Clinton aides hint that now things'll get nasty

While you were sleeping, the chartered jet of the third-place finisher in the Iowa Democratic caucus winged its way from Des Moines to Manchester, N.H. And it sounds like some decisions were made on that plane that may alter the course of that party's presidential race.

At her concession speech in Des Moines on Thursday night, Hillary Clinton was all gracious and determined and smiling. But hours later on that flight someone named Mark Penn, who happens to be her chief political strategist, ominously told a gaggle of reporters, including The Times' Peter Nicholas, that the campaign's focus needs to shift now onto, you might have guessed, someone named Barack Obama.

The Illinois senator happens to be the first-place finisher in those same caucuses and now Clinton, once the inevitable Democratic nominee, is playing catch-up. Things could get nasty with some pretty sharp media contrasts made in coming days, it would seem. "This has been very much a referendum on her,'' said Penn. "And people will take a harder look at the choice and the kind of president who will be needed in these times.''

Penn hinted that the Clinton campaign may be poised to mount a more aggressive campaign in New Hampshire than in Iowa. "Time and again in the Democratic primaries," he said, ...

... "you've seen people latch onto the new, seemingly fresh candidate only to then take a sobering look at the choice they have when it comes down to the end of it. I think you're going to see that again.''

He claimed that Obama's record is comparatively unexplored and he suggested the news media should ask itself about taking a closer look at Obama's history. "Does everyone know everything they need to know about Barack Obama?'' Penn asked. "That's a decision you're going to have to make. I think at this point his record is not very well-known. And she is really well-known. She's fully vetted, fully tested. And I don't think that process has occurred with Barack Obama.''

For weeks now Clinton aides have been threatening on and off the record to use some bad stuff against their chief opponent. First, two of them told conservative columnist Robert Novak that the Clintons had very damaging information on Obama, but they weren't going to use it. Then Billy Shaheen, her New Hampshire co-chair, said that though no Democrat would use Obama's admitted youthful drug use against him, boy, would the Republicans have a field day with that later this year.

Early this morning, Penn told Nicholas that he didn't believe Obama was positioned to win in New Hamsphire, which votes Tuesday. "The only thing Obama has going for him in New Hampshire," Penn added, "is some sense of momentum. Let's see whether or not that sustains itself ... when people really focus in on the choice of picking a president.''

Some adjustments need to be made in the Clinton strategy, Penn admitted. Clinton's strongest appeal in Iowa, he said, was with older voters. Now, she must reach across generational lines. "I think her appeal as we move forward can be broader than it was [in Iowa],'' Penn said. "And I think that will happen.''

The architect of the Clinton campaign claimed that she is still positioned to win the nomination and he sought, as every political strategist would at a time like this, to play down the Iowa setback. "This is a bump in the road," he said. "No question about that. But we're in a very, very strong position to move forward and tackle the challenges that this presents.''

Kinda makes you remember that long internal memo that someone named Mike Henry wrote to Clinton last spring. At the time he was her deputy campaign manager. And he wrote: “My recommendation is to pull completely out of Iowa and spend the money and Senator Clinton’s time on other states. If she walks away from Iowa, she will devalue Iowa — our consistently weakest state.”

At the time the campaign disavowed that leaked document.

But that was last spring. And this is now.

-- Andrew Malcolm

Comments

[Double Standard]

Anyone who has been to an Obama event knows that he and his surrogates spend about half their time bashing Hillary. So the idea that going negative would be a new thing in the Democratic campaign is interesting to me. Why paint the story as if it Hillary's campaign is so horrible for attacking the opponent? Sure, they were in a good position and didn't have to be negative as Obama. But now to turn it against them when Barack has been incredibly negative for so long? Give me a break! Let's be honest and fair.

(Hey, read it again. It's Clinton aides going on the record themselves in this item saying this.)

[Karry Mays]

IOWANS are looking mighty foolish!!!they fell for the oprah sake oil and now the country will judge! they did not research becuase the media has been biased. Obamas change is INEXPERIENCE/RACISM what we do not need!
Truth is "WHEN" OBAMA DID SHOW UP TO VOTE IN SENATE HE VOTED EXACTLY AS CLINTON DID! WHERES THE UNBIASED MEDIA!.
http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/mar/29/comparison_of_hillary_and_obama_votes_on_iraq
By Greg Sargent and Eric Kleefeld | bio
Since the comparison of the Iraq positions over the years of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama is one of the hottest issues of the campaign, we thought it would be useful to post a comprehensive comparison of all of their votes on everything relating to the Iraq war.
So here it is: A massive compilation of Iraq-related bills — and the votes by Hillary and Obama on them, side by side — beginning in early 2005, when Obama first joined the Senate.
Of the total of 69 votes we compiled — some significant, some not — it turns out that the two differed on only one. You'll see that one in bold on our chart. But let us be clear: We are not posting this to suggest that their earlier difference at the start of the war — their most important difference — should in any way be overshadowed by these similarities. For many, that difference

[Anne Milligan]

With great concern, I recall the same kind of undiscerning mass hysteria that we see now in some sectors associated with the rise of Barak Obama, back in 2000 when George W. Bush came out of nowhere and was propped up as the next president. I wish people would slow down a little and really look at what is going on here. Despite his oratory skills and the media having created him as its next "newsworthy" darling, when the next president of the U.S. sits down at the desk, it is going to be another disaster if Barak Obama is sitting there. Barak Obama is simply not prepared to lead the free world. Think people, think! We simply cannot afford to set up another president who is participating in on-the-job-training.

[JIM]

Bye Bye BILLary!

[The LowDown]

This has been coming for awhile, but no one saw it because in truth the media has been building up Hilliary, not Obama. But, the fact is that Obama is the only canidate that the people demanded run. His campaign was not built on his ego, like the others, it was built on the demands of the people, especially young people. The second clue was how much money he got from small donors, those donations turn into real votes, unlike the huge donations that Hilliary got, which provide fewer votes. The third clue was the internet presence of the Obama supporters who are building him up. The other canidates wish they had that kind of support. Pay attention people, this contest is over.

[Keith L]

The Hillary fans are spinning already. Obama spends very little time attacking HIllary, and almost never by name. He takes issue with her policies and approaches. Guess what? It's working!! Isn't it interesting how people in states where both have spent a lot of time turn away from her and toward Obama. What's baffling to me is how Mark Penn thinks more of the same negative attacks will work. If anything that's what hurt her the most. The more mud she threw, the more she dirtied herself. But this is a perfect illustration of why Obama says he should be the choice and not Hillary: how can you do more of the same thing and expect different results? That is, according to psychology texts, one definition of insanity.

Hillary hasn't had an original thought in her head this entire campaign, except for the $5,000 for every baby. Which she quickly dropped. All her other ideas have been stolen from Edwards or Obama. She's even had the audacity to change her campaign signs to be all about "change."

Hillary will be done withnin a month.

[Chris McCoy]

The negative Hillary campaign has already started. Her wonks are out in force on the internet. You can recognize their tracks whenever they leave a message because they sound a lot like the first three...all in a row, at the beginning of this comment thread. It's been out in the blogs for a while that her campaign actually pays people to do nothing but fill comment-sections of discussion threads with negatives about Edwards and Obama. They sell fear of Obama and dire warnings instead of attacking his positions on the issues, which is what this election is really about.

The reason Hillary is losing is because people sense she will do or say ANYTHING to become President. At this point she'll self destruct in one of two ways. Either some of her negative campaigning against Obama will sound racist, or someone is going to start throwing negatives back...and mentioning Vincent Foster, Whitewater, and her claims of being a feminist leader while all the while campaigning on the back of her husband's record in office. Let's not forget she refuses to be open and honest and release her records to the public from the Presedential library till AFTER the election. Makes me wonder what she's hiding.

