Obama's Response Ad: "Ringing" - "In a dangerous world, it’s judgment that matters."

[jefferson_dem]

Obama: 'Ringing'

Obama is up in Texas with his own red phone spot, a direct response to Clinton that doesn't name her, but stresses the contrast between their stances on the beginning of the war in Iraq.

"In a dangerous world, it’s judgment that matters," says the narrator.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0208/Obama_Ringing.html

[NYCGirl]

1. Man, they're good!

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[Divernan]

81. Got this from a poster on another blog - suggested Obama ad.

"That was quick. Here's another new ad.

It's 3 a.m. A phone rings and you see Obama sit up in his bed in his pjs. He picks up the phone. It's Hillary on the other line, saying "come outside and debate me." Barack hangs up and goes back to bed. Michelle asks, "who was that honey?" Barack says, "Hillary again" (sighs). The ad ends with the caption. Barack Obama. Ready on day one. "

[bicentennial_baby]

2. Ha! Rapid response y'all!

:woohoo:

[Flabbergasted]

3. Works well and also directed at McCain.

[Kittycat]

9. Agreed. Great Ad, Great Response - 2 in 1!

Gobama!

[sniffa]

4. Again, his rapid response team is fast and lethal

K&R. :thumbsup:

[RBInMaine]

5. Good ! Hit back, and hit back hard.

[flyarm]

6. "In a dangerous world, it’s judgment that matters," says the narrator.

what kind of judgement did Obama have when he had Rezko help him buy his home?

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., approached a well-known Illinois political fixer under active federal investigation, Antoin "Tony" Rezko, for "advice" as he sought to find a way to buy a house shortly after being elected to the United States Senate.

snip:

Rezko had been widely reported to be under investigation by the U.S. attorney and the FBI at the time Obama contacted him and has since been indicted on corruption charges by a federal grand jury in a case that prosecutors say involves bribes, kickbacks and "efforts to illegally obtain millions of dollars."




http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4111483

[GoreVidalIsGod]

8. What kind of judgement did Hillary have when she allowed Norman Hsu to donate millions

to her campaign? hmmm? hmmm?

[Kittycat]

12. Go away with that crap.

You know there is nothing in that story. It's been investigated to death, and Obama was the ONLY bidder on that house - which he purchased at a fair price.

It's our Governor that's in trouble - which also spells trouble for a lot of the good work he did in our state for kids :(

[jefferson_dem]

15. Very soon, that nonsense will be off DU and relegated to freeper-type boards.

Soon.

[Kittycat]

20. 5-12 days and counting.

[flyarm]

63. excuse me ..why should i go away? i have been an elected delegate for my state..

and i have worked my entire adult life for the dem party..and may be just maybe if people had asked all the questions about little lord pissy pants ..instead of fawning over him like a rock star..my co-workers may not have died on 9/11 , and if people had demanded answers instead of ignoring all the questions many of us had in 2000, maybe my 2 neighbors sons would still be alive that died on 9/11.
and who are you to tell me to go away?

i was told to go away in 2001 by little lord pissy pants sheeple too..instead i fought for truth about 9/11..i worked with Pilots for truth..i went nose to nose with a 9/11 commissioner..i did public speaking to make people aware of the lies they were told..i worked diligently with people fighting for the truth..i worked with the Jersey Gals who, several, live in my hometown..get to people who could help them with inside info..

I worked with the Kerry campaign ,I have two homes..and in my other home..in Fla.. I Housed a field rep for them who worked 3 large counties in Florida and I helped run the headquarters for that area, i fed the field staff for over 2 months ..i ran an election for delegate for my state and won the most votes in my area...and i donated a shit load of money to the dem party.
and still do...

i was a volunteer worker for Edwards and traveled to Iowa for almost 2 weeks..and also to South Carolina...all on my own dime.

so really who are you to tell me to go away?

i didn't go away when people acted like you for little lord pissy pants, and you certainly are not going to make me go away either.

I flew as a flight crew for most of my life..i have worked in the public arena...my entire adult life..i have worked with the public... that can be very rude ...similar to what i am seeing here with Obam's supporters.

Sad but you do not do your candidate any good.

