnyinWI]

73. I'm glad to see my donation money being used for good ads n/t

[saltpoint]

90. Ja! Hiya ginny.

:hi:

[mmonk]

2. Nice ad. Stays positive while addressing the ad.

(and issues)

[MagsDem]

20. Well, except it's not true

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2008/01/democrats-should-stop-squabbling-over.html

Just that little detail about actually being factual. It isn't.

[tammywammy]

39. It is factual

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2007/12/why-is-hrc-stooping-so-low.html

I’m equally concerned about her attack on his health care plan. She says his would insure fewer people than hers. I’ve compared the two plans in detail. Both of them are big advances over what we have now. But in my view Obama’s would insure more people, not fewer, than HRC’s.

[MagsDem]

47. He backpedaled 6 weeks later

And come on, do you not think Obama doesn't KNOW his plan covers less people? How in the world can he be against mandates for adults, only call for covering children, and then claim her plan, which mandates coverage for everyone -- AND still claim his plan covers more people.

He cannot have it both ways. He can't slam her for mandates and say they are bad (unless they are for kids, I guess) and then say his covers more people even though he doesn't have mandates for adults. That's just pure bull, and if you're an honest person you will admit it.

[tammywammy]

53. Where did he backpedal?

I don't see in the second article anywhere Reich says "Obama's plan does not cover more people."

The second article was more about how the plans are similar.

[MagsDem]

72. Do you think Obama's plan covers more people

without mandates than Clinton's does with mandates? Do you honestly think that ad is truthful in that respect? Maybe I have too much faith in people, but I just can't believe you actually believe that ad is truthful.

[tammywammy]

76. I prefer Obama's plan over Hillary's

You started by saying that Reich never said Obama's plan covers more people. He did.

[MagsDem]

80. Let's stick to the topic - is Obama being truthful in that ad?

Is he being honest with the folks watching the ad, or is he being Bush style "honest" by using another person to state a lie on his behalf?

[tammywammy]

82. Yes, it's an honest ad

There is nothing inaccurate in the ad.

[MagsDem]

86. You know that is not true

So much for "change"

[tammywammy]

91. Um, no I think it's a factually accurate ad

There is no lie, except what you're interpreting as a lie.
There have been 18 debates, plus 2 to come - True.
Hillary said he's ducking debates - True.
Reich said Obama's plan would cover more people - True.
Obama's experts say it'll lower costs per family - True.
Obama wants to crack down on crooked lenders - True.

[MagsDem]

93. Oh I see, so you're a fan of the "The British have reported that Saddam....

as attempted to buy tons of yellowcake from Niger" style of lying. Did you catch where I posted that Obama will be the democrats George Bush the other day? That's exactly what I meant. "Change" my ass. Changing a bald faced rethug liar for a bald faced democratic liar is all.

[tammywammy]

96. Oh, you caught me, that's exactly what I am

:eyes:

[MagsDem]

98. Yep, that's exactly what you are

[TexasObserver]

4. He's right and the ad has a nice touch.

Pointing out the obvious - she's a lying triangulator.

[MagsDem]

24. Actually, no, he's lying

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2008/01/democrats-should-stop-squabbling-over.html

[DUyellow]

lying... that is a strong word, not sure if that applies here

[MagsDem]

68. Does his plan cover everyone?

Or is it not a lie because Obama says "Reich says....."

Kind of like how Bush claimed "the British have discovered that Saddam...." so he could claim latter that it wasn't him that was lying. He was just reporting what the British said.

This is what I mean about Obama being the same kind of liar Bush is. Prime example. No one but the completely uneducated on this issue thinks that Obama's plan covers more people than Clinton's. If that were so he couldn't also bash her on her mandates, which he likes to do.

[rodeodance]

84. O. suddenly has started calling his plan 'univeral" for "polical" pruposes yet it

omits millions of people right from the start. That is lying.

[Imagevision]

74. "He's lying" - that's the best you got?!?! no! you're misinformed..

[Az_lefty]

5. ha ha...beautiful. Which part of 18 fu*king debates didn't you understand?

[MagsDem]

35. WI doesn't care about that, i wouldn't think

They have been invited to debate for WI resident, she accepted, he snubbed them. Myself, I think 18 is misleading as all get out. People want to see them one on one. I know I do. How many of those? Two?

