Obama responds to the red phone -- "what kind of judgment will you make when you answer?"

[jefferson_dem]

Perfect! :patriot:

Obama responds to the red phone

Obama responded to Clinton's ad in a speech to veterans in Houston today, according to prepared remarks. He accused her of playing on fear, and echoed his staff's retort that she's had, and blown, her red phone moment:

Now before we open this up for conversation, I just want to take a moment to respond to an ad that Sen. Clinton is apparently running today that asks, “Who do you want answering the phone in the White House when it’s 3 a.m. and something has happened in the world?”

We’ve seen these ads before. They’re the kind that play on peoples’ fears to scare up votes.

Well it won’t work this time. Because the question is not about picking up the phone. The question is — what kind of judgment will you make when you answer? We’ve had a red phone moment. It was the decision to invade Iraq. And Sen. Clinton gave the wrong answer. George Bush gave the wrong answer. John McCain gave the wrong answer.

Also:

And I’ll never see the threat of terrorism as a way to scare up votes, because it’s a threat that should rally this country around our common enemies. That’s the judgment we need at 3 a.m. And that’s the judgment that I am running for president to provide.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0208/Obama_responds_to_the_red_phone.html#comments

[debatepro]

1. this was the right answer...

they will not have a counter arg...

:kick:

[skipos]

2. great answer. nt

[MoJoWorkin]

3. Great counter to that crap! Did you see his ad?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x98995

[rucky]

4. Damn, he's good. n/t

[Avalux]

5. Excellent! Great response and quick too.

This is the kind of candidate we need - one who is not afraid to speak out against the attacks and does so immediately. I love how Obama is handling this.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

79. I'm sure Bush probably wouldn't bother answering the phone

judging by Bush's very slow response on 9/11.

Obama will be right there for us. We can depend on Obama.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

6. Not A Great Response By Any Means. It Was Partially Disingenuous And Partially Hypocritical.

Hillary didn't make a decision to invade Iraq, so he's again being disingenuous. But I also don't condone Hillary using that line of attack in her ad either, because we shouldn't be engaging in fear tactics. But Obama is also being a blatant hypocrite here in certain ways. If he didn't want to take part in fear tactics, he would've limited his response to only his latter statement. The fact he turned HER fear tactic around on her, now makes him guilty of offering HIS fear tactic. She was using it to say something bad could happen if it were him answering, he turned it around to say something bad could happen if it were her answering. You can't turn a condemned style attack around onto your opponent, yet go on claiming you condemn the tactic.

[damonm]

8. Not so....

Ever heard the phrase "turnabout is fair play"? Or seen the basic principle of defensive martial arts such as Aikido - to turn your opponent's size & strength against them, and make them into YOUR weapon? This is what Obama is doing - political Aikido.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

16. You Don't Get It, Do You.

If some guru karate master said "kicking someone in nuts, very bad. Very very bad. Don't do this. This bring great dishonor and should be avoided at all costs", but then right after someone kicks him in the nuts, he goes right back and kicks them in their nuts harder, he would be a bit of a hypocrite, no?

Look, if ya don't get it, ya don't get it. But I'm right here.

If he truly condemned those tactics, he wouldn't have JUST used them himself. He would've just left his response as condemning those types of tactics, and that the voters will not fall for them, as opposed to issuing one right back himself. Seriously, this is so blatantly clear.

[Warren Stupidity]

43. Bad analogy.

First of all, what is with the bad grammar? Are all karate instructors channelling Yoda, or is that your impression of how oriental people speak? Yikes. So wrong in so many ways. But I digress.

If your karate instructor tells you that kicking people in the nuts is very very bad and you shouldn't do this, please consider immediately changing schools and getting a new instructor. On the other hand, if the instructor warns you that while this is a great target if you can strike it, your opponent is not likely to make it an easy target to strike, the instructor actually knows something. But I digress again.

A better analogy of what Obama did, staying in the martial arts mode, is that he used Clinton's groin shot against her. That does not make him a hypocrite, it makes him pretty deft at sparring in politics. Her strike, in true martial arts form, became a weapon against her. Good for Obama!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

52. All Around Empty Response.

You went in circles a bit and in the end really didn't say anything that showed why my analogy was false. Just a whole lotta words, not a whole lot of explanation, about, well, anything.

[Warren Stupidity]

61. He did not initiate a 'fear attack'.

He used her fear attack against her. You were too busy rolling on the floor punching the caps lock key to notice. Your debating style is childish. Grow up.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

62. "He used her fear attack against her"

Exactly. Thank you for conceding the point.