Honestly I'm not a big Obama fan...i like Richardson, but i really dislike Hillary. She's partisan and mean and stubborn (refuses to admit Iraq vote was a mistake). She's a liberal version of George Bush.

No more Clintons or Bushes in the White House please. 20 years is plenty. Lets not make it 28.

[jrw34]

This is a great day for America. No doubt the "fun part" of Hillary's campaign will come out as you see in some of the comments of rabid supporters on this blog. Today is America has turned a new page in it's history. Clinton's use of "Rovian" tactics won't work this time. Iowa is NOT the "bump on the road" that her spinners would like us to believe. The vehicle of propaganda is broken. Time to sell it for parts. Folks in Iowa have know her since the early 90's and she's campaigned extremely hard in Iowa. Iowa was the test of whether she could win in a national election and the answer was a resounding NO! She didn't even win her base which was the women voters, Barack took it. This is no fluke. Rudy and McCain can legitimately say they didn't try in Iowa, but not Hillary. We are done with "divider deciders" we've had that for almost two decades. Hillary was correct about one thing in her concession speech last night...she stated it was a great night for Democrats...she's right about that! We clearly have a candidate that speaks to people across the spectrum and does not have to run focus groups to find a position. Her campaign is clearly shaken up. She wasn't even close. 3rd place? John Edwards beat her. Her EMILY's and ATF side organizations couldn't counter the power of the people. Barack will win by a landslide. Last night was the beginning of the end of the Clinton dynasty. The spin machine is a broken record and nobody's listening...Obama '08.

[Karen]

Please do your own investigating, readers. Go to the Hillary site and read her position on issues. Go to the Obama site and ready his position on issues. Read Hillary's books. Read Obama's books. Don't let others' peoples opinions decide your own. Make an investment of your time to find out for yourself. The media has an agenda and slants their representation. All people have opinions and anyone with an opinion wants you to agree with them. People express themselves in ways designed to get you to agree with their opinions.

The worst thing you can do as a voter is let someone else make up your mind.

This is an important election and voting is a sacred right of Americans. Honor those who have died to secure that right for you and spend some time learning FOR YOURSELF who YOU feel is the best candidate. You can find detractors and supporters for every candidate. Even people who are misinforming you sound very believable and informed.

MAKE UP YOUR OWN MINDS AMERICANS!!! DON'T CAVE TO THE MEDIA BIAS AND DEFINITELY DON'T BUY INTO THE VITRIOL YOU SEE ON WEBSITES.

[ifymens]

Here we go again , another on the job training. What do people see in Obama. Oprah why dont you take your boy with you and leave us alone.Why do the Democrats like to self distruck, Barack OBama will never win in november no matter what the press will like us to believe.I know that some people want to ease their conscense by votting for Obama so that they will not be accused as racist but this has gone far enough.If Chris Mathews truely believe that America has changed, he should give up his job for a black man because l know of a few who are better than him.The press are jelous of Hillary and cant wait to see her fail.What is it about the Clintons that make the press wet their pants?

[Steve]

I would rather have a president that admited he did drugs like most of us in our youth and with minimal political expereince. If you have 4 more years of the so called expereinced politician nothing will change, with both Republicans and Hillary it will be politics as usual. It is time for a drastic change in this country, and Hillary is not it, a political hag with an ego who wants one thing, power.

[Joe]

You have to be kidding that people are defining who the nomination will go to by Iowa? Not one of the party nominees has won Iowa by the way in the last 4 elections. Obama does not have the experience to deliver in the Oval Office. I believe this country will make a grave mistake by placing their support behind this inexperience.

I am a very firm Democrat and I will never support an Obama ticket...this is a repeat of Bush number 2 with his inexperience. People are voting for Oprah not for Obama and that just makes me Ill that someone who is in the public eye can step in and sway enough people to switch their vote based on nothing solid. ALL I HEAR FROM HIM IS ... "its time for a change" I hear no clear plan on how he thinks he can make that change.

I also am not comfortable with his Islamic schooling background...why has no attention to details like this been made! For christ sake the islamic people believe its perfectly ok to kill people who do not believe as they do and they will be honored in heaven. He was very quick to pronounce the fact he was a "christian" despite the fact he was schooled in an islamic school as a child.

Bush has set this country up for failure in my opinion when the next president takes over and I do not feel Obama is the man who can dig us out of the trenches. Lets hope people don't elect Oprah, I mean Obama over Hillary because if they Democrats chose Him over Her .. the Republicans are a sure win in 2008 elections.

[Zennie Abrahsm]

Mark Penn has learned nothing and will just use the same strategy as before: being nasty and racist. Americans don't want that anymore. But he will just not learn. Barack Obama is the best candidate, and even the Clinton-promoters here know it. He has more experience with using good judgement than Clinton and it showed in Iowa.

Meanwhile, Penn will have to deal with his own statements....

http://zennie2005.blogspot.com/2008/01/clinton-campaign-head-mark-penn-says-he.html

[Time for Change]

Did anyone notice that at Hillary's concession speech, she was claiming the mantle of change (stealing this line from Obama, really). But then as the camera panned out, Hillary was flanked by 1990s figures Madeline Albright and Bill Clinton -- looking old, creaky and battle-worn. (Interesting that Hillary's strongest supporters are 65+ set.) Obama's victory speech, on the other hand, had "fired up, ready to go" young students surrounding him. Also note that Hillary made that (admittedly, humorous -- and perhaps even spontaneous?) crack about Republicans, while Obama invited Republicans to join him, overcoming partisanship. Hillary says she has the "experience," but I don't want to relive this experience.

Obama in '08!

[Steve]

So Hillary wants to out-Romney, Romney. Well, we know how well Romney did in Iowa after out-spending his opponent 20 to 1. Hopefully Hillary will follow a similar strategy in NH to lose mightily against Obama. In the last few years, she has proven herself a betrayer of her principles. She supported the Bush bankruptcy bill that took all the rights from the middle class and gave them to the credit card companies and the banks. She supported the Iraqi War, until it became unpopular. She supported that war resolution against Iran not too long ago. The 70s Hillary would never have voted for the 21st century Hillary. It is unfortunate.

GET FIRED UP AND READY TO GO!! Hillary is history. Obama is the future.

[John Smart]

Gee, I have been saying this for MONTHS. Who is this man Obama? and why in the world would we elect him? he has gotten a free pass from the media for 11 months. It is time to go after him. Dig up his past. I want to know what makes this senator with 1 year of experience in the senate think he can be president. And the media needs to start doing its job - not letting Obama have a free ride as it has until now.

[MIKE]

KAREN FOR PRESIDENT!!!!

No truer words have ever been said.

To all all Obama/Oprah & Hillary/Bill Haters. :p

[McLovin]

Obama may not be perfect. But I do believe he is a brilliant man that will actually reason with the other side as much as possible given the political climate. I believe a Obama- Dodd ticket would mean a very reasoned, effective administration ( throw in Biden for Secretary of State) I believe he is the only candidate that gives this nation a chance to believe in the ideals that many of us want. When I close my eyes and imagine Hillary in the White house I see further division and the country and at best staying put with corporatist policies. When I close my eye and see Barack Obama being sworn in, I see the county moving forward, and taking a step towards changing what many of us envision the America we believe still exists.

John Edwards says some very compelling things, but I know too much about his work in the senate. His new populist message sounds too much like a man trying to create differentiation, but does not believe his own words.

Hillary does not need to be made a villain in all of this. She is just a cog in the big machine we are all tired of dealing with. I can simply put it this way, I do not trust her, but she is not a villain.

This is still a great country, and last night’s election proves just that.

[Franklin]

Well, if the writing skills, logic and spelling of the anti-Obama opinions on this page are an indicator of anything, he has my vote. (How can you misspell so many words when the input box here has a spell checker?!)) Islamic schooling, Joe? Are you serious? The scary thing is that you probably are.