[ginnyinWI]

77. I'm in WI and I've seen plenty of debates

We do get cable tv here. It's just a political ploy--I'm glad he's not taking the bait.


Instead he's spending his time at smaller events so people can get to know him better. When he does that, his numbers go up.


I saw him yesterday at an expo center that only holds about 1,000 people--and it was packed. Bill Clinton was at the same venue today trying to hold a rally--and had less than 400 turn out.

[MagsDem]

94. I guess you don't have to watch anymore then

[Colobo]

8. Great stuff! Gobama!

[usregimechange]

10. Excellent ad, hammering away at the theme, DC bullshit needs reform

http://my.barackobama.com/page/outreach/view/main/Seth77

[MagsDem]

23. Don't you think then, that he shouldn't do exactly what he...

accuses her of in that ad.

He's lying about his healthcare plan.

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2008/01/democrats-should-stop-squabbling-over.html

[rodeodance]

27. and how will he do this 'change" thingy when he himself is a Corportist?

[DUyellow]

51. explain "Corporatist", please educate all of us on how he is

links... descriptions... let it all out...

[Johnny__Motown]

13. Hillary trying to mislead people again? What were the odds?

[MagsDem]

15. Actually it's Obama who is lying

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2008/01/democrats-should-stop-squabbling-over.html

[DUyellow]

56. how is he lying? your link does not show that....

The BLOG (Robert Reich), does not talk about the two issues raised in the ad. Did the Clinton adviser (Robert Reich) say that? YES.... Does Obama's website says that it can save some families money? YES...

In fact the BLOG doesn't even take a definite decision as to which of the 3 plans is best or will even work.

[MagsDem]

83. Does Obama's plan cover more people than Hillary's?

You can't possibly claim that. Do you not think Obama knows that is not true given that he has slammed her for mandates? The issue here is if Obama is being truthful. Now I don't know what you're going to post, but you KNOW that is not true.

This is precisely the same kind of lies Bush tells. Using someone else (like the British yellowcake) to tell a lie for you. Not dime's worth of difference. Why do you want someone like that as president?

You know why they have to make that statement "I'm Barack Obama and I approve this message", right?

[MagsDem]

14. The ad is absolutely false about his healthcare plan

And false about what Reich has said. In short, the Obama folks are not telling the truth.

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2008/01/democrats-should-stop-squabbling-over.html

[Avalux]

16. If that's how you want to play it -

you're outraged about this ad. Hillary's ad is bullshit. You're OK with that though, right?

[MagsDem]

18. haven't seen it. Got a link?

[MagsDem]

26. I found it on my own... so what is your problem with it?

[Avalux]

28. Calling Obama afraid? Please.

I would hope Hillary would have more class than that.

[MagsDem]

31. Okay, I just watched it again

She deosn't say anything about him being afraid. She says he'd rather give speeches than debate the issues. So what is your beef? And how do you justify him coming back with an ad that is absolute fabrication of what Riech as said?

[KAZ]

37. Hillary does. This poster does not.

I'm beginning to think its purpose here is not quite as obvious as it may seem.

[MagsDem]

48. Hillary does what?

Calls Obama afraid? watch the tape and tell me where she says that?

[KAZ]

58. Has more class. Try reading someone else's post.

You really hurt Clinton's cause, and since her candidacy is important to me, why don't you STFU for once.

[MagsDem]

61. No, I don't think I will

But thanks for the offer. LOL!

[KAZ]

75. Ah, so your purpose here is clear, sink Hillary,

Most of us saw through that long ago. Thanks for playing.

[tammywammy]

38. Reich did say it

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2007/12/why-is-hrc-stooping-so-low.html

"I’m equally concerned about her attack on his health care plan. She says his would insure fewer people than hers. I’ve compared the two plans in detail. Both of them are big advances over what we have now. But in my view Obama’s would insure more people, not fewer, than HRC’s. "

[MagsDem]

50. And then he backpedals on Jan 13th

Obama ought to keep more up to date, or at least ask Reich.

Regardless, Reich is incorrect according to every source you can find. And you know what? Obama darn well knows his plan is not even designed to cover everyone, and he knows her's is. Hell, he has slammed her on the mandates for everyone.

