Obama antiwar speech becomes fodder for Clinton

With the Democratic presidential race seemingly settled into a two-person battle (sorry, John Edwards), Hillary Clinton is honing her arguments against Barack Obama. She spotlighted one Sunday during her "Meet the Press" appearance and -- with a nod to Walter Mondale's famed (and effective) "Where's the beef" line against Gary Hart in the party's 1984 tiff -- the case she made against him can be characterized as: "There's only a speech."

The address in question was the one he gave in early October 2002 opposing an American invasion of Iraq. Clinton and her aides long have chafed over the mileage he has gotten from it, given the difference in their stature at the time.

He was an obscure state senator in Illinois, representing a district in Chicago with a strong antiwar constituency. She was a high-profile U.S. senator from New York, which suffered the most grievous losses on 9/11. He did not face a vote on the Iraq issue. She did, and later that October supported the congressional resolution that paved the way for the war a few months later.

From the start of his White House bid, Obama and his supporters have pointed to the 2002 speech (posted here on his campaign website) as the prime example that good judgment trumps experience. But Sunday, Clinton decided to try to use it for her own purposes, asserting that it demonstrates Obama may be long on rhetoric, but he's short on accomplishment.

"The story of his campaign is really the story of that speech and his opposition to Iraq," she told "Meet the Press" moderator Tim Russert just a few minutes into the program....

"I think it is fair to ask questions about, 'Well, what did you do after the speech was over?' And when he became a (U.S.) senator, he didn't go to the floor of the Senate to condemn the war in Iraq for 18 months. He didn't introduce legislation against the war in Iraq. He voted against timelines and deadlines initially," she said.

As the lengthy interview proceed, twice more she returned -- in a somewhat scoffing manner -- to the speech Obama so frequently mentions himself with such pride.

"Look, if you are running for president based primarily on a speech you gave in 2002 and speeches you have given since, most notably at the Democratic convention, then I think it is fair to say we need to know more beyond the words," she said.

And again: "The story of his campaign is premised on that speech."

Before Sunday, it was her husband, Bill Clinton, who most publicly had sought to take the glow off Obama's early opposition to the war. His remarks were made Monday in New Hampshire, and at the time were widely seen as a petulant response to his wife's expected loss to Obama the next day in the state's primary.

What happened, of course, was an upset win for her. And with that now has come a full-throated effort by Camp Clinton to depreciate a key Obama asset.

You can watch the Clinton interview here.

-- Don Frederick

Comments

[Enough]

Clearly, Obama has no experience to be President.

Foreign policy experience while attending school in another country?

I don't think so.

Now, he's presented his own stimulus plan (which of course, had to be bigger than Hillary's).

Where did he get this financial experience, while playing Monopoly?

Allowing others to pull the race card, while he pretends to be above it?

No, I'm not buying this. He's in it, deep.

In the end, we're going to see he's just all hype.

Obama is a liar!

[Kyle in San Francisco]

Top of the Ticket has become my favorite site for campaign news. Thank you Mr Frederick and thanks to the LA Times. Your intrepidity will be remembered.
p.s. You didn't mention that Obama also voted in favor of funding the Iraq War on at least four separate occasions, like Clinton and Edwards. And he voted for the Patriot Act...just like Clinton and Edwards. Remember, just one more week to register as a republican (don't worry, it doesn't hurt that bad). The Peace candidate is Ron Paul. Thanks.

[Marks]

Hillary will not get points harping on what Obama said in 2002.

Obstruction to Hillary becoming President is Bill. Bill having a third term. Hillary claims she can change Washington, by taking Bill back to the White House?

Does not compute. Her supporters are ready to throw sexism is the reason people don't want a woman President. They have to put her in the office now! She's the only chance ever?

I'll repeat it everyday if necessary, America is poorly served by rewarding the White House to two families. Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton.

The world will frown. It's more important than ever that we show the World that America is changing. Not repeating times again and again in our government.

If Democrats think Republicans want that or will work agreeably with her as President, forget it! GOP woman will cross over to vote for Hillary because she's a lady?

People will get their partisan feelings up like never before.

We're going through the repeated times. Didn't George W. hire friends and supporters of his father's government? Hillary will reach back and go retro pulling Billy's old buddies from obscurity to the D.C. spotlights again.

People say experience matters, of course it does. Over experience matters too. We have the Decider in Washington who acted with his set in ways. Bush has made horrible decisions and where is the apology or acknowledgment White House made a mistake?

A Presidential candidate with a willingness to learn is needed today. I'm for bipartisan hiring in the White House. Obama is acknowledging there has to be some cooperation in Washington between the parties. The best way to have less partisanship is bipartisan hiring and appointments.

The GOP is weakened long as the focus is on Bush's decisions. If Democrats decide their nominee is Hillary, then the GOP has past ammunition to shell Hillary and Bill with.