He used it. End of story. You're done.

[Warren Stupidity]

65. Yup I'm done. nt.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

76. "...channelling Yoda,..."

:spray:

[Bongo Prophet]

50. Someone doesn't "get it" --- that much is true.

Aikido is not karate, though at higher levels, there are some similarities.

Neither karate nor aikido has "gurus" (a teacher would be called a sensei)

Your analogy of "kicking in the nuts" is not apt, in my opinion. It shows your ignorance, and your point about hypocrisy misses the mark totally.

Your faux asian "kicking someone in nuts, very bad. Very very bad. Don't do this. This bring great dishonor and should be avoided at all costs" is some pretty bad "me love you long time" racist bullshit. Too bad we don't have a visual of you pulling back your eyes, or fake overbite, or other stereotypes. Classy as usual, OMC.


I will not argue with you on your point, however.
Not because I cannot, but because YOU ARE ALWAYS RIGHT.

As you repeated tell everyone on DU, as you then insult anyone who disagrees.
Life is too short to spend time on intellectual bullies.


"The essence of aikido does not lie in fighting with others."
Morihei Uyeshiba (founder of aikido)


Actually, I would say that Obama's technique is more akin to jujitsu than aikido, but would respectfully discuss that, rather than insist that I am right and the other poster is some kind of idiot. We are just different that way.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

54. OH MY GOD WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE!!!!!! ROFLMAO!!!!!!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

I don't believe you guys are responding as if my analogy was supposed to have some accurate technical meaning as it relates to aikido, karate or otherwise ROFLMAO. It was just a statement for explanatory purposes for god's sake! I wasn't being technical like some master would TRULY say that, or someone would TRULY advise that, or that aikido has Gurus. I'm laughin my ass off at how some are responding as if to school me on the technical details of karate and aikido. So friggin stupid!!!!! :rofl:

It was just a silly example, like a cartoon character guru sitting atop a mountain, giving guidance to some other character that journeyed far far away. Totally lighthearted, sooooooooo not technical. My god you guys crack me up sometimes.

It's the point of the analogy that matters, and it is accurate.

(and no, nothing racist about that post at all, and I laughed my ass off at your accusation.)

[Warren Stupidity]

60. !!!1!!!!!!1!11!!!1!1!1 1!11!1111!!!!!1!! !1!11!1!1

"If some guru karate master said "kicking someone in nuts, very bad. Very very bad. Don't do this. This bring great dishonor and should be avoided at all costs"

Yeah no racist stereotyping at all. But you have wounded me with your masterly used of caps and punctuation, I may have to withdraw from the contest.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

63. .

:spank: :rofl:

[Bongo Prophet]

64. You responded just as I expected, by insults. Yes, we all miss the point. we are all stupid.

YOU ARE ALWAYS RIGHT, even when you are wrong.
Grow up.

People go easy on you for reasons you should be quite aware.
Sympathy.

I hope you raise your kids to have more respect for people than you do.
Good luck with that.

Search your soul a bit, and learn from life.
Start treating people a little better, and be a tad less condescending.
Please.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

67. How Else Could I Respond? Your Post Was Ridiculous!

You went on this tirade about technical aspects of karate etc, as if I was actually being serious or trying to be factual in my use of the analogy! It was BEYOND absurd! Your reply didn't address the context whatsoever nor the point, but instead fixated on the karate aspect, in a totally took it wayyyyyyyy too seriously manner. How else could I have responded? I mean, you ACTUALLY felt the need to correct guru and call it sensei!!!!! Could you possibly be any more ridiculous and technical as it related to the point?

Seriously, it allllllll sorts of cracked me up! :rofl:

Oh, and people go easy on me? Are you insane?

Seriously, you have acted reallllllly weird in this thread. Your original reply to me was one of the strangest and off the mark replies I've ever received. Your follow up reply is even more odd. Either address the points I was making, or save us both time and just go away, ok?

[Name removed]

75. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jefferson_dem]

18. The red phone rang in late 2002. It was chimpy on the line.

Without much hesitation, Hillary simply said ... "hand me a war drum I can beat."

Truth.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

20. Ummmmm, Yeah...... Just A Tadddddddd Of An Exaggeration There LOL

It's ok though. I'm used to the silliness around here as it relates to, ya know, actual reality and stuff. What a ridiculously warped reply. It actually made me laugh a little!