This is what I mean when I say he is just a bald faced liar. I honestly don't understand how you can vote for someone like that. He lies just like Bush did on the campaign trail in 2000. Bald faced stuff that is just complete bullshit.

[DUyellow]

63. where does he backpedal?

"Mr. Obama thinks a lot of them are people who won't be able to afford even the subsidized premiums, so they'd either ignore a mandate or wouldn't be able to pay for it. He says if his plan gets 97% coverage without a mandate and he finds that the remaining 3% are mostly young and healthy, he'll go along with a mandate." So his plan will cover 100%

[DefenseLawyer]

43. You might want to check that

before posting that link another 50 times. Here's an excerpt from Reich's blog entry from Dec 3, 2007
"I’m equally concerned about her attack on his health care plan. She says his would insure fewer people than hers. I’ve compared the two plans in detail. Both of them are big advances over what we have now. But in my view Obama’s would insure more people, not fewer, than HRC’s."

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2007/12/why-is-hrc-stooping-so-low.html

You really shouldn't throw around the term "liar" unless you know what the hell you are talking about.

[BringBigDogBack]

17. How Penn is still employed

...baffles the mind.

[MagsDem]

19. who's doing Obama ads?

Because this one is a complete fabrication.

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2008/01/democrats-should-stop-squabbling-over.html

[Tellurian]

25. Of course it is... but thats the idea... bombard the masses with scripted propaganda..

so they can defend the hologram to the hilt!

[MagsDem]

29. She should try to get that Obama ad killed

The media usually won't let you run an ad if your opposition can demonstrate it is false. And his ad most certainly is.

[tammywammy]

42. It's not false, so she would have no reason to get it off the air

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2007/12/why-is-hrc-stooping-so-low.html

I’m equally concerned about her attack on his health care plan. She says his would insure fewer people than hers. I’ve compared the two plans in detail. Both of them are big advances over what we have now. But in my view Obama’s would insure more people, not fewer, than HRC’s.

[Tellurian]

62. When both Campaign were in their infancy..

a determination was made just before the presidential campaigns were in full swing, saying, it won't be considered illegal if the candidates do not represent the Truth in their campaigns.

Now, my candidate Hillary's words WILL STAND UP to the Truth because Hillary would never misled the public as her rival, Obama has done. Why do you think Obama doesn't want to debate Hillary? Or better, why do you think Hillary wants to get Obama on National TV and prove him to be the LIAR he is?

If Hillary had anything to hide, she'd shun the debates just as Obama has done. He reluctantly accepted...so, we'll see what happens next.

[rodeodance]

33. like his staged rallies. All glitter, little substance.

[tammywammy]

40. It's not a fabrication

Reich did say it:

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2007/12/why-is-hrc-stooping-so-low.html

I’m equally concerned about her attack on his health care plan. She says his would insure fewer people than hers. I’ve compared the two plans in detail. Both of them are big advances over what we have now. But in my view Obama’s would insure more people, not fewer, than HRC’s.

[MagsDem]

45. And then 6 weeks later he retracts it. See the link I posted

[DefenseLawyer]

49. I don't see a "retraction"

I didn't see him make reference to his December 3 entry at all, much less make a retraction. He seems to be saying in the first that HRC is unfairly attacking Obama's health care plan. In the second he seems to be lamenting that while the candidates and the pundits are sniping about the differences, the plans are remarkably similar. I don't see where he says "My previous statement about Obama's plan covering more people was incorrect". That would be a retraction in my book, but I'm just a caveman.

[MagsDem]

60. Then you don't understand the issue

What he saying is yes, okay, his covers less, but it's really not consequential. But the bottom line is that during the debate Obama never even attempted to claim his plan covered everyone. He knows better. This is akin to Bush's 17 words in the SOTU saying "The British say Saddam has attempted to purchase yellow cake" so he can claim HE wasn't lying later on because someone else said, and he's just telling you what they said.

See below:

"Cohn (The New Republic, June 3): The best studies out there — by Urban Institute researchers, the RAND Corporation, and MIT economist Jonathan Gruber — suggest that, without a mandate, improving affordability will cover roughly one-third of the people who don't have coverage. Mandating that kids (but not adults) have coverage bumps that up to about a half. Obama's advisers think that, by really loading up on the subsidies … they can goose that up to two-thirds. But that's getting optimistic — and, even then, you still have around 15 million people who are uninsured.