What should I infer from the fact that the Obama supporters are so much more articulate and well-reasoned than his detractors? A delta in IQ perhaps?

[Arlene]

This election has shown that young people will come out if a candidate inspires them and that candidate is Barack Obama. This Iowa election has also shown that independents support Barack Obama and we need independents to win in November. Independents will not support Clinton. She is the worst nominee for the Democrats. And John Edwards is getting so angry. He doesn't have the temperament to be President. Obama has an even temperament. He is the one we need.

[Chris]

Nights like last night make me proud to be an American. Commenters like Joe make me question that all over again.

(1) "Not one of the party nominees has won Iowa ... in the last 4 elections"? What about Kerry in 2004? Bush and Gore in 2000? Not liking the truth doesn't make it okay to outright lie about it.

(2) "People are voting for Oprah not for Obama"? Oprah doesn't mean much to me - I'm a 27-year-old male - or any of my friends. We're all voting for Obama.

(3) "I also am not comfortable with his Islamic schooling background"? The change will be when racist slurs and other Clinton/Rove campaign machinations like this stop fooling people like you. Obama went to a public school in a secular muslim country; this is no more a muslim school than PS 421 in New York is a Christian school. Just because someone once lived in another country doesn't make him a mujahideen towelhead terrorist.

Finally, the "Obama can't win in November" argument: I have yet to see a hypothetical general election matchup where Obama doesn't do better than Clinton. Half of the country already detests Hillary and always will. See http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct=us/3-0&fp=477ec03d9493cb71&ei=V1h-R7ruKIT2-wHjssGgDQ&url=http%3A//www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/12/29/electability_democrats/&cid=0 for an example.

[Marjorie]

Nothing new here - the Clintons are nasty and vindictive people who feel entiteld to live in the WHite House. They forgive no one except convicted drug dealers or white collar crime fugitives who have piad for pardons by donating big bucks to the campaign chests. (or to the morally challenged Rodham brothers) How I would love to have Obabama to vote for! I am a white , well-educated. well-to-do woman.of Hillary's age who was happy to see the fake smile frozen on her smug face last night. I had been hoping that this battery-operated robot would fall on her big butt in Iowa.
Her brothers took money for pardons; his has a couple of felony drug convictions,; his Arkansas campaign manager has written that he used state troopers to solicit women for him; and they're both congernital liars as David Geffen has pointed out. He lost me at "smoked but didn't inhale" Please.
I find it weird that Billary supporters yak on about lack of foreign policy experience. They were singing a different tune when Arkansas's good ol' boy Governor was running. Obama has far more experience than Bill ever had. and Hillary's was all by osmosis apparently.
The only foreign policy experience you'd get in Little Rock would be deciding what to serve for brunch if an agricultural delegation from Kazakhstan showed up.
The recent hints dropped that Hill helped resolve the Northern iIeland impassse are ludicrous. WIll she now also take responsibility for dropping the ball in Rwanda?.
Go Obama!

[barackoblogger]

The negative campaign is "GOING TO START"???

What do you call kindergate, racist Muslim and drug dealing smears, playing the gender card? And where has that gotten her but a 30-point drop in the polls in the past two months and a but-whoopin' in Iowa!?

Well, Hillary, I guess a gal's gotta do what a gal's gotta do. Go for it.

But at this point I would expect that the same tactics would have the same result and she will tank.

[David Peck]

I just received my overseas absentee ballot and promptly marked it for Barack Obama. America is not about political dynasties; I voted for hope and change and opportunity. David Peck

[John Doe]

Hillary's has 50% negatives. So she is a polarizing figure. We need someone who can bring this country together,not divide it. Obama seems to unite the right and the left. Democrats,Repulbicans,and independents all like Obama. H

[John Chapman]

I can't believe the veiled racist comments about Barack Obama."Oprah why dont you take your boy" All one has to do is LISTEN to the two candidates. Go watch Obama's acceptance speech. The choice is between a failed machine politics and something that has the promise of something new. Remember, Clinton politics has ALWAYS been about Clinton. It has NEVER been about ideas or the party. Shoiuld Clinton get the nomination, she will have NO coat-tails, just like her husband had none. Obama offers the hope of something new. I am a member of the AFT, and I was appalled that they endorsed Clinton. Just imagine what an Obama candidacy and presidency might be like if he DID NOT feel beholden to the labor movement and to the Clintonista machine. Imagine the consternation in corporate boardrooms and union executive offices when they realize that the Democratic nominee didn't need them to win, that they have no hooks in him. We can anticipate new lows in racist, xenophobic attacks from the Clinton surrogates, whether they are Bob Kerrey or a campaign chair in New Hampshire.

Hope is the thing with feathers
That perches in the soul
And sings the song without the words
And never stops at all.

In this moment of post-Iowa enthusiasm, Obama seems just like Dickinson's bird.

[Christopher London, New York City]

HILLARY'S THEME SONG IS "CAN'T BUY ME LOVE" --With a virtually unlimited campaign war chest, support of the Democratic Establishment, entrenched interests and endorsements galore, the story is that Hillary was a THIRD PLACE FINISHER in Iowa. So what do Mark Penn & the Clintonista's promise New Hampshire and the rest of America? A NEGATIVE CAMPAIGN. You see Hillary cannot win if this campaign is about who and what she is. The Clinton Legacy is largely fictional. Hillary & Bill are American Frauds. For Hillary to win, the Clinton Campaign must suppress voter turnout, alienate the electorate, blur the line between her and the other candidates, sandbag them at every turn, steal their message, triangulate issues and paint Obama as some dangerous inexperienced black man. Make no mistake that in short that is the CLINTON PLAYBOOK. Also further expect a laundry list of promises and policy initatives aimed at every interest group in America. GOOGLE: Clinton Cocaine Mena Arkansas Bimbo Eruptions Bush Connection Vince Foster Suicide Murder Web Hubbell. Hillary used New York as a platform for her Presidential ambitions and will use America for the greater good of her own ambition

[Kurt]

I was once one of Hillary's biggest fans, when she was the first lady. Now she has shown an extraordinarily blind arrogance, assured that simply her name and background are enough to be crowned. And her touted "experience"? What has she done independent of her husband? Has she ever shown ANY courage or independent thinking as senator for, er. . ., New York?

Everyone has to think about the larger costs to the country of a HIllary Clinton presidency. We are looking at a QUARTER CENTURY of presidents named only Bush and Clinton. Are we a mature democracy or a 19th century monarchy? Have we not learned our lesson with Bush Jr.? The only thing worse than someone thinking he can inherit political power is an electorate allowing him to do so. No, there's something even worse: An electorate letting it happen again (and again).

[David Sugarman]

We need to clearly think about the nature of "bashing" or "attacking" an opponent. I would suggest that focusing on an opponent;s policies and their positions is not bashing or attacking if there is not a nasty deprecating tone to these comments. Using this standard, I don't think Senator Obama has violated the standard he is espousing.

We will see in the days ahead if Senator Clinton's campaign, and Obama himself, move toward negative, bashing attack ads. I hope not. I want to see a good race without mudslinging.

[Jai Patriot]

I certainly do hope the campaigns, in fact, read all these comments (it does seem apparent that they pay people to post the daily "party line"). If Obama's people are reading this thread then they are getting a glimpse of the strategy that We the People can expect to be hearing a great deal of from the Billary camp in the coming weeks...Obama = Bush Jr. That's the line apparently. Well, I also started hearing the rebuttal and, as a long time disfranchised voter activist, I like it better...experienced politicians are what have destroyed this country. People whose political careers mean more to them than the careers of ordinary Americans they are supposed to be serving. Career politicians only serve one constituent...the almighty dollar.