I * will * continue to ask questions..and since one of our candidates have not been vetted..i want the damn answers.

people's lives depend on that..i know, my co-workers are no longer here to fight for answers!

this is not a joy ride for me..this is serious business to me..i do not want to have a damn beer with a president nor do i want a rock star..i want someone who will be the right person for the office...so if that makes me an asshole for asking questions and pointing out facts....so be it. So if i have to keep asking questions ..you nor anyone else will silence me.

I also know Gov Ryan (R) Ill. was one indicted person Fitzgerald was going after..and that one indictment multiplied and became 60.



fly

[Kittycat]

76. None of your experience

Explains your swiftboating slams. And what the hell does having two homes have to do with anything? I'm a homeowner as well, have been since I was 21. We aren't measuring penis sizes or bank accounts right now. But what you are doing is giving imaginary legs to something that has none. If you want to talk about vetted, get your gal to release her tax returns, calendar and notes from her time in the W.H. and beyond. Start asking questions about your candidates campaign donations, and her husband's shady deals. Obama is small time in comparison to the clinton's when it comes to scandals, and you know it. But you also know it's the Clinton playbook to attack someone's strength with your own weakness. Your candidate needs to think about saving herself a little room for grace, so that she still has a career at all when this is said and none. She's basically running a repuke campaign, right down to her fear mongering. And they greatly underestimated Obama's ability to organize by assuming she was the presumptive nominee. Now they're getting their asses handed to them, and rightfully so.

[flyarm]

79. i guess you missed my point..not that i expect differently..

my point about two homes is i live in NJ where i flew out of and where my neighbors were the jersey gals..and i am a delegate in Florida..it was merely an explanation and if you weren't so hell bent on being nasty, you might have figured out my explanation .


oh and the point of my first post was ..it was Obama's commercial questioning someone else's judgement..i do not believe it is sliming, while pointing out Obama's judgement has not been all that hot either..and i posted facts..facts that while under federal investigation Obama went to Rezko and had him help him buy a home..since you are a homeowner, as you state, and i am as well..the last person i would ask for advice is a man under federal investigation..if you think that is good judgement so be it..i do not.

fly

[anigbrowl]

25. And everyone knows that the trail is about Rezko's relationship with Gov Blagejovic

I hope they're paying you to go through with this daily idiocy. I couldn't take the humiliation myself.

[ebdarcy]

29. Yeah, you're right.

The IWR vote pales in comparison to Rezko.

[Alexander]

43. Patrick Fitzergald says Obama has not been accused of any wrongdoing.

When will you smearfest Shillbots get that through your thick skulls?

[flyarm]

84. can you please supply me with a link where Fitzgerald says what you claim?

thank you...

although i would find that highly unlikely as Fitzgerald is pretty closed mouth about his prosecutions..i would like to see for myself where Fitz exonerates Obama, as you have stated here..

thanks.

fly

[Pirate Smile]

45. Wolfson wanted to know why the media wasn't pressing this issue - here is why:

The Real Story of Rezko and Obama: 10 Myths Debunked

by JohnKWilson
Tue Jan 29, 2008 at 02:20:40 PM PST

Note: I'm the author of a new book, Barack Obama: This Improbable Quest, but I'm not part of the Obama campaign.

There’s been a huge amount of misinformation and rumor about Barack Obama’s dealings with Tony Rezko. This is not a new story. At the first Democratic debate in 2007, Brian Williams of NBC asked Obama about his connections to Rezko. The same thing happened on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos. But it’s a complex set of charges, and a lot of details have been falsely reported on blogs and in the mainstream press.

Here are 10 myths debunked about Obama and Rezko:

JohnKWilson's diary :: ::
Myth #1: Obama did legal work for Rezko

Claim: Hillary Clinton during a debate denounced Obama for "representing your contributor, Rezko, in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago."

The truth: According to Factcheck.org, "Obama was associated with a law firm that represented the community groups working with Rezko on several deals. There's no evidence that Obama spent much time on them, and he never represented Rezko directly. So it was wrong for Clinton to say he was ‘representing ... Rezko.’ That's untrue."

Myth #2: Obama knew Rezko was a slumlord

Claim: The Chicago Sun-Times reported that in 1997, Rezko’s company failed to turn the heat back on in one of his buildings, while giving $1,000 to Obama’s campaign fund.