Cohn makes it clear here that he is offering an estimate based on the best information available, not a hard and fast calculation. And the best available information doesn't always agree. One of the people Cohn cites, economist and influential health care expert Jonathan Gruber, has gone on record saying that without a mandate, Obama's plan would still leave 6 percent of the nation – about 18 million people – uninsured. But it's not clear whether he meant "without an individual mandate" or "without any kind of mandate." The Obama plan does include limited mandates, including a requirement for employers to either provide health insurance or pay into a public fund. A Gruber study from 2006 estimates that a plan with generous subsidies and an employer mandate would lead to 82 percent of the uninsured gaining coverage, based on 2001 data. Applied to today's figures, that would leave about 8.5 million without insurance. Gruber found that a proposal that included an individual mandate would lead to 100 percent coverage of the uninsured."

Now Obama has been clear that he is not calling for individual manadates, can we agree on that? If so, they he knows he is lying. This is what I simply cannot stand about Obama. He will stand there and tell you a bald faced lie when he knows most people don't know the difference and won't check. How can you vote for someone like that?

[Laurab]

70. Oh, I do so love your posts - "bald faced liar" and

"bald faced lie" - used about 30,000 times - I'm kind of getting attached to them. I hope you don't actually type it out every time - you could save a lot of time if you had a special key for it.

Plus, you have such a knack for discovering "bald faced lies" - why is it you never notice any of Hillary's?? You could use that special key SO much more if you did.

[MagsDem]

78. I am more than willing to listen to actual lies that Hillary has told

... if you know of some, post them. I will read them and check them out. I understand all politicians put their spin on things. That's politics when they mix their facts with their opinions. Customary, usual.

But that is why I use the bald faced lie -- to differentiate between lies that there is no question are lies and what I describe above. Let me give you a Bush campaign example:

He stated, in 2000, when he was running against Gore, that he "supported the SCHIP program as governor of Texas"

Fact: He vetoed it as gov of Texas, and only let it become law without is signature when the state lege passed it with enough votes that his signature wasn't required for it to become law.

See how that is a bald faced lie? No question -- it's a lie.

Now the facts are that there isn't a single health care expert that thinks Obama's plan covers more than Hillary's. If Obama thinks so he didn't claim it in the debate where it was discussed, and in fact has critisized her for mandates on everyone where his is only mandated for children. So clearly he is aware that his plan does not "cover more" people than Clinton's.

Yet he misleads people with that ad, with yes, a bald faced lie by ascribing the comment to Clinton's labor secretary, who basically back pedaled 6 weeks later. And you know where this comment was made? On a personal blog. No analysis attached to it, no study, no nothing. Just a wild assed guess on a personal blog.

[Laurab]

108. Oh, I don't actually read your posts - I just like the

"bald faced lie" parts. Hillary's lies are many IF you want to see them.

[DefenseLawyer]

89. Ahhhh okay, I just don't understand

I can only read what he said, I need to "understand the issue", like you, to see what he was "really saying". Maybe Hillary can run an ad with several quotes of what various people were really saying to help poor ignorant fools like me understand. "Senator Kennedy SAID he endorsed Barack Obama, but if you understood the issue, you would know that what he REALLY meant was that he endorsed me!" That would be a great ad.

[MagsDem]

92. His Jan 13th post to his blog says something very different

And frankly it's still not true according to every single healthcare policy analyst and economist that has analyzed both proposals. It doesn't even pass the common sense test since Obama has made such an issue about her mandated coverage for everyone and him not doing that. Remember last week when he was claiming not having mandates made his plan better because we shouldn't force people to buy health insurance?

Now this week, his plan covers more people than hers? How does he have it both ways?

I know it's not true, you know it's not true. And if you're not being intellectually dishonest then yes, you don't understand the issue very well.

But one thing is very clear to me. Obama is not about "change" at all. He just wants to replace a rethug liar with a democratic one.

[DefenseLawyer]

105. He says something very different, and it's still not true?

First you said it was a retraction. I asked where the retraction was and you said that while he didn't actually give a retraction, that was what he was "really saying" to those of you that "understood". Now you are saying that Reich's second statement, which you allege reverses his previous statement (making it a bald face lie in the Obama ad) is "still not true". So which is it? Is Obama lying about Reich or is Reich lying about Hillary? Cause I mean, how can..? Nevermind. My head hurts.