I like Obama. I like the energy and enthusiasm he instills in the young people who have to find a way to rebuild this horrible mess called Amerika. That said, I'm not convinced he's the guy either but not because Billary says so. My prayer is that, going into the convention, there is not a clear winner. After two rounds of balloting and a deadlock, the delegates draft Albert Gore to serve as the Democratic nominee and he selects Obama to run as his VP.

God help us all if we stick with bu$ine$$ as usual...it will be the Fall of the American Empire (which really isn't all that bad thing).

[M. David L.]

I am not paid by the Clinton campaign to leave comments.

I watched Obama's speech last night, and it sounded great.

Still, I don't think he knows the ways of Washington to be able to make the changes he wants. Hillary does - she is more detailed, more nuanced, more experienced in the "system." If this make me sound like a cynic, so be it. But Obama is a great speaker - it just really bothers me that he would vote "present" so much back in the Illinois legislature.

You'll see on Tuesday - Hillary will be back on top.

[MizLiz]

So the Borg Queen is going to get nasty, huh? Are we surprised? The woman is desperate...I'll bet she's cussing a blue streak and back to throwing lamps at Bill. The fact is, Obama doesn't need to lead the free world all by himself, he just needs to have the wisdom and courage to pick the very best people he can find to help him. Kennedy did it with The Best and The Brightest, and I think Obama will too. No cronies allowed...although Barack doesn't strike me as the "Crony type", unlike Hilary, who probably has all sorts of unsavory cronies lurking around.

[David Rosenberg]

I am an independent who has become a Democrat as a result of George Bush. But under no circustance will I vote for Clinton.This country can do better. Why would the democratic party pick a person who is "HATED" by 40% of the people? She is the only democrat that can lose!!!
When we reward top executives with compensation 500 times the average wage in a company, there is something wrong.Steves Jobs is the exception! The thought of a republican making the supreme court more imbalanced is horrible, but it pales when I think of Hillary and Bill in the White House again! She is a bigger threat than Osama to world peace. If the public can connect to Tiger Woods, then Obama should not be a problem at all.

[Mike]

Too bad Edwards didn't win. He'd make a great VP to Obama, but I can't imagine he'd want to go that route again.

Honestly, what are people afraid about on the Obama drug use issue? All these dire warnings about how Republicans will have a field day with this issue are highly delusional. All Obama has to say, and what he will say, is, something like what Bush said "when I was young and foolish I did young and foolish things. I regret my choices then, and urge people not to make the mistakes I made. America is a forgiving nation. I sinned. I have repented. And by the way, maybe we shouldn't be so harsh on those who are make the drug use mistake and get caught up in the legal system... offer them what every person deserves... a second chance."

He can spin a great narrative of sin and redemption. Really, what are the Repbulicans going to be able to say to that?

Nobody even cares that much about drug use as an issue, and those who do care about it, can be helped to understand it in the sin and redemption framing. This is not only not an Obama disadvantage... it is potentially a defining moment in a debate and potentially a plus for his candidacy. He's just smart of enough to figure that out.

Anyway, time to end dynastic politics..... let's hope Clinton fades fast.

[J Warren]

Thank you Karen! Make up you own minds, people. Don't let the media make them up for you. Do your research, know the issues, know where the candidates stand on the issues that matter to you. Listen to the candidates speak, watch the debates. Make your OWN choice!

[john mcmichael]

Thank God the American democrats have a real choice for president. I personelly supported John Edwards but Barrack Obama is a good second choice. Any body but Hillary is my option.

[tootsie]

Steve: I am trying to determine if you are a Hillary camp paid sock - puppet or getting your info from Fox News.
Obama went to an international school in Indonesia, was never a muslim, nor had no "muslim upbringing".
I am also curious as to those spinning an equivalency between Bush Junior and Obama- how starkly different can two politicians be? On the job training is a requirement for EVERY president- no one has background in running the free world. I personally find quite incredible that Hillary rests on her background as the overseer of state dinners at the white house as a job preparation. What were her official capacities as first lady? We know what happened to the one crack she had on policy from the White house... remember the health care debacle?

[Rick Friedman]

I saw Obama's acceptance speech. He's a great orator and a great communicator. He's got this "change"thing down to a science. It's easy to see why people find him to be an attractive candidate. That said, I still don't know what his message is. Platitudes and generalities only go so far.

Sure, the country hates Washington and all it stands for. No question that the system is broken. But, it's still the system. If optimism could carry the day, that would be great. Yet something tells me that it takes a seasoned, experienced, trained mechanic to repair a car and that Washington is no different.

For all her flaws -- and she has plenty -- Hillary has the "manufacturer's certified factory training" to go in there and pull out the broken parts. Obama may be able to do it on instinct alone, but how do we know?

Every time voters send the anti-Washington candidate to the White House -- Jimmy Carter, George W Bush -- they fail to get the job done for the American people. It's just like, is the girl you like to date have what it takes to be a good wife? Obama's a great trophy to take to the dance but plain, drab Hillary seems more like the ultimate keeper.

[Doug in Mount Vernon]

Joe above, you are a disgusting pig. To insinuate anything about Obama having an "Islamic schooling background' first of all is completely fabricated and false. Second, although I should have known better, I would never have guessed that Clintonistas would be so desperate to rescue their sinking ship as to impugn the integrity and values of such a great man who serves, need I remind you, as a US Senator from Illinois. But more noteworthy, this attempt to interject racism and deep-seated prejudices that are the hallmark of America's other major party, into the Democratic Party process is plain unconscionable. Joe, people like you, attempting to make up lies and false filth about any of our good Democratic candidates, ought to be ashamed.

You are the problem in the Democratic Party, if you are indeed even a Democrat.

[Stubenville]

Not that Iowa is representative of the entire country, but how could the media, the pundits and the candidates all be so clueless about the mood of the American public? People are tired of the posturing, the nasty sniping and many of us feel like only business interests and the wealthy are being represented.

Hillary seems willing to say anything to get elected, but somehow she fails to get that all her "I'm the most qualified" harping paints her as representing the status quo. Sorry, the coronation Hillary expected didn't happen this time. And if her aides 'get nasty' as the article reports, that is just going to turn even more people off.

It's exactly the same on the other side of the coin; Mitt Romney thought he could buy the nomination, another guy who will say anything to get a vote. But Mitt also comes off as just one more of the poseurs Washington is awash in.

Perhaps everyone involved in this election could take a moment to step out of their shared reality distortion zone and stop reading their own press releases to listen to what the American public actually wants and needs? People are attracted to Senator Obama and Governor Hucabee because they both seem attuned to what people outside the beltway think and are concerned about; jobs, accessible health insurance and integrity in government to name a few.

No matter who ultimately wins, America will be well served if the new President is someone thoughtful and concerned about real people. Over-hyped windbags take note!

[Pedro (koreatown)]

Ummm NORMAN Y HSU?

[Omar]

To Joe:

Your comments about your unrest with Obama's Islamic schooling background are somewhat disturbing. Specifically, the following comment: "For christ [sic] sake the islamic [sic] people believe its [sic] perfectly ok to kill people who do not believe as they do and they will be honored in heaven." You may have been made ill by the fact that "people are voting for Oprah not for Obama," but I am made ill not so much by your lack of knowledge about Islam, but more by your willingness to make comments about the religion when you clearly do not know very much about it. Muslims do not believe they will go to heaven for killing those who are not Muslims. Rather, a small group of misguided Muslims believe that. One has to keep in mind that many religious traditions have some blood in their histories, and Christianity, the predominant faith in the USA, is no exception. I say this not to defend religious violence; I believe that killing people because they believe differently from you is a terrible thing. Indeed, looking to the example of the Prophet Muhammad, Islam's example of what people should try to be like, shows that people were shocked by how respectful he was of people who chose different belief systems. That claim is one that anyone with any knowledge of Islam can substantiate, and I'm happy to do so if emailed and asked to do such.