Oh, and furthermore, since none of my post had been dealing with that, maybe next time you should actually try and focus on the context maybe? My god, some have such one track minds. So silly.

[jefferson_dem]

23. You said "Hillary didn't make a decision to invade Iraq."

She voted for the resolution that gave him a permission slip to do just that, even after many had literally begged her not to. That's the poor judgment she displayed, and Obama refers to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYATbsu2cP8

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

27. Hillary Didn't Make A Decision To Invade Iraq.

Furthermore, I know what Obama was referencing, but he still did so disingenuously. He also still showed some blatant hypocrisy, of which you have not yet referenced. No biggie though, since it is politics and that's the game, but it still was something worth pointing out.

[bigbrother05]

31. But, if your right and everybody else is wrong

even the candidate that is running for President, why should they comment.
I know you have all the answers, why don't you run for Pres.

[Brotherjohn]

32. Get real. We all, to a number, know what Obama was talking about.

Hillary... YES as a Senator in the context of a vote to give GWB approval to invade Iraq... used bad judgement. No one mistakes Obama's statment to mean that a Senator from NY alone decided to invade Iraq. DUH!

But she played a major part. That was not just any vote (and dawrves in importance anyone's continued votes to continue funding). It was also an awfully big lapse in judgement (some would say calculated gamble, one that gambled with the very future of our country; not to mention thousands of lives). That vote was the moment to stop the war; and as we have all seen (and many of us warned back then), these things are much easier to start than to stop.

She got the phone call. She made the wrong decision. Clear and valid point. I like Hillary, and I liked Kerry in 2004. But if there were a viable candidate running in 2004 made the same statement about Kerry in 2004, I would have supported them instead.

[cali]

48. She voted for a blank check. It's that simple.

And Pat Leahy and Robert Byrd made it crystal clear that that's exactly what the AUMF was, BEFORE the vote. And please, don't presume that you're smarter or know more about the Constitution than either of them. They both said in no uncertain way, that they'd never vote for a blank check for any President- Republican or Democrat.

It was a vote for war. Many in Congress said that repeatedly. Everyone voting knew it.

Oh, and just because you don't like his response, doesn't mean it wasn't an effective and catchy one.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

80. Answer Me This:

Did Hillary vote with a mindset of "Yes, let's attack Iraq unilaterally, right now!", or did she vote with a mindset of "Let's take this to the UN, get the inspectors back in, be responsible about how we go about it, and if all else fails you have my permission to declare war"?

There's a huge difference between those two sentiments. You, Obama, and several others, have been disingenuous in your portrayal that it was equal to the former, when it was in fact the latter. And yes, doing so IS disingenuous.

[Brotherjohn]

25. This is not disingenuous. She knew what she was voting for. She used bad judgement.

She is naive at best if she thought that vote wasn't giving Bush the go ahead. And at worst, she was voting out of political expediency, to increase her chances of eventually running for president (the idea of war was then much more popular).

I KNEW, just from extensive reading on the subject from various sources, that almost every claim Bush was making to get the authorization for war, was false. If she were using good judgement, she should have known too, and should have opposed it. She and many others (including Kerry, which made him a much less attractive candidate as well, once the war became unpopular).

You can say all you want that Obama's position was "under less pressure" and were he in the Senate at the time, the story would have been different. But that's a hypothetical. Besides the fact that his words (both then and now) go against it, he WAS a state politician planning a run for the U.S. Senate. Yes, he has since voted to continue funding. Everyone, Hillary included, have been put (by Bush's rash actions) in an awkward position of not wanting to abandon troops, and not having the power or opportunity to cleanly extricate us from this war. Whomever the eventual Dem nominee and president will be is going to have a MESS on their hands, thanks to Bush.

The time to stop this war was before it started, and Hillary and others in Congress had the ability to do it. They failed.

[Brotherjohn]

29. & is THIS what you mean by Obama also resorting to fear tactics?: "And I’ll never see the threat...

"...And I’ll never see the threat of terrorism as a way to scare up votes, because it’s a threat that should rally this country around our common enemies. That’s the judgment we need at 3 a.m. And that’s the judgment that I am running for president to provide."?

If so, that's pretty weak. I mean, terrorism IS a bit of a problem. All he said was we should use it as an opportunity to come together, not use fear to tear each other apart. This was in direct response to Hillary doing just that.

By this reasoning (if this was your example of him using fear as a tactic), he cannot discuss any enemies of the United States, terrorism, the Iraq War, or anything that in any way might make us fearful by thinking about it.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

35. No. I Found It Silly That You Thought So.

I'm talking about this:

"The question is — what kind of judgment will you make when you answer? We’ve had a red phone moment. It was the decision to invade Iraq. And Sen. Clinton gave the wrong answer."