The truth: There’s no evidence that Obama knew about problems with Rezko’s buildings. A state senator doesn’t deal with tenant complaints, and the Chicago newspapers never reported on Rezko’s problems as a landlord until after he was indicted. According to the Chicago Tribune, "in the years before 2005, Rezko enjoyed a reputation in Illinois as an up-and-coming, even enlightened entrepreneur with a strong interest in the risky low-income and affordable housing markets." http://www.chicagotribune.com/...

Myth #3: Obama underpaid for his house in a deal with Rezko

Claim: Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass wrote: "Rezko paid more than the asking price for the side lot, and Obama paid less than the asking price for the big house. It’s the Chicago way." Kass claimed that Rezko was "Obama's Real Estate Fairy" and this is "the story of the dream house the Obamas wanted and couldn't quite afford and how the Rezkos helped."

The truth: None of this is true. The seller decided to divide the lot in offering it for sale, not Obama or Rezko. Rezko had paid the list price for his lot, not an excessive amount (as the resale value later proved). The owner reportedly had already been offered $625,000 for the side lot, so Rezko didn’t offer any more money and there was no way Obama could have gotten a special deal this way. The only special arrangement Rezko provided was selling the two lots on the same day, which simplified matters for the seller. Obama paid $1.65 million for a house originally priced at $1.95 million. His was the higher of two bids for the main property. It’s not unusual at all in the Chicago real estate business to see a 15 percent price cut on an expensive house that’s been on the market for four months. Nor is it unusual that a vacant lot next door would sell to a condo developer without such a discount. In the Hyde Park market, there are a lot of upper-middle-class residents making six figures, but not very many millionaires (it’s not Lincoln Park or the Gold Coast). Therefore, a pricey mansion is very difficult to sell, while a $300,000 townhouse is very common.

Myth #4: Rezko’s lot was a front (yard) deal

Claim: One blogger declared it was "a $925,000 favor to a sitting US Senator" because "the Rezko property was never intended to be a separate piece of land."

The truth: It’s insane to think that Obama arranged for Rezko to buy the lot as his front yard, and never intended for anyone to develop it. If Obama had arranged such a deal, it would be crazy for him to spend $104,500 to buy part of the land from Rezko. There is not even the slightest evidence to support this notion.

Myth #5: Obama underpaid (or overpaid) for the slice of Rezko’s lot

Claim: John Kass declared: "Obama’s appraiser told him the fair market value of that slice was $40,500. Since that’s one-sixth of the Rezko side, it means Rezko paid $625,000 for property that was actually worth $243,000. That would make Rezko a complete fool. But he’s no fool." Fox News Channel incorrectly reported that Rezko "sold half that lot to Obama for 1/3 its original value."

The truth: The appraiser was clearly wrong (probably basing the low value on the fact that 1/6th of the lot was too small for any house, which would dramatically reduce its value standing alone). That’s why Obama decided to buy 1/6th of Rezko’s lot for 1/6th of what Rezko paid for it ($104,500). A year after the 10-foot-wide strip of land was sold to Obama, a Rezko business associate bought the rest of the lot for $575,000, resulting in a profit for the Rezkos of $54,000 from the two land sales. This sale proved that Obama paid fair market value for his portion of the land.

Myth #6: Obama hasn’t returned all the money linked to Rezko’s donations

Claim: The Chicago Sun-Times accused Obama of downplaying the $50,000–$60,000 in donations he received from Rezko (Rezko, before his legal troubles started, had cohosted a fundraiser for Obama). The newspaper claimed the actual amount was $168,000.

The truth: The Sun Times came up with that figure by counting every donation to Obama from anyone ever associated with Rezko, even if there was no evidence Rezko prompted the donation. Obama donated additional money to charity, but he’s under no obligation (legal or even moral) to return every dollar ever linked to Rezko. If you play a game of "six degrees of separation" with Rezko, he’s linked to almost every politician in Chicago.

Myth #7: Rezko had a special relationship with Obama

Claim: The Clinton campaign denounces "Sen. Obama's 17-year relationship with the indicted influence peddler."