[johnnydrama]

21. i wonder

if it would be legal to have clips of all the debates on one website, so anybody can go look at any question.


I mean, exactly what question wasn't asked in the 18 debates?

[MagsDem]

22. How many one on one debates have they had?

I've only seen 2. Are there more?

[rodeodance]

30. There are many in WI who think Obama dissed them --and now are dissing Hillary--this

ad is having negitive effects.

[MagsDem]

32. I should hope so... it's a complete lie

Reich hasn't said that about his healthcare plan at all.

[Umbram]

55. Is this not him?

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2007/12/why-is-hrc-stooping-so-low.html

I can't say I know much about it - I just googled to check. If that's him then he does say it.

"I’m equally concerned about her attack on his health care plan. She says his would insure fewer people than hers. I’ve compared the two plans in detail. Both of them are big advances over what we have now. But in my view Obama’s would insure more people, not fewer, than HRC’s. That’s because Obama’s puts more money up front and contains sufficient subsidies to insure everyone who’s likely to need help – including all children and young adults up to 25 years old."

[MagsDem]

65. This is him too

Yeah, then he backpedals:

http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2008/01/democrats-should-stop-squabbling-over.html

Now for the actual facts:

Cohn (The New Republic, June 3): The best studies out there — by Urban Institute researchers, the RAND Corporation, and MIT economist Jonathan Gruber — suggest that, without a mandate, improving affordability will cover roughly one-third of the people who don't have coverage. Mandating that kids (but not adults) have coverage bumps that up to about a half. Obama's advisers think that, by really loading up on the subsidies … they can goose that up to two-thirds. But that's getting optimistic — and, even then, you still have around 15 million people who are uninsured.

Cohn makes it clear here that he is offering an estimate based on the best information available, not a hard and fast calculation. And the best available information doesn't always agree. One of the people Cohn cites, economist and influential health care expert Jonathan Gruber, has gone on record saying that without a mandate, Obama's plan would still leave 6 percent of the nation – about 18 million people – uninsured. But it's not clear whether he meant "without an individual mandate" or "without any kind of mandate." The Obama plan does include limited mandates, including a requirement for employers to either provide health insurance or pay into a public fund. A Gruber study from 2006 estimates that a plan with generous subsidies and an employer mandate would lead to 82 percent of the uninsured gaining coverage, based on 2001 data. Applied to today's figures, that would leave about 8.5 million without insurance. Gruber found that a proposal that included an individual mandate would lead to 100 percent coverage of the uninsured.

And don't kid yourself that Obama doesn't know this claim of his is a lie. That is why he attributes to an old article by Reich instead of making the claim himself. Kinda like Bush's BS about the British said Saddam was after yellowcake, not me, after he got busted on his SOTU address.

[Umbram]

67. I'm not kidding myself

I'd have to have drawn an opinion on the matter to begin kidding myself.

[Political Heretic]

59. LOL, no there aren't.

[rodeodance]

81. WRONG--I live in WI. I interact with people. I hear what is said. Perhaps

you live in WI also?--If you do we do not live in the came company.




LOL, no there aren't.
Posted by Political Heretic

[Political Heretic]

102. Yawn. You post an anecdotal argument. I post an anecdotal argument.

and round and round the world goes.

[rodeodance]

34. Your OP is very divisive.

Obama makes Hillary look like a fool in response to attack ad in Wisconsin

[Umbram]

52. Erm?

You just rec'd a thread that supports "writing in" Hillary's name if she's not the nominee.

Care to define divisive?

:wtf:

[misanthrope]

36. Very good counter...

...Nice ad, great production values and editing, voiceover and tone convey a sense of confidence and ease. Good too that his quotes included figures from Hillary's own realm.

[tammywammy]

41. It's a very good effective ad

[GoldieAZ49]

44. Good ad, effective without nasty

ignore her demands without ignoring it publicly, he does have a superior campaign.

[jillan]

46. You think so? I think it makes people remember all of the past debates that Obama

tried to get out of; or his past poor performances.

Anyone who has been paying attention over the last year will remember the non-stop chatter about how Obama does not do well at debates.