My real question here is the following: before making comments about Islam, how many people actually try to learn more about the religion than is presented in the media? How about when you're making your decision of which candidate to vote for? That is an important decision, and represents a fundamental American value: not just to vote, but do so with knowledge about candidates and what you are voting for. Please, rather than making ill-informed comments about religions, try to learn something about the religions. Once you know something about the religion, then feel free to criticize and make comments. Never am I intending to stifle discussion about Islam; I recognize that it's not perfect and that there is much to be discussed. However, it's impossible to do so until people know what they're talking about.

[rmcentee]

Barak Obama is the real deal, finally a candidate who can stand up to the venemous politics of our time with forcefulness and integrity. It has been a long time since we have seen this, probably since the Kennedy's. We have had other good people enter the political arena (Jimmy Carter), but did not have the forcefulness and strength to unite us, Barak does. I am amazed at the hate a genuine person still generates, as is seen in many of the above comments. Where is the depth, the thoughtfulness, in the above comments? So emotional, and baseless... Let yourself believe in a new day and in the power of the goodness of humanity, that we can unite, and that this is the true answer to our world's problems, not power or experience with "playing politics." Hope, my friends, exists in us all, extinguish your cynicism and fear, and learn to smile with joy once again...

[John]

Where in your blog is the so-called "hint" from Hillary's aides? There's no quote or evidence that anyone said this. You reference previous acts and quotes, but nothing about some new strategy of nastiness. It seems that you're manipulating information so you can have a headline that gets a hit online.

[miscue]

After listening to several of Obama's speech's, he reminds me of JFK when he ran for office. JFK was more or less branded the same as Obama is. Too young, no experience, etc. But JFK surrounded himself with very good advisers. Why wouldn't Obama do the same? But this run for office has a long way to go, and trying to decide who is going to win right now is a toss-up.

But it seems like the majority of people, my self included, have had enough of 20 years of the same two family's running this country. We sure need a change, hopefully for the better, and I don't feel that Hilliary will give us much of a change. If by chance she does win, and becomes the first women president, the GOP had better watch out. I'm sure she has some scores to settle.

[dcogan]

Yes, no more Clintons or Bushes. There is a status conference on Jan. 15 in the historic civil suit in Los Angeles, Paul v Clinton. She is going to be under oath before the election, and discovery in the case is finally going to reveal an unprecedented campaign finance fraud.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7007109937779036019&pr=goog-sl

[Andy]

Joe, I think you need to become a little more informed before spouted such idiotic nonsense. Maybe you are of the mental level that Oprah's opinion has an effect on you (it seems you would go against something, just because she was for it). You have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to Islam. Historically, it has been far more tolerant of others than Christianity. If you are a very firm Democrat, then I hope you are not symbolic of your party. Because if you are, then the moral ambiguity and corruption is the defining characteristic of both parties.

[Mona S]

I have only two comments and you can run with it as you please:

1. Hillary is a woman first and if women are naturally entrusted by God to raise our CHILDREN, Hillary can definitely be entrusted to raise OUR NATION.

1. People you are voting for Obama, not Oprah!! Obama is not going to give you a free TV or build you a house.

[Kyle Smith]

Poster Joe, why do you say that "Not one of the party nominees has won Iowa by the way in the last 4 elections"? John Kerry, Al Gore, George W. Bush, and Bob Dole all won Iowa and got the nomination. You are either a Republican or a Clinton operative who is terrified of Obama. Hillary is a good person who is going to be the senator from New York until the day she dies. Which is great. Obama has what it takes to lead the country and the world to a better place. God Bless the people of Iowa for choosing him. And remember -- Iowa is 96% white! That means Obama is totally electable. He trounced Clinton and Edwards and will trounce the Republican nominee.

[ASylvan]

Mark Penn is either intellectually dishonest or truly delusional to believe that New Hampshire is still a media designated 'firewall" for the Clinton campaign. Considering that independants overwhelmingly voted for the Obama campaign in the Iowa causus, that New Hampshire has an open primary that allows independant voters and republicans to vote in the Democratic primaries, and New Hampshire voters tendency to be anti-establishment, Obama should win that primary as well. South Carolina is a lock for the Obama campaign because of the historical significance of him being the first African American president will trump any past loyalty African Americans feel towards Bill Clinton. With the momentum, better organization, equal financial resoureces, and proof of potential support from cross over republican voters and independants in the general election, Feb. 5th will be a sweep for the Obama campaign. The media will still downplay every accomplishment that Obama campaign makes and spin the potential Hillary comeback scenario, but there are no polling trends to support it.

[brad]

Joe (posting above),

"Not one of the party nominees has won Iowa by the way in the last 4 elections"

Iowa caucus winners
2004- John Kerry (Party nominee)
2000- Al Gore (Party nominee
1996- Bill Clinton unnaposed (party nominee)

The party nominee also won in 1976, 1980, and 1984. In 1992, Tom Harkin won, but he was a "native son", as was Gephardt (practically) in 1988.

What are you smoking, chief?

[jdr]

Listen, no one from Obama's campaign personally faults Mark Penn for being an obese, effeminate, Rovian pollster. Never mind his union busting history, his public relations work for Black Water. Never mind his playing the gender card after Hillary gaffed late October. Penn does his job as he sees fit. However, Obama's campaign has never illicited Hillary as a pandering cackler that divides, polarizes, cackles and aggravates. That is simply a reaction to seeing and hearing her. No matter what, Hillary will always have trouble building consensus. Obama is gifted. Go to BarackObama.com to learn how he stands on the issues. Read his books. The more people learn about Obama the more he is supported. Penn has tried and failed in Iowa, the Clinton train is derailing. Thank you Iowa.

[Bill Flannigan]

Reading the comments from the Hillary supporters is like listening to the Bush administration try to explain their failed policies- ignore the facts, spin faster and faster to try to confuse the real issue and hope that the American people will stop paying attention. The fact is for all of Hillary's so-called experience (as first lady?- please...), she lacked either the judgment or the character on the most important political choice of her senate experience- voting for a misguided war. What if she had led a vigorous opposition to that war effort (remember Sen. Byrd of W. Virginia and his passionate speech?)- she didn't because she was already thinking about her own presidential aspirations back in 2002 as opposed to thinking about what a war would actually look like (hell, even Bush the elder AND Cheney knew that going into Iraq would be a disaster as far back as the first Gulf War). The fact is Obama is NOTHING like Bush- their backgrounds couldn't be more different and, as a result, their intellectual capabilities and vision for how to transform America also are radically different. Obama build a campaign from the ground up and beat an established Democratic machine led by insiders tied to Hill and Bill. Hillary will always be overshadowed by her more talented but flawed husband, but more importantly, the Iowa electorate, as well as other Obama supporters around the country know that leadership is not something you deserve (as Hillary presumes because she's been in politics for so long) but is something you earn with a combination of ideas, passion and character. People believe in Obama because he has all those things and the more we all see of Hill, the more we know that she is lacking in all three (although she does have some good ideas and would wise to continue to work in the Senate for the next 20 years where she will continue to be effective). I'm all for a female President someday- just not one who gets there on the name of her famous, ex-president husband.

[Nathan]

I'm truly amazed with the comments on this board. I still have faith in this country. But, we have become our own worse enemy. Don't you see what 7 years of George Bush has done to us! We can't even have a meaningful debate about who will be our next president without getting so nasty with each other. Oh, I forgot we are loving and understanding country. Right! Barack Obama may or may not be a lot of things but he is a decent man to his core. This is what you see in this man. You can say that about George Bush. Guess what, we have paid the price for it. I get the sense that he understands the enormous task at hand. It will be extremely difficult to bring this country together. He is the only one that can do this. But, he will need our help. I'm tiring of not liking the other side. It is very draining and takes up a lot of energy. We should all look in the mirror before passing judgement.