Hillary is attacking Obama statements in 2002. Hillary will be distracted answering questions about her actions back in the 90's.

Who they pardoned will be a big story. What did those pardoned people do with their new life?

We're repeating the past in many ways with Hillary as President. What some felt in the 90's having the Clinton's running the White House isn't going to be repeated again.

This is a new Century we're we can define a new Presidency, not to repeat it again.

Few can say repeating under a Bush has been worth it. We've had 12 years under a Bush. I don't want 12 years under a Clinton.

I want change in Washington and Obama fits that description.

GOP candidates like to bring up Reagan's name, why? He sent Rumsfeld to shake Saddam's hand. Reagan ramped up spending on the military machines that didn't work like B2 bomber. Bush has the Osprey Helicopter transport for Marines failing apart in the same expensive ways.

Billion dollar per truck that's a little more resistance to road side bombs. The Iraq war was a fight by choice, its not supposed to be bankrupting future economics of our Federal Budget.

The Military decision will matter. Former command and x soldiers. Current soldiers around the world. They might be picking a candidate with no military experience. Some x military are coming out for Obama.

They acknowledge, he won't be a Decider. A definitive change from the current President.

Bill shot on Usama Bin Laden and the Taliban. He missed. They think Hillary will miss too, because its the same mental consideration. Bill's enemies were hers!

Don't people think Hillary and Bill think together after all the years?

Enemies have been at war with Clinton's around the world, they won't respect a do over. Clinton's old enemies can get publicity again. Clinton's in the White House will bring a lot of things back.

John McCain only wants one term he says. I say he's too old already, been in government longer than necessary. His rubber stamping Bush's war, doesn't mean he'll change anything. Everyone surely thanks him for his sacrifice in Service but that was a long time and different age ago.

McCain is not a change agent for Washington. Because he's x military doesn't mean he should be President.

[Warren Ben]

Hillary Clinton is more of the same. She has so much experience at changing nothing. Per the previous comment; Bush/ Clinton/ Bush/ Clinton? I sincerely hope not.
The Clintons have so much dirt one cannot begin to think that anything will get done in Washington. Some of the dirt includes Vince Foster etc. If anyone is in any doubt about the "shiftyness" of the Clintons, I invite them to look up the "Peter Paul" interviews on youtube. There are so many cases of irregularities with the Clintons that they should be behind bars for a very long time.
Another issue not discussed, the Clintons are by no means, common folk. Chelsea Clinton completed her studies at Oxford University and landed a job that paid her a six fugure salary. How many graduates with degrees in worthless subjects that Chelsea has, get six figure salaries right out of college? These people are just so dirty.
Hillary is rewriting history to claim the accomplishments of others, as her own!
Last point, a white woman from Park Ridge, IL (one of the wealthiest suburbs of Chicago), cannot possibly understand what people are going through in the US. Obama is a man of all the people of the great country who just happens to be black. We should give him a chance.
Change cannot come from the same dirty people that have spent an entire life in politics enriching themselves.

[rawdawgbuffalo]

like she has a war record...who ever wins they will have MAJOR problems . poor mr or mrs next president

not to change the subject, but u think Bill and Hill paid BETs Rob Johnson

[Dave]

Thank you for this article.

While I am a staunch supporter of Barack Obama for President, it is still essential that we examine candidates deeply to judge their qualifications.

In defense of my candidate of choice, based on his own testimony, once he became a senator it was obvious that an immediate pullout from Iraq would be disastrous. So he supported the troops as best he could, funding the war effort.

At first he did not support timetables for withdrawal, but when it became obvious that the situation was becoming a disaster (and that there were no weapons of mass destruction), he advocated for a phased withdrawal.

He is not perfect, and I acknowledge that, but he did come out against the war at a time when almost the entire media empire was rallying for it. That alone is courage and judgment to me.

[John Helding]

Here's the test.
If the war had come out wonderfully, then right now the Clinton's would have been all over Obama for his 2002 speech. Of course then it wouldn't have just been a speech but a grevious error in judgment, unpatriotic to boot and what you'd have to expect from an inexperience State Senator.

Stop it Hilllary. Stop it Bill. The fact is, in public, taking on a big political risk that the two of you certainly didn't Obama opposed the Iraq war before it happened. Al Gore did the same thing (of course you might start criticizing him as well, eh?) You two didn't. Just accept the facts and stop trying to sow doubt and half-truths. You're swiftboating big time. Stop it! You'll harm the Democratic effort in the process. But of course, maybe you don't really care about that. You're certainly acting as though you don't.