Here's a little reminder for all of the short memories around here:

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/08/enoughs_enough_obama_will_limi_1.php

[ButterflyBlood]

54. Excellent ad!

It shows just how desperate Hillary has gotten and is a great contrast of their messages.

[Political Heretic]

57. Whoever planned Hillary's ad should be fired.

Seriously... I saw it and cringed for them, then smiled and thanked them for the opportunity to beat them again.

It's hard to run and ad calling your opponent a chicken when you yourself (at the time) were considering pulling out of a debate.

It's hard to run an ad calling your opponent a chicken for not debating when there have been twenty debates and two more scheduled - the most of any primary season ever in history.

And nice job in totally giving our guys the most beautiful opening to "There you go again" your ass and reinforce OUR message of how the Clinton campaign is nothing but "same old political tricks and cheap tactics."

PLEASE -- I BEG YOU -- keep running shit like this, and give whoever OKed that for the air a PROMOTION!! :)

[catagory5]

66. yeah but look at who is commenting on his policies in his ad......hehe

"cracks down on crooked lawyers" well that comment is from his own website! It is shown like some "expert" or outside opinion is weighing in on all his policies, yet no one is. It is him commenting on his policies and how they are better. LOL

He doesn't have the greatest ad people either.

[casus belli]

85. It's not shown as a quote...

It's text to highlight key points. There isn't anything misrepresentative about the use of the text to highlight the talking points in the ad. Their purpose is to provide impact, not to mislead.

[DefenseLawyer]

107. It's lenders, not lawyers

You can blame us for a lot, but not the subprime mortgage crisis!

[Imagevision]

64. IF barack runs the government the way he's running his campaign, we'll be just fine...

[MagsDem]

97. By lying? Heck, in that case why not just ask Bush to stay on?

[IndieLeft]

69. He's ready. He is so ready for McCain.

I can't wait.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

71. distortions and omisions...Clinton and Obama had only ONE..... that's ONE 1 on 1 debate......

and he didn't tell you that millions will be left without coverage under his health care plan or that his plan will also heap fines onto the people who don't have it.....what a farce this ad is.

[Araxen]

79. It's millions left uncovered by their own free will

and not being told to pay for something they can't afford. Obama is about free choice. Hillary's is her way or the highway.

[MagsDem]

95. And that;s fine -- people can choose which candidate....

has the policy positions they agree with more. But the fact is that the statement in the ad that his policy covers more people is a lie. Why would you vote for someone that lies so blatantly like Bush does? How is that change?

[MagsDem]

88. The thing is his supporters, here at least, KNOW he is lying

But you can present them with incontrovertible facts to show he is lying and they just pretend not to notice. I'm left trying to figure out how this is a "change" from the liar we have in the WH now.

[LadyVT]

99. Liar... factcheck.org

He's lied about the number of people covered by his vs. Hillary's health plan.
The statements attributed to the AP are quotes of Obama himself.
And THIS is integrity?

[Political Heretic]

103. Choose to ignore this if you want.....

I can't remember if this is the site, so dismiss my warning because I have an Obama icon if you want. But in 2004 we quickly discovered that ONE site that was a claimed "fact checking" site wasn't merely "slanted" to the right, it was actually bullshit and wrong half the time.

There was factcheck.org and another one... I can't remember which one kept saying Kerry was lying when mediamatters and other sites were proving that the accusations were false.

Seriously... might not be this site. But I just wanted to mention that.

As for your "concerns" - he's not lying about the number of people covered at all. Some people have the OPINION that his plan won't work without a mandate, but that doesn't change the fact that his PLAN is to cover everyone.

And statements attributed to the AP are from the AP... the Associated Press doesn't do opinions or "editorials" - it reports news stories. So even if they are quotes of obama, if they were printed by or given in an interview to the associated press, that's the proper way to cite them.

I know a little something about this, having had to speak to the media as a campaign manager.

[ShadowLiberal]

100. That's a great ad, and it stays sounding positive to

[psychopomp]

101. Yes! Counter the propaganda with facts!

:kick:

[calteacherguy]

104. Great ad! nt

[workinclasszero]

106. Hillary keeps spreading lies

And Obama keeps knocking them down!

No problems! GOBAMA!!

[Araxen]

110. I really enjoy this ad.