[ArmyVet]

In my opinion, what this country needs is a great Commander-inChief. Sobering reflection will make people examine both Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and B. Obama as never before. As they do this, I think Hillary will, once again, come in third. She would not be the strongest choice for the Democratic Party's presidential nominee. A. B. C. = Anybody But Clinton.

[Patrick]

Gee, three conspicuously well-written comments seeding the "on the job training" meme, and two or three deliberately misspelled "populist" rants about Oprah and Islam? Dear Team Hillary, you're not doing yourself any favors by manipulating article comments at major news outlets. The backlash is already beginning. We love Bill, but you've always just come across as a schemer.

Obama is perfectly suited to be President. He's been a lawyer and a U.S. Senator. He's an intelligent, reasonable, principled person with leadership ability. He has the magic x-factor that Hillary lacks: He's an inspiring speaker who makes people want to come together and do something bigger than themselves. This nonsense about Hillary's résumé (which isn't that much more impressive than Obama's, especially at the academic level) really needs to stop.

[Joe]

Congratulations Iowans, you have bought the Republican strategy and picked the media darling, Obama. Obama is the republican and media choice because he will lose the general election. Why are people so naive and run blindly after a good speaker and Oprah's favorite things? I guess we shouldn't be surprised look who's in the white house now, people will believe anything as long as its wrapped up in a nice package.

[Jwrightongal]

If Hillary or any Democrat uses Robert Novak as a tool to bash an opponent, that will most definitely mean instant political death. Robert Novak is a traitorous neocon who ousted Valerie Pflame for Cheney for purely partisan purposes. Any democrat who wants to win or survive politcally best never used this traitor for any cause ever.

[Kiku]

Clinton was leading in the polls, at her highest peak, until she started to get nasty. I've long thought she should fire Penn. But, it's too late now, she's lost my vote. I'm sure Penn has a set of statistics that shows if she fires him, she's sunk.

Karry Mays: that's an interesting point on the votes. However, we know the differences are much bigger than that list suggests. Hillary has always been willing to go to war.

In the White House, the administration turned to her to give Bill backbone.

On Iraq: 1. She didn't bother to read the intelligence, but Obama knew what was going on. She claims she thought the admin goal was a joint UN resolution. But, this is belied by the fact that she voted against a resolution that would have required Bush to work with UN, inspectors, and to seek approval from Congress before going to war. 2. They have both been voting to fund the war, I don't think any Democrat is willing to play a game of chicken with Bush over the troops. 3. A 2006 Washington Post article has Hillary drumming for war against Iran harder than Bush. 4. Obama and Clinton have sponsored very different bills for troop extradition, as was pointed out earlier. 5. A vote was held to tie Iraq funding to a schedule of troop extradition. It passed 80-14 and was vetoed by Bush. Clinton was the only Democrat to vote against it. 6. Clinton has now voted for Iran, which no other presidential candidate did. 7. Hillary wants to keep troops in to protect "vital interests", eg. oil, where as Obama sees that alternative energy and energy independence is the only solution.

They are different in other respects as well. Obama would meet with foreign leaders without preset conditions. After calling Obama naive and inexperienced, Hillary has now adopted this policy. Hillary supports torture, even though it's against the Geneva Conventions, and has ridiculed Obama for an old document that showed support for gun control and for being against the death penalty.

The biggist and most important difference is their personalities. Hillary likes to show she's tough, she lectures loud and clear on the popular opinion of the day, which often changes. She's also quick and eager to demonstrate she's ready for war. She's quick to attack others. She is often wrong. Obama stays calm, he wants to hear opposing opinions, he opposes using the military unless absolutely necessary, he believes in working together to find solutions. He is extremely intelligent and capable of understanding complex situations. He has shown time and again that his judgement is sound and correct. I personally personally prefer a calm person, capable of understanding the world, who has demonstrated sound judgement time and time again, to head the military.

[Gary]

Mark Penn's sarcastic remarks ---- "Does everyone know everything they need to know about Barack Obama?'' and "That's a decision you're going to have to make. I think at this point his record is not very well-known. And she is really well-known...."--- are, as Hillary herself would say, "right out of the Republican playbook." Karl Rove must be proud.

Is Hillary Clinton really well known?

Frankly, Mark Penn is delusional if he thinks such vapid scare tactics will convince the electorate that Hillary is the "inevitable" nominee. Take your meds, Penn, because until Hillary produces her documents from the past 2 Clinton Administrations--- without further delay--- his words ring very hollow.

Penn, you've got it backwards, while your and Hillary's chief nemesis, Barack Obama, has it right:

"We have just gone through one of the most secretive administrations in our history. And not releasing, I think, these records at the same time, Hillary, that you're making the claim that this is the basis for your experience, I think, is a problem." Senator Barack Obama charged during the October 29th presidential debate.

[Franklin]

In some sense, if a person really does think that experience is the be all to end all -- Vote Richardson. End of conversation (now that Dodd and Biden are out of it).

If they think that there are other qualities that matter beyond just time in elected office, or heading up jobs in the federal bureacracy, then vote based on those issues or qualities.

But don't tell me that you're voting for Hilary Clinton over Obama, because Clinton allegedly has more relevant "experience" (she doesn't).

As far as the George W. Bush parallels go I seem to recall that his success was due in large part to a famous political name, the family connections, and big money which drove his election in 2000 -- he was in every sense the establishment candidate. Say what you will about Obama -- he earned every vote that he received last night -- nothing was given to him on the basis of his family name or connections.

The win was an incredibly achievement on his part and those of his dedicated campaign workers. I hope they keep up the great work, stay positive, stay focused and keep things rolling through New Hampshire and beyond.

[Susan C. Larsen, Ph.D.]

Wow, did you all listen to Barak Obama's speech last night? Of course you did.
And of course you noticed how he was able to envision a new America where all
of us participate and take responsibility. He is simply more visionary and smarter
than the rest. He is also more temperate and more civil. I was so disappointed that
John Edwards didn't even deign to congratulate Obama on his Iowa victory.
That spoke volumes about Edwards, and I used to admire him. Too bad he is so consumed
by his candidacy that he can't stretch his mind and heart to behave properly.
Obama has the mind and the heart and the vision to take us forward. I'm looking forward
to an America where we wake up each day and think, "I admire our President. I wonder
what he will do today?" What a change. What a chance. Go for it, America, Support him, please.

[Keith]

To the Obama supporters: Your candidate has a natural shine that will be dangerous for the Hil's to mess with, surprising Hillary's would be so up front about it. Better to run on issues of substance than an avalanche of mud.

To the Hillary supporters: Your gal is the inevitable candidate, why worry? Personally, I believe this to be true, Iowa is nothing more than the first newsworthy event in the campaign, doesn't mean squat in the long run. The party machine is really behind her, however I do find it interesting that the media machine seems to be lining up behind Barack. What a battle!

How much mud can Hillary fling if she's going to need Barack as a VP?

To the person who pointed out the irony of Hillary's campaign of "change" in the light of her surrounding herself on the podium with those old dinosaurs, great catch. It really highlights the difference of how her and Bill ran the 90's campaigns, they were much sharper then, surprising that they have slipped in their handling of such imagery.

[Meghan Ritchie]

You all want someone with Washington experience? No one can beat Cheney and Rumsfeld as far as experience goes, and look how that turned out. And I'm sorry, but since when does being First Lady qualify as experience? Read up on the issues and pick a candidate you think is committed to making the best choices for the people of this country. I choose Obama.