[saraz]

This 60 year old white woman thinks Barack Obama is the most electable Democrat. I hope I live to see a Democratic woman as president. But not Hillary Clinton. Let’s face it; Hillary’s political tin ear has been amply demonstrated during the last week. I fear she will not fare well under the intense public scrutiny of a national campaign.

And her attempt to paint Obama as somehow less experienced or substantive sits very poorly with me. Obama is a U. S. Senator and a top Harvard Law School graduate who was elected by his Harvard peers to be president of the Harvard Law Review.

He could have leveraged his credentials and connections to work in a top corporate law firm, as Hillary Clinton did. Instead, he went into public interest law and taught at University of Chicago Law School before being elected the U.S. senate.

Unlike Hillary Clinton, he has shown leadership skills by coming out publicly against the war in Iraq before it became fashionable. He has served 11 years in elected office to Hillary's 7. But that is not the point. The point is that he has the intelligence to make the best appointments and pick the best advisors, has a record that shows a commitment to progressive causes, and is clearly the most articulate and charismatic of the candidates, which will help him represent our country abroad, build coalitions at home and win in November.

Current polls have shown Obama and Clinton running about equally against McCain. Obama’s greater charisma will render him more likely to maintain and increase his lead over McCain during the long course of a tough presidential campaign.

As to the implicit concerns that a black man can't win, I would refer readers to the March 13, 20007 Gallup poll (consistent with other polls), that shows 84% of Americans completely comfortable voting for a black, 77% for a woman, and only 42% for a 72 year old (McCain's age).

[Calista]

Dear Obama: Good intentions aren't good enough. You are mostly all-talk and not action.

This is one of many reasons I am voting for and supporting Hillary Clinton for president!

Angeleno's for Hillary!

[Paul]

I've already heard two people say something rather significant to me: while Obama or Clinton may win the Democratic nomination, neither will win the presidency. When I asked them why, their response was the same: America is not "ready" for a black president nor is America "ready" for a female president. Has anyone else heard others say that? Can this be true? Do racism and sexism run so deep through this country that we would reject excellent presidential candidates because of such illogical biases? Would YOU vote against Obama and/or Clinton in part because of their race/sex?

[Rick Sroka]

Obama's my man;
He's no flash in the pan!
Let Hillary belittle
Obama's short fiddle.
The song that she plays
Will not cut short his days
As the candidate exemplar
Who exceeds her by far!

[Keith]

And if that doesn't do the trick, she can always cry some more, for the children.

[guyfawkes]

Voting against the Iraq war means opposing the war. Voting to fund the war means supporting the troops. Barack Obama has always opposed the war and has always supported the troops.

Obama is the only Democratic candidate who can win against all of the Republican candidates. That truth is as simple as can be, and everyone paying attention to this race knows this. So if you don't want four more years in Iraq, if you don't want a war with Iran, if you don't want four more years to start yet another pointless war, and if you don't want bin Laden running free for another four years, then throw your support behind Obama.

[Steve]

It's funny how Republicans say they won't work with Clinton. They don't work with any Democrats! They are already bi-partisan! They do buy Democrats, however, that's why the top 1% own 22% of the wealth, when they only used to own 7% -- they brought Democrats to get tax breaks for the rich, dismantle pension plans, healthcare, and education.

[CALIFORNIAMARTY]

If you liked Bill Clinton's presidency, even if you cannot stand Hillary, you can still expect more of the same. We all know that Hillary and Bill both will be running the country. If your taste runs to the far-left intern of charismatic oratory and your hatred for Hillary and Bill overcomes your good judgment, then vote for Obama. Obama, a former Chicago "community organizer" punted hundreds of time voting "present" on tithe tough issues facing the Illinois legislature. He authored no one major piece of legislation but he looked good and has the oratory In the debating hot air society of the Senate. He had done nothing of importance for only one year, when he has the unmitigated chutzpah to announce for POTUS.
Never a prosecutor, attorney general, mayor, governor, businessperson, private sector employee, ambassador, war hero, military member, he who never served in the ROTC or Eagle Scouts for that matter, says we should ignore General Petreaus, a military legend and run to the Baghdad airport ASAP allowing al Qaeda to claim victory and to make a comeback from their defeats, the victories our troops fought and died to obtain. He ignores those Iraqis who joined us and voted for a friendly government and would be content tossing them all to the wolves, women and children alike. Obama is the new Neville Chamberlain.
His judgement TO IGNORE butchering tyrant who had murdered the Kurds and ignored all U.N.Resolutions for twelve years was flawed. When Saddam invaded Kuwait, where was Obama?

[Dwight]

How Obama responds to "Where's the Beef" will decide this election.

Obama is very smart and very savvy.

Can he find the responses he needs?

Logic like this would seem pretty simple and powerful:

"1) Jimmy Carter was a hard-working, well-intentioned policy wonk who turned to his own smarts to get things done, and had one just one term.