He turned her tactic around right back on her, thereby using the tactic he was condemning. It's quite simple to see, really.

[Brotherjohn]

40. Self-Delete.

[Brotherjohn]

42. He turned her argument against her, yes. But he didn't sink to using the fear tactic she used.

He didn't use the same tactic she used; he just turned her argument on its ear. There's nothing wrong with that.

She says "You can't trust his ability to protect you if a 'red phone moment' occurs".
She's using a vague, scary-sounding hypothetical to send this message: "Be afraid for your safety if this man is in the White House."

He says: "A red phone moment has occurred, and she already showed bad judgement."
He's using a specific example from her record to demonstrate with facts what she is implying about him.

Completely fair game. Not using fear. Not using her tactics. Using the record to make a point; perhaps the most valid point of the primary and the general election.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

57. Look, This Really Is Quite Simple:

Hillary: "Don't vote for Obama. He might get a call on the red phone and fuck it up"

Obama: "hey, don't vote for Hillary. She theorizing I'd fuck it up, but we already know from a failing of her past, that if she answered the red phone SHE'd fuck it up".

They're both using the same red-phone emergency imagery to make a point that when it came to crunch time, they'd be the better one for the job. Same damn thing. Same tactic. Same imagery. Same use of fear. Use your head.

[Brotherjohn]

71. Not same tactic. Sorry. The same red phone imagery does not make it so.

A) She brought up the red phone and he's simply answering her accusation in her terms. As I said, that is completely fair. That's called a response.

B) She used the scary red phone imagery and innuendo to just imply you'd somehow be in danger with him at the helm. He answers the accusation using her record, using facts.

Facts are facts. She enabled the start of this war, and that IS dangerous. That's talking about the real world and her record, not invoking some boogie man, which is what she was doing. It wasn't the red phone imagery. It was how she used it.

Besides which, I don't see her ad as all that bad. Go ahead. Claim your more experienced and more able to handle a crisis. That may be so. But you'd better damned well expect a response on how you've done so in the past.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

72. If Ya Don't Get It, Ya Don't Get It.

I've explained it enough. I'm not gonna spend all afternoon repeating myself.

[Occam Bandage]

30. OMC, given that this is a campaign, what is your rationale

for claiming that this is not a great response? He's managed to make up a significant foreign-policy-experience deficit by pounding a single message over and over again: "I had the judgement to oppose invading Iraq, and Hillary Clinton and John McCain did not."

Turning this back into that same line is what is expected from a successful politician. He turned an attack ad into an opportunity to shift the debate back to his message. How can that be anything but the best possible response?

You seem to be complaining that this response is "fear tactics," and as such is hypocrisy. However, I see a clear distinction between the two situations. Clinton is claiming that Obama would harm the nation. Obama is claiming that he has better judgement than Sen. Clinton; he is challenging his assertion that she would be better, not making the explicit case that she would be a danger in the white house. Pointing out that the basis for an opponent's fear tactic is unsound is not in and of itself a fear tactic.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

38. I Guess I Meant Great As In Accurate. For Sake Of Politics And Future Standing Up For Himself,

it was quite good. I was looking at it more from an objective eye of accuracy, sort of thing. Course, in politics and campaigns, that's not much what counts, and it is responses like these we will need from him as he goes through the GE, if he is indeed the candidate.

But I disagree with your assessment of his turning it around. I think it's fine that he did, and expected, but I also think that by doing so he incorporated the same tactic she did. He's just using a different line to do it with. He's using the same red phone analogy, but using it to say that if she picked it up, she might make as bad a judgment with that as she did with voting for the IWR. He's using her own tactic against her. That's not something that would be surprising, I just don't think you can do that and yet condemn it in the same breath. And no matter what any of you say, I will always find it disingenuous when people use her IWR vote as if it were HER choosing to go to war, when she's explained a gazillion times what her expectations were for how it would be implemented. When people twist it in such ways, it is definitely disingenuous because it leaves out all the nuances and details as to what she felt she was actually voting for. She WOULD NOT have condoned going into Iraq in the ways bush did, and she even DECLARED that at the time. To not reference that and instead make it like she was all gung ho for his plan and way he implemented it, is absolutely disingenuous. I will continue to firmly believe that.