The truth: Rezko attached himself to lots of politicians. Rezko donated money to every major Democratic politician in Illinois, then helped organize a $3.5 million fundraiser for President George W. Bush in 2003. After giving large campaign donations to Democratic Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich, Rezko arranged to have his buddies appointed by Blagojevich to state boards such as the Teachers’ Retirement System Board and the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board. With his friend Stuart Levine, Rezko threatened to hold up a $220 million deal to invest teachers’ pension fund money unless $2 million was paid to Levine or $1.5 million was donated to Blagojevich’s campaign. Rezko and Levine also demanded a $1 million cut from a developer to build a hospital. Rezko was indicted for pretending to sell his Papa John’s pizza restaurants while secretly maintaining control of them, and fraudulently using the transaction to get $10 million in loans. It is Blagojevich, not Obama, who did favors for Rezko. Rezko’s eye for scouting political talent was amazing, but he did not capitalize on Obama’s influence. Obama said he had known Rezko for twenty years and "he had never asked me for anything. I’ve never done any favors for him."

Myth #8: Obama did favors for Rezko

Claim: Chicago Sun-Times revealed that in 1998, Obama wrote a letter endorsing a low-income housing development for which Rezko was a codeveloper. As the Sun-Times put it, "NOT A FAVOR? As a state senator, he went to bat for now-indicted developer’s deal." Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass wrote, "No favors? When you transcend politics and walk on water, I guess it all depends on what your definition of favor is."

The truth: The common definition of a favor in this context is a political action done in exchange for donations. Rezko’s lawyer reported that Rezko had not asked Obama to write the letter. Instead, Obama (along with a local state representative and an alderman) endorsed the project because it had widespread community support. It’s difficult to imagine any politician on the south side of Chicago who wouldn’t have a routine letter written to endorse government funding for affordable housing and social services for low-income senior citizens in that area. When it came to political influence, Obama didn’t do any favors for Rezko. The Chicago Tribune reported, "when Rezko pushed for passage in Springfield of a major gambling measure, Obama vocally opposed it."

Myth #9: Obama should have known about Rezko’s sleazy background

Claim: The Chicago Tribune, although endorsing Obama, wrote: "His assertion in network TV interviews last week that nobody had indications Rezko was engaging in wrongdoing strains credulity: Tribune stories linked Rezko to questionable fundraising for Gov. Rod Blagojevich in 2004."

The truth: At the time Obama bought his house, there was no public indication of Rezko’s problems. When Obama bought a small strip of Rezko’s land in 2006, rumors were swirling around Chicago that the federal government was investigating Rezko, but he wasn’t indicted until October 2006. The Tribune stories before 2006 reveal that Rezko was a tightly connected political player, but the evidence of criminal misconduct wasn’t proven.

Myth #10: Obama hasn’t been forthcoming about his mistakes with Rezko

Claim: The Chicago Tribune editorialized, "Obama has been too self-exculpatory."

The truth: Obama has been honest about the mistake he made, and the fact that Rezko was trying to buy future influence with him. Obama declared, "I am the first one to acknowledge that it was a boneheaded move for me to purchase this 10-foot strip from Rezko, given that he was already under a cloud of concern. I will also acknowledge that from his perspective, he no doubt believed that by buying the piece of property next to me that he would, if not be doing me a favor, it would help strengthen our relationship." Obama’s mistake was in allowing the appearance of impropriety. He never actually did anything wrong. And that’s the key issue here.

Despite all of these rumors about Obama and Rezko, none of the evidence indicates any actual wrongdoing. Conservative Republican Tom Bevan called the evidence against Obama "pretty darn weak." Conor Clarke of the New Republic reported that Obama’s real estate deal with Rezko was a "nonscandal." According to Clarke, "journalists have followed the smoke and haven’t found the fire. At that point, accusing someone of something that looks wrong stops making sense."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/29/171056/015

[City Lights]

7. Sweet!

His team is absolutely amazing. :thumbsup: :bounce:

[Kittycat]

10. Kicking #5 for the Greatest

[easy_b94]

11. I love this John Mcmuffin look out

[loveangelc]

13. damn, that was quick!

[DefenseLawyer]

14. Someone needs to tell Mark Penn

Never bring a sword to a gunfight.

[Hepburn]

86. Sword???

LOL....more like a dull steak knife, IMO! :hi:

[Straight Shooter]

16. All this outrage about Hillary's fear-mongering ad, but Obama concurs the world is dangerous.

Interesting. That would seem to be a form of fear-mongering, as well.

Obama's hindsight judgment is as good as anyone else's.