2) Ronald Reagan used his communicaton skills to go directly to the American people, and had them pressure Congress to move past inertia.

3) This shows that the skill of communicaiton, of motivating and moving the majority of Americans, is essential to governing.

4) When I said with frustration that you are "likable enough", the frustration is how, for whatever reason, you and President Clinton are such divisive figures, who inspire and engage in such anger with a major portion of our electorate.

5) The direct experience of the last 25 years makes clear that the ability to motivate American toward a next genearation of the dream is essential.

6) In making the choice between us, American voters will decide whether they want a detail person like Carter, or a big-picture vision person like Kennedy and Reagan.

[Lupe]

Listening to Obama is torture now. After listening to several speeches I have come to the conclusion there is nothing substantive in those speeches.

Latinos for Hillary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Lolo]

Hillary is on the attack again with her underhanded dirty tricks. Bill yells and shakes his finger at us, telling us in NH that Obama's message is a fairy tale. Then HRC belittles Obama's message of hope, saying it took LBJ to realize MLK's dream, and that "it took a president" to realize the dream. THe Gall!!! Then she tries to minimize the insult of her comments. When prominent blacks speak out against what she says, she accuses Obama of twisting her comments and bringing up the race card. And he hadn't commented yet!! She will stop at nothing to smear Obama and get elected.

[mike khandjian]

My concern is that the American public gives the Clintons a free pass on framing who the other guy is and what the issues are. An educated assessment of what Hilary is saying exposes that she is attempting to use WHAT SHE WANTS US TO THINK regarding Obama - as fact - and it isn't.

And the greater concern is that it is obvious that she will say anything and do anything and act in any way to get what she wants.

My sense is that she is enraged because he has captured (and by the way, I'm undecided) the imaginations and hearts of the Democratic and Independent constituencies - where she believed that it was her turn.

She does have more experience - but as I watch her speak and listen - I see someone who is a deeply mean-spirited, self-consumed, ambitious individual who doesn't care what is true or untrue - and who has no respect for anyone who gets in her way.

In the end Obama may lose because he is not playing dirty.

One example - The Press is missing the point on the MLK/Johnson 'thing' - what she demonstrates in her words, is not racism, but an utter disrespect for all humanity - she is an elitist who thinks that if you are not in power, you are nothing - and that is what is so revolting about what she has said. It is her true philosophy.

[Susan L Martin]

Hooray for Barack Obama! His very run for the presidency is
an act of courage. He knew the Clinton machine would turn on him.
He is ready for the Republicans too. Let's all stand with him. . . he
is putting himself on the line for the rest of us.
I used to have some degree of respect for Bill Clinton but the real Clinton
came out in NH with swagger and bile. Shame on him. We honored Clinton
with our presidency and now he wants to install his wife.
Barack Obama, a man of accomplishment, discipline and good will,
is offering us an alternative. Let's take it!!!

[Del Spiva]

New voters came out in droves and for the most part flocked to Obama in the Iowa primary. If these new voters for Obama become apathetic and stay home, Clinton will win the nomination. The politically savvy Washington types know this tool so well, since it has been used against Democrats in the worst way.

Thanks, Don Frederick, for fanning the flames of apathy without coming out and saying whom you support, which is obvious.

[Ed Watters]

Whatever any of the candidates said regarding the Iraq war is a non-issue. All of the Dems, when asked at a debate, acknowledged that they couldn't foresee a complete withdrawal of troops at the end of their term, despite the fact that thier party regained control of congress because of anti-war sentiment in this country . Even if the Iraqi parliament passes "the oil law" - the centerpiece of this war (just ask that leftist US foriegn policy critic Alan Greenspan) - a huge US troop presence will be needed since an overwhelming majority of Iraqis are against the law which virtually hands control of thier one natural resource over to the control of western interests.
Journalists covering the election have an obligation to look past the rhetoric when analyzing candidates stands on the issues...

[michelle]

All these political blogs are entertaining, but I'm sick to death of reading comments that only praise the candidate the poster supports or denigrate that candidate's opponents. I also tire of the subjects and headlines of many of these pieces - so much free publicity is given to the public quarreling among candidates, and, lately (ok, the past six months), only the supposed front-runners have been covered. Am I not the only one to think this is a dangerous situation? In my personal opinion, both the campaigns of Obama and Hillary Clinton have been a load of hype. It's as my friend says: If a prominent string theorist had had a physical incapacity, perhaps he would be as famous as another one for the novelty.

Of course, the outward quarreling isn't always a trivial matter and exposes the public to the tactics of the candidates. However, I thought the point is supposed to be that these tactics are ignoble (but, silly me, I am inclined to expect better of this country's leaders). Unfortunately, bad publicity is still publicity, and many a great candidate languishes in obscurity.