[Double Standard/Not a Clinton Aide]

I wrote the first response on this blog and you inserted a comment about me being a Clinton aide. Actually I am a seventh grade teacher living in Los Angeles. I have a public policy master's degree from the same place Obama went to law school and I probably have more in common with him then Cllinton. I am not an aide, but I obviously do care about politics. I like Obama. I want to see him fighting for us in the Senate. I want to see him fulfill some of this great "potential" that people speak of before I support him for president.

As others have mentioned, Obama said he was the anti-war candidate. But then he voted against John Kerry's resolution to withdraw. He is patently the same as Hillary on the war. Vote for vote. So why the pass from Democrats? An antiwar speech means nothing if you don't walk the walk. For all his antiwar talk, he hasn't put forth any legislation or supported those who courageously have. In 2004, Obama said about the 2002 congressional Authorization for the Use of Military Force: "I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports. What would I have done? I don't know." On Iraq-related votes in the Senate, Obama's record identically matches Senator Clinton's--with the exception that Senator Clinton voted against the confirmation of General George Casey as Army chief of staff. Obama voted for him. For some reason people think Obama really is anti-war. They don't know his record.

I look at Clinton's experience and it powerful. For some reason, people still don't know how much she's accomplished in public service. It is funny to me that the same people who say Hillary tried to do too much as a first lady now say she doesn't have any experience. Forget that she is a powerful senator (when people said it couldn't be done). When Bill Clinton ran for president, he said that the country would get "two for one" because Hillary was his closest adviser. She was the only first lady to have an office in the West Wing. Yet some people think she was just knitting those eight years. NO EXPERIENCE? Come on. Hillary traveled to 79 countries on our behalf. She is credited with helping people all over the world, in places like Northern Ireland. There is a reason that people internationally are backing her. Domestically her work throughout her life for children and for healthcare are impressive. Sure she failed at universal healthcare, but she tried, and polls actually show that people trust her more than anyone else on that issue. Polls also show that healthcare is the top issue for voters after terrorism.

Honestly, Biden (who got no support) and Richardson probably have the best governing experience. Clearly people vote for reasons other than that. But making nice speeches is not enough to get me excited about a candidate. Obama is not running for class president. Excuse me if I want to see some results before I support someone for president.

I went to an Obama event in Los Angeles (to learn more) and they (including Obama) really did spent a lot of time bashing Hillary. It is a fine line. If you are making comparisons, fine. But when you spend SOO much time talking about your opponent negatively it makes it look like you don't have a lot going on and that you are bashing. It seems mean spirited. The other thing that was strange was that Obama's surrogates kept comparing him to MLK and Abe Lincoln They kept talking about this great potential. But what in Obama's experience bears out this great hope? He has an admirable background, but so far it is all about potential and not about anything he has actually done.

(I was not saying YOU are a Clinton aide, though I can see how you might have mis-read that. I have adjusted my previous comment there to be more clear. I was suggesting you re-read the item because it was Clinton aides IN THE ITEM who were saying that, not us. Sorry for the misunderstanding, but hey, it was the end of another 20-hour day. Thanks for reading--and coming back.)

[ProblemWithCaring]

I also am not comfortable with his Islamic schooling background...why has no attention to details like this been made! For christ sake the islamic people believe its perfectly ok to kill people who do not believe as they do and they will be honored in heaven. He was very quick to pronounce the fact he was a "christian" despite the fact he was schooled in an islamic school as a child.

Posted by: Joe

Hillary your days are numbered:

Attention White liberals who still want to hide behind the well-intentioned racists and lazy prejudices of white privilege: your days are numbered.

Attention Middle-Aging boomers, addicted to easy credit and cheap Chinese goods:

Attention Stubborn and lazy union members and teamsters who greed and selfishness block progress in health care, education and safety policies:

Attention Snake-oiled lobbyists and special interested groups who thinks their cause - should justify a 35 year federal government gridlock:

Your days are numbered.

Whether Obama gets the nom this time or not - a new Democrat was born, turned 18, and is ticked off about how you are ruining this country with the politics of fear.

Bill/Hillary/ Daschle /Kerry/Albright/Reid/Pelosi and all your ilk-- your days are numbered.

Get Fired UP for Change. Obama 2008

[Kiku]

DoubleStandard:

You claim that Obama is "patently the same" as Hillary. I disagree. For example:

White House: the New York Times reported that Bill's administration would turn to Hillary to strengthen Bill's resolve to go to war. She was more willing than he was to go to war.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/26/us/politics/26clinton.html?pagewanted=3&_r=1&hp”>New York Times

Iraq: Hillary said she did NOT read the intelligence. She is a lawyer, she knew, as did the rest of the nation, that the vote meant Bush COULD take us to war.

How do we know? She voted AGAINST the Levin Amendment to the Iraq Resolution, which would have required the President to conduct vigorous diplomacy at the U.N., and would have also required a separate Congressional authorization to unilaterally invade Iraq.

A 2006 Washington Post article tells of Hillary beating the war drums on Iran harder than President Bush.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/19/AR2006011903220.html

In her second term, she voted AGAINST an Iraq war funding bill that tied funds to progress benchmarks (80-14 voted for it). She was the ONLY Democrat to vote against it.

Iran: she did NOT learn her lesson, and voted to give Bush support for another war.

Pakistan: she recently spoke about Pakistan, and completely misunderstood their current election process. She thought Musharaf was going to be up for election shortly, when it is the parliment that is being elected. People make mistakes, but this is poignant because she touts superior foreign experience, her more extensive advisors, and Bill calls her a genius. In addition, during a debate, she said Pakistan was her biggest international concern. Finally, this mistake wasn't made in the heat of the moment as a reply to an audience member (she didn't allow that very often), but in a rehearsed and studied statement made twice on national TV. Here again, she was beating the drums without information, and she got it wrong. This is dangerous in my book.

They are different in other respects as well. Obama would meet with foreign leaders without preset conditions, as recommended by FP studies; after calling Obama naive and inexperienced, Hillary has now adopted this policy. Hillary supports torture, even though it's against the Geneve Conventions, and has ridiculed Obama for expressing support for gun control and against the death penalty.

The question for Hillary is this: Can she choose NOT to go to war? She's pushed Bill to use the military. Her Senate record is stronger than some Republicans, and sometimes stronger than Bush. Her past shows that she is ready for war, she does not hesitate to push for war.

Personally, I want a President who thinks long and hard before using the military. Obama has shown sound judgment and been right on many important issues many times over where Hillary, for all her experience, has been wrong. Obama has a personality that is patient, he likes to hear different and opposing sides to issues to understand them. Hillary does not. I would trust Obama in making a judgement to use the military, I don't think Hillary has the personality to be given that power.

[Kiku]

DoubleStandard:

You claim Hillary has experience.

It is clear that Hillary has been the champion of health, women's, and children's care. It isn’t enough to support these issues, the real test is if she has been able to effect any change. I have been reading the internet news and blogs for months. Not one post has been written about specific legislation that has resulted because of Hillary's actions. Neither can I find this information on her web site. Please, share this with us.

With regard to her White House years: She did have an office in the West Wing. She did attend some meetings. I've even read that Albright and Reno were her picks. However, I have also read that she was over-reactive, for example, she fired all of the travel staff at once. She had a chilling effect on the administration. Eventually, she was even kicked out of Bill's administration because ….. people didn’t like working with her.

Dodd and Biden have each stated that Hillary's White House experience wasn't sufficient to support an argument for presidential credentials. Here are some articles that discuss her experience:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/23/opinion/23rich.html?_r=2&ref=opinion&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion?bid=15&pid=263560

http://www.newsweek.com/id/81600

Having reasonable experience is essential. All of Democratic candidates have reasonable experience. The bigger question, is have the right lessons been learned, can this person lead us, can we trust this person to use integrity in the office, will they defend the constitution, will they use the military sparingly, will they find a balance between the corporations and the people, do they have the capacity to understand complex situations, can they reach out to other people nationally and internationally to get people to work together, do they bring together sound advisors with good judgment, have they demonstrated this?