[jefferson_dem]

22. Were you hiding under your bed hoping the Swift Boat Liars would just go away?

If you launch bullshit attacks, be prepared to get hit between the eyes with the truth.

They are reeling in Hillaryland.

[OnionPatch]

72. There's a difference.

This is a response to an attack. If it wasn't and he had brought this out before her ad, then I would see it as fear-mongering. But this is a response and personally, I'm glad we have a candidate who will respond to attacks.

[Straight Shooter]

80. An "attack." I've seen more vicious tumbleweeds than Hillary's ad. n/t

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

17. Told Ya. He's Engaging In The EXACT SAME TACTIC. Course, I Don't Expect His Supporters To Condemn

his use of it, like they did Hillary's.

Just goes to show I was in fact right in the other thread, and he was being hypocritical by condemning the tactic while using it himself. Not a bad response, and not a bad ad, but it is playing to fear same as she was. Can't wait to see all the biased clouded minded justification of HIS doing it though. Oughta be a hoot!!!!!

On a more positive note though, I do like seeing his responses of late. I think he's proving more and more he can stand up to what's thrown against him. At least for now, he's been doing so.

[K Gardner]

19. Tactic = Copy Hillary's ad, revise words. Your spin is pathetic.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

23. He Condemned Using Fear, But Now Did The Same Thing.

He could either condemn her using such tactics and consider that his response, or he could mimic the tactic and create a fear ad of his own like hers, but using some facts as support. You can't do both. If you do, you're a hypocrite. It really is quite simple.

I do think it's a good ad though, since she already took it to that level. But that doesn't mean it isn't a bit hypocritical.

[anigbrowl]

30. Wake up: it IS the Hillary ad

same footage, same music until about 10 seconds in. The Hillary campaign had a high-resolution copy on their website, so Obama's video team just downloaded it and used the first few seconds to respond to her ad in the most direct manner possible. Think of it as a remix - whether you prefer it to the original or not depends on who you support. It's a clever tactic, because a lot of folks who liked the original ad will start watching it again, only to be surprised by the different direction it goes in after the fist few seconds.

Obama's team saved a bunch of $$$ money though, by not shooting any new footage :-)

So I don't think it's hypocritical because it's a direct response to her ad rather than another in the same style. I might be plagiarism (if that sort of thing really mattered in political campaigns), but legally speaking it's acceptable to 'quote' someone else as the video editors have done here.

[K Gardner]

32. Save your breath. Remember, your talking to a Hillary supporter. Upside down/opposite world.

[anigbrowl]

37. Oh yeah, I forgot. Well, Obama IS losing.

:-)

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

53. Wrong.

I support them both, and can actually partake in the rarity here that is objectivity. You might wanna try it sometime, if you can figure out how.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

36. AARRRRRGHHHHH!!!!! What Is So Hard To Understand About This?

You can't use the same ad and at the same time condemn its use to begin with! That's the very definition of hypocrisy!

Now personally, I don't care that he used it. It was a smart response and since she approached that level first, I have no problem with his direct use of it back. But it is his declaration against the use of fear tactics that comes into play, since you can't have it both ways! It absolutely is hypocritical on its face. If he was going to respond with the ad, he should've foregone the condemnation of the tactic. If he was going to condemn the tactic, he should've foregone the use of the same ad for the same purposes. Jesus, how blind can some of you be? :crazy:

[Alexander]

40. It's called "parody". It's effective. That's why Obama's winning.

He's mocking her ridiculous ad, the same way she mocked him in Providence.

Except his tactics are working. And he's winning.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

54. Wrong. He's Using Her Own Ad Against Her, While Incorporating The Same Fear Tactic.

I think he did a good job by doing so. But it was still hypocritical of him to condemn the tactic, then use it himself. If you were able to think a bit clearly, I think you'd readily be able to see that.

[anigbrowl]

41. I'm wondering the same thing about you.

"You can't use the same ad and at the same time condemn its use to begin with! That's the very definition of hypocrisy!"

If you make an ad with a particular tone and I do a different ad with the same tone, it's hypocrisy for me to complain about your ad. Agreed.

But if I actually rip of your ad, then I'm quoting it and then offering a different conclusion in response. I have quoted the opening line of your post as the opening line of mine. But it doesn't mean I agree with you, does it?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

55. What On Earth Are You Talking About?

How does your analogy possibly apply? Agree with what?