What I gather from this blog is that Clinton will not apologize (as Edwards has done) for her decision on the war while still giving off the impression that she feels it was a bad decision. Thus, she can have the support of both those who supported the war and those who didn't. Also, she's getting desperate finding anything to respond to with regard to Obama. Who wouldn't - for both Hillary and Obama? Both of these candidates haven't been politicians long enough for their oeuvres to accurately represent who they would be as president.

Who knows how many people are voting for Obama just because they don't like Clinton, and vice versa? I won't vote for either in this primary. I think someday people will realize they passed up some candidates who actually didn't grow to forget about the citizens they are serving. Perhaps I will vote for someone who loses, but, in the future, at least I can complain and know I didn't vote for a bad decision.

[PulSamsara]

Barack Obama TOOK A STAND against the IRAQ INVASION when it MATTERED.

Hillary Clinton PLAYED politics when it MATTERED.

Everything else is just BUNK !

[PulSamsara]

Barack Obama TOOK A STAND against the IRAQ INVASION when it MATTERED.

Hillary Clinton PLAYED politics when it MATTERED.

Everything else is just BUNK !

[Enrique]

Rather than admit her mistake in voting to authorize the Iraq war, Hillary is distorting Obama's record. For an individual who claims to have first hand White House experience, she sure made a big blunder by not doing her homework before voting for Bush to invade Iraq. Hillary's attacks will backfire on her. As a supporter of the Clintons in the 90s I can say that Hillary may not get my vote if she were to become the nominee.

[joe]

Strip the words black, woman, southern,chirstian,veteran,hero.
Remove their names Obama, Clinton, Edwards, Huckabee, Romney, McCain.
They all want to improve the economy, have some type of healthcare for everyone, good education for our kids and keep our country safe.
Will any of this candidate be able to do all of these by the end of their term?
The law of probability says NO! That's why they are allowed to run for another term.
Then who do you pick?
I do not want to be blamed, so I'm not telling you.
Just do me a favor and bring a picture of George Bush and look at it while you're voting.

[magg kay]

There are not many smart candidates for presidency in the USA. For the "MONEY MATTERS" u have RON PAUL,,,,for INTERNATIONAL MATTERS U have RICHARDSON,,,,,for BRAGGING & ARTIFICIAL CHARACTER & WORKS,,,GIULINI ,,,,,,FOR A SWAY WHERE THE WIND BLOWS,,,EDWARDS,,,,FOR A MOTOR MOUTH & HOT AIR & LOUD & TOUGH TALKING ,,,,OBAMA

FOR MADAME SMART & ALL ROUNDER,,,,MADAME HILARY !!!!

[Jeff]

What happened to the warm and teary Hillary ? Oh yeah, that was last week. Potential Hillary supporters should be cattching on now that if they want a different tone, they should make a different choice. In the 90's it was the vast right wing conspiracy.... Now we see the consipracy is the Clintons. Is there anything they will not say or do to stay in power? Do they have any values but getting back to the white house? Stay tuned.

[Cohen]

Surely, Clintons are frustrated about Obama, he should be done by now in the face of 'inevitable Clinonts'. Unfortuntely that did not happen.

So, Hilary goes back to read the manual 'How to be a President?' and then she up her antes against Obama. Sparring falsification, direct-mail service spawning to voter's door by Clinton's spinning doctors.

The politics of 'fun' should be over.

Clintons have lot under their rug, and 'that woman' Monica Lewinsky is still alive!

[norma shusterman]

i am a 79 year old white woman. i will not vote for the clintons they owe too many favors and have too much to bring to the white house, i think obama and edwards should forces and run for president and vice president

i wanted to day they the clintons bring too much luggage to the white house

as you can tell i am not good on the computer

[roger]

Hillary is the most experienced person to be elected president, I don't believe Obama has the experience yet to be corrupt, lie, and cheat, so he may not fit in with the old style washington gang. Besides to get elected you need to be able to destory other peoples lifes, I think Obama is weak here. I think Obama needs to read Hillarys latest book, How To Destory People And Get Ahead. Obama keep up the got work, don't get in the gutter with the Clintons.

[Ugh]

Dear Hillary....

There was a speech, true. But it wasn't "only". It was followed by a *vote*.

The more of the Bill and Hillary show I see, the more I remember the first time around and the less likely I'm going to vote democratic if she's the nominee. Obama would have *nothing* to use against her, had she thought her comments through. She probably thinks it's 'do or die' to win this, which will make the race ugly, and send the White House back to the republicans again.

And CarliforniaMarty - the first invasion of Iraq was completely different. Iraq invaded Kuwait, our ally. I was just 17, and even *I* knew we were going to go in, we *had* to. Kuwait was reestablished, Saddam was neutralised. It was a surgical operation with a strategy both for entering and exiting, along with a UN backed coalition. Bush Sr. also didn't make any stupid comments like "mission accomplished". Obama, were he probably not still in law school or something, would have voted for it.