[cottonseed]

33. I can't wait until he can use these tactics on the Republicans

It's the only thing that works when republican's toss absolute, unfounded garbage your way. The way Hillary's campaign is acting, there's really not much of a difference any more these days.

[cali]

45. LOL!!

talk about being a contortionist!

:rofl:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

55. Just Calling Out The Reality As Always, Cali.

:hi:

[cali]

58. that's your reality

doesn't mean it's THE reality. c'mon, OMC, try answering my other post in this thread.

:)

[K Gardner]

7. Reporter from Texas on MSNBC: "This negative ad won't work in Texas."

Obama leading in delegate rich dallas and houston regions

"Legal challenges won't play much in whether she wins or loses."

[Cha]

11. E Ha! Hope it doesn't

work in Ohio, either..come on Ohio don't let hilary scare ya.

[Cha]

9. Freakin' Perfect...

And as for that little fearmongering hilary.. Will she ever go and fuck off?

[damonm]

10. And this is one reason why...

negative campaigning against Obama will backfire - he will not, like Gore & Kerry before him, allow an attack to go unanswered. Moreover, he will turn the attack back.

[Cha]

13. Just like we always wanted it

to happen!

[Meshuga]

12. As far as authorization for Bush's war

Somebody should have Kept Hillary away from that phone!!!

[loveangelc]

14. this ad is way too late. i dont see it having any huge impact.

[MoJoWorkin]

15. Well, I think we have the number one story for the KO show tonite.

You all know how he dislikes those fearmongers.:evilgrin:

[jackson_dem]

17. Based on Kyl-Lieberman he would ignore the call and wait for the polls to be done before answering.

[jefferson_dem]

24. Baloney. He publicly opposed K-L on the day it was voted on.

Senator Obama clearly recognizes the serious threat posed by Iran. However, he does not agree with the president that the best way to counter that threat is to keep large numbers of troops in Iraq, and he does not think that now is the time for saber-rattling towards Iran. In fact, he thinks that our large troop presence in Iraq has served to strengthen Iran - not weaken it. He believes that diplomacy and economic pressure, such as the divestment bill that he has proposed, is the right way to pressure the Iranian regime. Accordingly, he would have opposed the Kyl-Lieberman amendment had he been able to vote today.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0907/Obama_No_on_KylLieberman.html

[jackson_dem]

66. I stand corrected

But it should be noted his objection was to the reference to the troops in Iraq in the bill, not the designation of the IRG as a terrorist organization, something he supported in a bill he cosponsored earlier in 2007.

[elixir]

19. Sorry, Obama, wrong answer. HRC voted on an authorization of *, not to go to war. Also,

Obama is using the scare tactic, there are many "red phone" issues which do not involve terrorism, tsunamis, accidents (plane crash), black outs (such as Florida), hurricanes. He's playing the fear card.

[jefferson_dem]

22. "A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq."

Please.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237

[DUyellow]

28. I love that title. Cannot get any clearer than that...

[Drunken Irishman]

34. So are you admitting Hillary is really that naive?

Well hell, if that's the case, that's just as damning. If Clinton was naive enough to believe Bush would spend his time working for a peaceful resolution instead of rushing to war, then she isn't fit or of sound mind to run for president.

[Brotherjohn]

37. Her ad is CLEARLY trying to make us fearful of a less able person answering the "red phone".

I don't think the "red phone" symolizes plane crashes or tsunamis in Indonesia. No one loses sleep over a president's ability to handle those. Since the Cold War, the "red phone" has always been symbolic of nuclear attack, or imminent threat thereof, or similarly "scary" threat. In this day and age, a terrorist attack.

Besides, even if she were just talking about general ability to handle some "situation" (which she clearly was NOT), why is it wrong for him to point out a key difference between them in the context of a political primary? He's simply saying she used bad judgement on a (THE?) key issue of importance to this campaign. I don't think he's using fear at all.

[Dems Will Win]

21. Clinton was convinced by Condiliar to vote YES on War with Iraq

when Rice told her the vote was to let the inspectors back in, saying "Dick must have gotten confused", that it was a vote for an invasion.

That's who Clinton is.

[MyNameGoesHere]

26. What? AQ is in Pakistan? This is your president Barak Obama, i give the order to bomb

immediately.

general What'shisface: Sir shouldn't we contact Pakistani leaders first?
Obama: No i gave the order now go bomb them


BTW is there really a red phone?