He used the same fear tactics. In fact, he even used the same ad. He didn't use the ad to condemn it, he used the ad to put the thought in voters minds that it IS a dangerous world, and you SHOULD think about who answers that phone, lest you be in danger. But when thinking about who should answer that phone, ask yourself the right questions: His questions. Still using fear. Still using the same tactic. He condemned the use of that tactic earlier, but now is using it himself. How can you possibly stand here and say that's not the case? Is he NOT saying that if we don't choose the one who showed better judgment, we'd be worse off in this dangerous world? If he's not saying that, then what IS he saying? Jesus, the clouded vision here is astounding.

[ClassWarrior]

47. No you can't QUOTE something to CRITICIZE it. You're supposed to do an...

...interpretive dance about it!!



NGU.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

56. Ummmmmm... Huh?

:shrug:

[ClassWarrior]

59. It must be a pity to be so clueless.

NGU.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

62. I Do Feel Pity For Many In This Thread, You Are Correct.

But maybe instead of your enigmatic bullshit, you could actually maybe address the point or somethin... :hi:

[ClassWarrior]

64. Ahhh, the "I know you are but what am I?" defense. And on a thread...

...purportedly about copycat behavior.

:rofl:

NGU.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

66. I Didn't Say You Were Anything. But You Still Have Yet To Respond To The Issue. Not Up For The

challenge? That's ok. I know I have a good point, which leaves you only with the ability to act childish. No biggie though. I'm used to seeing that knee jerk behavior from so many in GDP. I still love ya anyway. :hi:

[ClassWarrior]

67. Did you know that the original Clinton ad plagiarizes a John McBush ad?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPadP7eAO9Y

No biggie though. I'm used to seeing that kind of childish, kneejerk behavior from so many in GDP.

:rofl:

NGU.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

70. Yes, I Did. Course, That's Completely Irrelevant To The Issue At Hand.

Are you going to address the actual issue I raised? Or are ya just gonna keep dancing around it with nonsensical unrelated stuff while avoiding having to confront the actual points that were raised?

3 replies from you now, all nonsensical, not one of which actually addresses the point I was making. Is this all you are capable of, or do you actually have what it takes to reply with intellect and address the actual context of my initial post? Just wondering. If ya can't hang, ya can't hang. I'll forgive ya for it. :hi:

[ClassWarrior]

73. You actually believe what you post is coherent?

Hoooo-boyyyy...

:crazy:

NGU.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

75. So Now A 4th Straight Nonsensical Reply From You, While Still Proving Unable To Refute My Points.

You look quite silly acting like that. So I ask again: Is that all you are capable of, or can you actually refute the points I made? Personally, I don't think you can. Not only because they were good points, but because I don't think you have the capability of being objective enough to make a reasoned return argument. That's why you are only resorting to these childish and empty nonsensical replies, since that's all you've got in your arsenal. If you do in fact have some ability to respond to the points, then by all means do so. I'd love to hear what you actually have to say, rather than this petty empty childish crap you're responding with. But if you can't, you can't, and I'll just lean back contently knowing once again I made a good point that some could only respond with emptiness to. :hi:

[ClassWarrior]

77. So coherently tell me, in one sentence, what points I'm supposed to address?

NGU.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

78. Ok.

He was being hypocritical by condemning these very fear tactics earlier, yet now is using the same tactic against her in response.

[K Gardner]

18. Good lord ! He must have a Production Crew on-call ! She simply can't touch him. Its a waste

of time and money for her to try.

[anigbrowl]

34. We;;, it's a ripoff of her advert.

You can download the hi-quality footage from Hillary's website so it was very easy. I could have put it together in about 1-2 hours. All you need is a computer and a decent-quality microphone. Makes me wish I'd gotten involved his campaign a year or more ago, maybe I'd be getting paid to remix Hillary's ads now!

I'm kind of sorry I didn't see Hillary's ad earlier, but I'll be ready to jump on the next one so I can spoof it on YouTube or so.

[K Gardner]

38. Let us know when you do something like that.. we can spread it around :-)

[anigbrowl]

44. Dammit - now I have to keep a window open on hillaryclinton.com at all times

Me and my big mouth :-O

[redstate_democrat]

21. Folks, this is the Obama Machine

They are lethal. Obama Machine > Clinton Machine.