If only his son learned from his father....and if only Billary would go away.

[Kiku]

Hillary is trying to undermine Obama's stance on the war by saying that her votes are not that different. Both have voted to fund the military, not being willing to play chicken with Bush on the soldiers live.

However, there are very big important differences in their history. Obama HAS consistently spoken out against the war.

Hillary has always been cozy with the use of the military, her unbridled support has been stronger than some Republicans.

Here’s her history:

White House:

Mrs. Clinton had become a champion of the bombing campaign, and many officials — including Madeleine K. Albright and Richard Holbrooke in the administration and Tony Blair, then Britain’s prime minister — turned to her at times to stiffen Mr. Clinton’s resolve to take on Serbia.

“Bill, you’re the president,” was a refrain that several administration officials said she used when Mr. Clinton was torn between his advisers.
The Iraq vote:

Of course, Hillary voted for Iraq, as did many others. She’s a lawyer, she knew what it meant, she knew what it could do. There was another vote, prior to the Iraq resolution, introduced by Levin. This called for the use of UN inspectors, and insisted that Bush come to Congress before using military war. Hillary voted NAY. She wanted to give Bush the tools to go to war, presumably so that Bush had sufficient power with the UN.

She then voted for the unfettered Iraq Resolution.

Iran:
Hillary beat the war drums harder than Bush in 2006 to take on Iran.
Hillary was the only presidential candidate to vote for the Iran resolution.
Hillary voted against an Iraq funding bill that tied funds to political progress in Iraq. It passed, 80-14. She was the only Democrat to vote against it.

[Mike Green]

I was a supporter of the Clintons regardless of their personal baggage. But after seeing them attack Obama just because they are losing and let's face it the attacks started in NH, drug use, fairytail, schuck and jive talker not doer, MLK vs Johnson etc. Was on the Clintons, all Barack did was talk about inspirational leaders and movements, he never claimed to be JFK OR MLK but used their hopes and dreams to inspire others to lead a new movement.
Northern bigotry is always below the surface, it usually is when you threaten existing power structures which are typicallly white liberals,this is what happens when affirmative action is brought to running for President

[Kiku]

Obama has amazing experience to be the president. Even in a Republican dominated Congress, he passed the Lugar-Obama bill that reduces nuclear and military caches around the world (a high priority of his). The Coburn-Obama bill provided for federal spending transparency. He's passed lots of other legislation as well:

Legislation Passed in US Senate

* Lugar-Obama Act for reduction of conventional and nuclear weapons world wide
* Coburn-Obama Transparency Act transparency in federal spending, found at www.usaspending.gov

* Cosponsored the Healthy Kids Act of 2007 and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) Reauthorization Act of 2007 to ensure that more American children have affordable health care coverage.
* Obama worked to pass a number of laws in Illinois and Washington to improve the health of women. His accomplishments include creating a task force on cervical cancer, providing greater access to breast and cervical cancer screenings, and helping improve prenatal and premature birth services.
* As a member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Obama passed legislation to improve care and slash red tape for our wounded warriors recovering at places like Walter Reed. He passed laws to help homeless veterans and offered an innovative solution to prevent at-risk veterans from falling into homelessness. Obama passed legislation to stop a VA review of closed PTSD cases that could have led to a reduction in veterans' benefits. He passed an amendment to ensure that all service members returning from Iraq are properly screened for traumatic brain injuries
* Congo
* Darfur
* Introduced Patriot Employer Act, August 2007, to reward companies for keeping jobs in the US
* As a member of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee, Obama helped pass legislation in the recent improvements to the Higher Education Act to increase the maximum Pell Grant award to $5,10.
* Obama passed legislation with Senator Jim Talent (R-MO) to give gas stations a tax credit for installing E85 ethanol refueling pumps.
* Obama sponsored an amendment that became law providing $40 million for commercialization of a combined flexible fuel vehicle/hybrid car within five years.
* Congress ethics legislation passed by Obama and Feingold that ending subsidized corporate jet travel, mandating disclosure of lobbyists' bundling of contributions, and enacting strong new restrictions of lobbyist-sponsored trips
* Obama has introduced and helped pass bipartisan legislation to limit the abuse of no-bid federal contracts.

[Kiku]

Are you kidding? Bill in the White House again? After what he's done to Hillary? He kicked her out of his administration because people didn't like her. He has been anything but loyal to her. Now, he can't even campaign without bungling it. Once she wins, she's done with him. She won't let him near the place, he'll be off overseas. He'll be a statesman, just like she was. She has said as much, not quite in those terms.