[Occam Bandage]

36. Obama doesn't claim he wouldn't contact Pakistani leaders.

Rather, he claims that if efforts to get the Pakistani government to act fail, then he will order cross-border strikes. Bonus: That actually became United States policy shortly after he said it, and as a result we killed AQ's number-3 guy.

(There actually is, yes, though most use of the phrase is metaphorical. A situation in which the Red Phone was used would have been a pressing, immediate foreign-policy crisis, and so the term has been generalized. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_telephone)

[MyNameGoesHere]

47. I have a hard time

letting that type of cowboy behavior to happen. We should dictate to other governments what they should or should not do, and then use force to make our point?

And which number 3 guy is this? DU used to joke about number 1 , number 2 being killed multiple times. How low we have sunk when unilateral pro war ideas are accepted.

[Occam Bandage]

49. Since Pakistan receives a large amount of United States aid that is

conditional on their support for our anti-extremist efforts along the Afghan-Pakistani border, then yes, we should. This is a game of mutual brinksmanship; we know that if we pull our funding Musharaaf collapses; he knows that we've invested too much in him to pull his funding and acts accordingly. It is not "cowboy behavior;" it is done rationally and with full knowledge of our actions.

If Musharaaf were to raise public objections, that would be one thing. However, his hands are largely tied; he can't support us too openly for fear of anti-American Taliban sympathizers staging a coup, and he can't reject us openly for fear of America cutting off its support and allowing him to crumble. At the same time, not doing anything threatens to throw Afghanistan back into feudal-theocratic rule. It's a balancing game.

US Central-Asian and South-Asian policy is very interesting.

[Gore1FL]

39. Mondale had an ad like that in 1984 against Hart

With a blinking phone basically aking who do you want to make the decision to nuke or not to nuke...

Clinton is making a mistake running on "experience," in my opinion. It opens a dangerous door to McCain's few comparable strengths. Additionally, she includes private sector in her experience which pretty much makes is a gericracy (sp?) argument which also gives McCain an edge.

I consider myself an Edwards refugee. I lean towards (and voted for) Obama on super Tuesday, but would have to say the biggest failure of Hillary Clinton in this cycle is her ability to hire campaign staff ready for days 1 through 365. Her campaign might have worked in 2004. She'd be president now, had she run then, IMO.

[invictus]

41. Hillary campaigns like a Republican. Shame on you, Hillary Clinton! n/t

[Nedsdag]

44. BULLSEYE!!!!!!

BOO-YAH!!!!!!

[jenmito]

46. I hope HE makes an ad talking about the "politics of fear" showing bits of HER ad and then clips of

the Repubs.' scary ads. Then he should talk about how he wants to end all that.

[nickn777]

51. When Clinton's phone rings at 3am...

No decision is made until a poll is taken.

[Eurobabe]

59. Quick lick your finger, in the air with you!

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

74. 100's of thousands of dollars

have been spent by the Obama campaign on Polling.

[Arugula Latte]

53. That man just gets better and better.

THIS is the kind of candidate we've been waiting for -- one who won't take crap from fearmongers in the Bush/Clinton Dynasty.

[Political Heretic]

56. This guy is what EVERY DUer WAS BEGGING JOHN KERRY TO BE/DO

He's bold, it immediately responds to attacks and he BEATS the attackers as their own game. He is quite simply, BETTER at the game than anyone else running this year.

[cottonseed]

70. Yes.

He just doesn't seem to be afraid to go back at em. This is what I for one have been screaming for for years now. No calculating, no backtracking. Attack with facts and more than anything, CONFIDENCE in what you believe.

[Scurrilous]

68. K & R

:thumbsup:

[Zachstar]

69. This is why Obama will win.

Desperate tactics will not work against him. He has done his homework and he is a strong leader.

Give it up Clinton! Enough is ENOUGH Do you really want to face what is in store for you in Texas and Ohio? It will not be good for your future chances in 2012 when every day is a new day of desperate tactics.

[cooolandrew]

73. Barack is going to be such a legend .=)

[kennetha]

77. I don't get how this is supposed to be a negative ad. I really don't!

And I'm not just saying that cause I'm 100% for Hillary. All the ad does is raise, admittedly in a somewhat sharp way, a real question that voters have to answer. Same question was raised in the debates by the moderator -- just not so artfully.

[powergirl]

78. You're burnt!

Hasn't the Clinton campaign figured out that Obama has a rapid response team that is ready to respond to these "attacks." I am an Obama supporter - but at the end of the day I want to be able to state that our (Democratic) candidates conducted themselves with class and integrity. That ain't happening right now with Sen. Clinton.