[ariesgem]

24. You got that right. n/t

[anonymous171]

26. If only Obama had been in charge of Kerry's campaign... nt

[ariesgem]

27. Damn. That was fast.

[MadBadger]

28. Imagine if Kerry had responded this quickly to the Swiftboaters.

[grantcart]

31. there are republican consultants somewhere writing a memo to Sen. McCain

Sen. McCain another area that we anticipate a significant problem is that there quick response time can be measured in seconds. We propose a Rapid Strategic Counter Room that will provide the same service for about $3.2 million.

[K Gardner]

35. ROFL !! In spite of the stress and tension, I imagine the Obama team is having

a blast now that things are getting FIRED UP! And they're obviously.. READY TO GO !

Move over Hillary.. the Machine is gearing up :woohoo:

[Alexander]

33. Wow, that was quick. When was the Hillary Clinton ad released?

This may have been released on the same day.

[jefferson_dem]

39. Quick indeed. Hillary's was released at around 9:00 am.

Here's the DU thread -- http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=98874&mesg_id=98874

[NJSecularist]

42. That is a very good ad

Hopefully he puts some big money on the airwaves to air it in Texas.

[DemGa]

46. But Obama has said he doesn't know what he would have done

No matter -- this will work on his uninformed supporters. This is obvious because even the informed Obama supporters don't care about this fact. They just like the gotcha!

[Binka]

51. But But But

Sheesh give it a rest. Have a blessed day and now sadly I must place you on ignore. Good bye. :hi:

[DemGa]

57. Have a "blessed day" you are on ignore? Whatever.

If you truly wanted to bless someone, you would not tell them they would be ignored.

This is in line with the tactics of Obama -- duplicity.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

60. Are You Kidding????? THAT Comment Is Worthy Of Them Being Put On Ignore????

Oh. My. God. :wow:

:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

[BlueStater]

48. Yawn

I was right about the Iraq war, too. I deserve to be president.

[grantcart]

49. here is a you tube that explains how they do it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOKPpGx03GQ

[Major Hogwash]

50. At least he didn't make the ad I would've made.

Of Hillary and Bubba arguing over who was going to answer the phone!

[Tennessee Gal]

52. What proves that Obama has better judgment than anyone else?

When has he been under pressure to make a significant decision with millions of lives in the balance?

When has he had to cast that type of vote or ask others to cast a vote giving him any kind of responsibility relating to our national security or our safety?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

58. Nothing Does, Really. But It Is Safe To Say He'd Have Really Good Judgment, And

though may not be immune from making mistakes, would be a great president as well. Not sure he has better judgment than Hillary, but I know for certain he has far better judgment than mccain.

[KLee]

65. ;)

I guess we see what has happened when the ones touted with "experience" have had to make that decision.


:sarcasm:

[Tennessee Gal]

74. So, because those with experience made the wrong choice, makes you believe that someone

with no experience at all would absolutely make the right choice in all decisions? And that makes sense to you?

Obama spoke out when he had absolutely no responsibility for anything. And that is no proof of what he would do under intense pressure with lives on the line.

[blogslut]

61. Rapido

Point goes to team Obama

[VenusRising]

68. This is the most amazing campaign organization ever!

:kick: and a Rec.

[workinclasszero]

69. Love the rapid response to Hillary's Bushco fear ad!

:applause:

[TheDonkey]

71. Good good good rapid response. Keep it up O

[Cha]

82. If nothing else Obama is helping to get

the word out that the War on Iraq was started on a Bogus Premise..no wonder so many in the military are supporting him. Obama and his team are the anti-m$$$m.

Obama is also getting the word out that he and his rapid response team will be ready on el dia de uno.

[Arugula Latte]

83. Obama is showing the cowering wimpy Dems. how it's done.

:applause:

[Hepburn]

85. Again....Hillary looks the fool.

What surprises me is how she and her campaign are leaving themselves wide open for the obvious come back. She looks like a total IDIOT with that 3:00 AM phone ad.

I wish she would just go the hell away and stop being and embarrassment to the Democratic Party.

JMHO

[TexasObserver]

87. Hillary is playing Checkers. Obama is playing Chess. And it Shows!!

She is simply outclassed by Obama in every way. He's much smarter than her and her team. Every time she thinks she's throwing a round house punch, the next thing she hears is a standing eight count.