[Orlando Silva]

Please, Hillary give me a break. Obama has responded to the Iraq issues in approprieted way. You, Hillary has clap hands on the Busch speack in the house of the representatives saying that the USA troops would be receirved with flower in Bagdad. Let see: you (Hillary) clap hands to this fellow who used the same Hittlers speach to the germanies in 1937. Please give a break.
Only one name is new and good in the moment to the USA recuperate its good appearance in front of the world: this name is OBAMA.
Sorry Hillary but you may go back and try in the next moment.
Orlando SIlva.

[John]

This is what I was waiting for. It's not about sermonizing or the "experience" thing, it's about ACTION. Hillary must keep the focus on the fact that Obama has not done anything but talk. And she must not fall for the race-baiting being hurled by Obama's attack dogs.

I spoke with my mother after the NH vote and her main point to me was, "Obama doesn't say how he'll do anything. He just keeps going on and on with a sermon about hope and change. Running the country is complicated. I want details. Hillary gives them to me."

As Oprah always says, "Hope is not a plan."

[No-Boma]

Obama has a new campagin slogan, "Hey, I have a great speech for that!"

[Trumbull]

What makes you think Hillary is the candidate of change? Check this out.
http://jtaplin.wordpress.com/2008/01/13/dr-king-didnt-just-give-speeches/

[Chris]

When reading all this letter, I assume this election of democrats candidate will be in a mess...I want democrats to win to be president but not like the way you portray your candidates and selling it to republicans this general election. dont you think people is stupid to believe, you are selling again the used and teared products to others...this is not a good politics...hillary did not say it wrongly about MLK, obama is a good and honest person but there will be a time for them to be a president, and may there good intention win in this race..not only democrats or maybe republican is more better, time will tell if they are good president.
America is great when this is UNITED and We Stand to Tyranny, Greed or any natural destruction in this country. Feel it great once again stand and rationalise everything what they wanna do to this country... God bless us all.

[Brad Ctibor]

The Element of Surprise: A Prescription for a Democratic Landslide Victory in ‘08.
The Democrats have a way of losing, especially when it appears they are winning. Let’s “move on” and not rehash the past and the numerous instances of such horror, shall we?
So, in order to thwart this "Cubs Curse" phenomenon I have devised the following prescription for a sure-fired Democratic National Committee (DNC) landslide victory in November of '08.
Instead of allowing the current field of democratic presidential candidates to continue fighting each other, which makes all of the candidates look awkward, hypocritical, indecisive, unauthentic and incompetent (hence weakening the party), the DNC should announce that it is abandoning the republican's Grand Old Party (GOP) paradigm of negative-individual-competition-politics in favor of the cohesiveness and power of the group (i.e., the ticket).
This would result in the DNC immediately abandoning the pursuit, adoration and cult of individual personality by announcing a “power-ticket” of togetherness, humility and love right now, today.
A semi-fair way to do this would be to announce the 2008 DNC presidential ticket in descending order according to the national polls as they stand today. This translates into the following: President Hillary Clinton, Vice-President Barrack Obama, and Secretary of State John Edwards.
In addition to announcing this primary powerhouse ticket which shatters every sexist, racist and classist paradigm long-employed by GOP stalwarts like Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, David Duke, William Bennett, Trent Lott, Joe McCarthy and various members of the KKK (who no doubt are "conservative" and vote Republican), the following "secondary ticket" of cabinet posts and diplomats should simultaneously be announced to the voting public: Secretary of Defense General Wesley Clark, Head of the EPA/Secretary of the Interior Al Gore, Secretary of the Treasury Ron Paul, Ambassador of Middle Eastern and International Affairs Bill Clinton, Head of CIA Valerie Plame, Head of Consumer Protection Ralph Nader (in addition to Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, Dennis Kucinich, David Geffen and Steven Spielberg in various supporting and diplomatic roles). George Clooney (Sudan), Angelina Jolie (Africa and Southeast Asia), Brad Pitt (New Orleans), Wynton Marsalis (public music education), and Michael Moore (healthcare) will also head up several socially conscious humanitarian projects for a DNC led U.S. government to address their respective causes.
Then, as a final crushing blow, appoint Oprah Winfrey as moral liaison and public spokesperson for "The New DNC" (having her be the one to hold an internationally televised press conference announcing the above paradigm shift in DNC strategy).
If the DNC were to present this entire ticket/strategy tomorrow to the American people and then say, "Go ahead, now choose America... Us or Them?" the result would be phenomenal, virtually guaranteeing a democratic lock on the U.S. federal government for decades to come.
If this were done immediately it would not only throw the Republican presidential nomination process into complete chaos, it would also free up the DNC and its members to spend the coming months attacking GOP/Bush policies instead of each other. The party could also spend its precious time developing a clearly focused public sector platform that embraces civil rights, environmental protection, electoral reform, separation of church and state, public education, government sponsored healthcare for every American child, affordable housing, workers rights and healthy food for all Americans.
If the DNC had a comprehensive and detailed ticket like this now it could stop the internal bickering it calls "debates," and instead focus as a group on the above platform and following GOP critiques:

1) 911 happened on the Republican's watch. The New DNC ticket should never veer off topic from this. This is the talking point. Blame all Republicans completely and utterly without compromise. Anytime they mention "security" just respond, "Yeah, but 911 happened on your watch." Repeat this mantra over and over and over again. When they reply, "Well, we haven't had another 911 since 911," you as a democrat reply, "But we never had a 911 before 911, so what's the relevance of your point? And please don't mention Pearl Harbor, that was not a 911-style terrorist attack." When they say, "Bill Clinton," you say, "Yeah, but 911 happened on your watch."
2) Global anti-American sentiment has dramatically increased under Bush/GOP ideology and policies making Americans less safe. Immediately following September 11, 2001, the world's people were mostly on America's side. An outpouring of sympathy from the global community proceeded the devastating 911 attacks. However, as a direct result of the current administration's illegal unilateral preemptive war doctrine, coupled with its arrogant unwillingness to take any responsibility for the root causes that have given rise to twenty-first century political extremism, world sentiment has turned against the United States. This has made Americans less safe (and increased the total number of terrorists and hence the overall number of terrorism related attacks).
3) Republicans knowingly break laws with impunity. Dick Chenney (not submitting to a sobriety test immediately after a hunting accident involving a firearm), Scooter Libby (perjury), George W. Bush (domestic spying without a warrant), Larry Craig (soliciting gay bathroom sex), Duke Cunningham (fraud), Ted Haggard (methamphetimine possession and gay prostitution), FEMA Press Secretary Aaron Walker (fraudulent "news" briefings), David Vitter (prostitution), the ultra-conservative Catholic priesthood (institutionalized pedophilia), Alberto Gonzalez (perjury/suspension of Habeas Corpus), Gov. Bob Taft (fraud/corruption), Bernard Kerik (corruption/tax evasion), Abu Grieb torture, Gitmo torture, Bill O'Reilly (sexual harassment), Rush Limbaugh (illegal drug possession/use), Mitt Romney (hiring of illegal immigrants), Jack Abramoff (fraud/corruption) and the list goes on.
4) Iraq is a catastrophe because the mission to "Bring our way of life to them," is/was "Mission Impossible"; therefore, the goal always was and continues to be unachievable. Mainly, this is because of the deeply selfish, ego-driven ideology of a few wealthy, Christian, heterosexual, married, white men with children who cannot admit that race, gender and economic geography are intrinsically connected to levels of education, "status," family dynamics (i.e., "culture"), power and personal wealth. In the case of the illegal invasion of Iraq what happened was that too many like-minded American white men generated too few solutions to a very complex set of global problems involving billions of nonwhite people. The result was a collective cowboy "rescue complex" steeped in narcissistic delusions of euro-patriarchal grandeur. This is also known as "Groupthink." Wikipedia defines Groupthink as: "A type of thought exhibited by group members who try to minimize conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas. During Groupthink, members of the group avoid promoting viewpoints outside the comfort zone of consensus thinking. A variety of motives for this may exist such as a desire to avoid being seen as foolish, or a desire to avoid embarrassing or angering other members of the group. Groupthink may cause groups to make hasty, irrational decisions, where individual doubts are set aside, for fear of upsetting the group's balance. The term is frequently used pejoratively, with hindsight.” Sound familiar?
5) The poor state of the economy is directly related to the GOP’s illegal Iraq “experiment.” Since the day the neo-con Bush administration preemptively struck Iraq gas prices have tripled, the U.S. dollar has tanked on the international market, and the U.S. treasury has/will be drained of three to five trillion dollars. To not draw constant and unwavering parallels between the cost of war and the state of economy is one of the biggest blunders of the current DNC platform.
6) The Republican Party is latently classist, racist and sexist because they only run rich, white men for the offices of president and vice-president of the United States. In other words, the DNC must play the race and gender card. Not against each other, but against the GOP who fought MLK and the entire civil rights movement every step of the way. The DNC must continually ask the question publicly: “Why has the GOP never had a women or non-white person run for president (sans the self-promoter Alan Keyes who’s bid was not seriously supported by the party)? When does the GOP expect to run such a candidate for the highest office in the land?”
6) Every time you speak call the Republican Party "The Republic Party." This is all in the name of good fun (with a smidgeon of revenge politicking :). When your conservative friends correct you, just say, "Oh yeah, the republic party" again. This will drive them crazy (and possibly get them to stop calling us the "democrat" party).

Happy WINNING in '08!