Some of these answers can be found in how the campaign has been managed. Obama has led the campaign with his vision for change, a change that will unite people to work together. That vision is being understood. His vision is backed by sound legislative work in the US Senate and the State Senate. More importantly, it is grounded in judgement proven time and again, and a strong core of ethics that he has not breached in the campaign. It is why Kucinich and Richardson sent their constituency to Obama. Here are some articles that discuss Obama’s character, and why it is more suited to the presidency:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/magazine/04obama-t.html?pagewanted=1

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/18/opinion/18brooks.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

[Kiku]

DoubleStandard,

I suggest that you start to do some research into the real background of each of the candidates. A rally isn't going to spell it out, but it will give you a place to meet the candidate.

You ask for Obama's experience.

Academically, he has great credentials: Foreign Policy Degree from Columbia, Law Degree from Harvard, graduated magna cum laude from Harvard (I've read both?), and herse served as the President of the Harvard Law Review, one of the most prestigious student positions in the world.

As a community organizer in south Chicago, he moved the Chicago Housing Authority to remove asbestos in housing. He established a job-training center. And he worked in the streets on voter registration.

He has been a Civil Rights Lawyer, and a Professor/lecturer of Constitutional Law.

In the Illinois State Senate, he worked on welfare legislation and the earned income tax credit that gave over $100 million in tax cuts for families throughout Illinois over 3 years.. He expanded early childhood education. He passed a statute mandating the electronic recording of interrogations and confessions in homicide cases, which took close work with the resistant law enforcement.

In the US Senate: the Lugar-Obama Act for reduction of conventional and nuclear weapons world wide, Coburn-Obama Transparency Act transparency in federal spending, aid for Congo and Darfur.

He is a member of the several Senate Committees:
• US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, that plays a vital role in shaping US policy around the world.
• Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee that addresses, among other things, issues of immigration and our borders.
• Health, Education, Labor and Pensions

You can read about his contributions at his web site. Look at the issues menu, and at the bottom of each page is his Record of Advocacy. Here is one on civil rights:

Obama has worked to promote civil rights and fairness in the criminal justice system throughout his career. As a community organizer, Obama helped 150,000 African Americans register to vote. As a civil rights lawyer, Obama litigated employment discrimination, housing discrimination, and voting rights cases. As a State Senator, Obama passed one of the country's first racial profiling law and helped reform a broken death penalty system. And in the U.S. Senate, Obama has been a leading advocate for protecting the right to vote, helping to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act and leading the opposition against discriminatory barriers to voting.

Another on education: Obama has been a leader on educational issues throughout his career. In the Illinois State Senate, Obama was a leader on early childhood education, helping create the state's Early Learning Council. In the U.S. Senate, Obama has been a leader in working to make college more affordable. His very first bill sought to increase the maximum Pell Grant award to $5,100. As a member of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee, Obama helped pass legislation to achieve that goal in the recent improvements to the Higher Education Act. Obama has also introduced legislation to create Teacher Residency Programs and to increase federal support for summer learning opportunities.

On healthcare: Health Insurance: In 2003, Barack Obama sponsored and passed legislation that expanded health care coverage to 70,000 kids and 84,000 adults. In the U.S. Senate, Obama 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. Women's Health: 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.

(Wow! For an 'average' reader, Kiku, you sure know a lot of detailed stuff that the Obama campaign would like everyone to know. Thanks for sharing.)

[Long Legs (Mohawk Indian)]

"It is really funny how the Pot calls the Kettle Black!" The O'bama supporters claim the Hillary supporters are negative and vendictive, when that is exactly what they are doing to Hillary!!!!!
I only want to say one thing O'bama did not have a Landslide Majority Vote!!!!! There were the
other 62% of Voters the O'bama supporters are discounting. Get a reality check!!!!!!

(Hmm. What item are you reading? There's nothing in here about any "landslide" victory.)

[Double Standard/Not a Clinton Aide]

Kiku--I never have claimed to have gotten substantive information from going to an Obama rally. My point was that Obama is as negative as any other candidate, and more so than Hillary to this point. I don't blame him for that, although I was surprised by how he spent so much time on her instead of himself. But I guess that is campaigning. It is how you move up. But let's not pretend otherwise. As Long Legs mentioned, all sides are pretty passionate here and willing to put down (or paint as less than perfect) the other side. Now Hillary is in a position where she has to do more of what Obama's been doing for months. On this point, neither Obama or Hillary is any more saintly than you or I would be.

On Hillary's experience--she tried to get universal healthcare for our country. That is impressive, and incredibly ambitious. Nixon, who is generally seen as highly successful legislatively, was never able to accomplish this either. But the difference was that Hillary stuck her neck out for us. Sure, she made some really big tactical errors. I was mad at the time. But who else has really tried? She dedicated months of her life to the cause. I think that is damn admirable.

You may want to read: Hillary's Unprecedented Experience on the World Stage. It describes some of the things Hillary did as first lady.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lissa-muscatine-and-melanne-verveer/hillarys-unprecedented-e_b_76883.html

[Double Standard]

You give a bio of Obama. You mention Obama being an excellent student. Good for him. I have two graduate degrees from Harvard, and I've spent more time in the "trenches". I am a lot younger than Obama. I don't pretend to be presidential material. Obama's bio is a good start, but mostly I see people talking about his "potential". His first job out of college was to work for a corporation. I'm not saying that is bad, but I don't see him as all admirable. Maybe look at Hillary's experience. You will see that she has similar, but I believe more and bettter experience for this job AT THIS POINT.

Hillary bio: She was elected president of the Wellesley College Government Association in college. She became the first student in Wellesley College history to deliver their commencement address. According to reports by the Associated Press, her speech received a standing ovation lasting seven minutes. She was featured in an article published in Life magazine.

She entered Yale Law School, where she served on the Board of Editors of the Yale Review of Law and Social Action. During her second year, she worked at the Yale Child Study Center, learning about new research on early childhood brain development and working as a research assistant on the seminal work, Beyond the Best Interests of the Child (1973). She also took on cases of child abuse at Yale-New Haven Hospital, and volunteered at New Haven Legal Services to provide free advice for the poor.

She began a year of post-graduate study on children and medicine at the Yale Child Study Center. Her first scholarly paper, "Children Under the Law", was published in the Harvard Educational Review in late 1973 and became frequently cited in the field.

ARKANSAS
Rodham co-founded the Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families, a state-level alliance with the Children's Defense Fund, in 1977.

Following the November 1978 election of her husband as Governor of Arkansas, Rodham became First Lady of Arkansas in January 1979, her title for a total of twelve years (1979–1981, 1983–1992). Clinton appointed her chair of the Rural Health Advisory Committee the same year, where she successfully obtained federal funds to expand medical facilities in Arkansas' poorest areas without affecting doctors' fees.

In the summer of 1970, she was awarded a grant to work at Marian Wright Edelman's Washington Research Project, where she was assigned to Senator Walter Mondale's Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, researching migrant workers' problems in housing, sanitation, health and education; Edelman would become a significant mentor to her.

As First Lady of Arkansas, Hillary Clinton chaired the Arkansas Educational Standards Committee from 1982 to 1992, where she sought to bring about reform in the state's court-sanctioned public education system. One of the most important initiatives of the entire Clinton governorship, she fought a prolonged but ultimately successful battle against the Arkansas Education Association] to put mandatory teacher testing as well as state standards for curriculum and classroom size in place. She introduced Arkansas' Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youth in 1985, a program that helps parents work with their children in preschool preparedness and literacy. She was named Arkansas Woman of the Year in 1983 and Arkansas Mother of the Year in 1984.

From 1987 to 1991 she chaired the American Bar Association's Commission on Women in the Profession, which addressed gender bias in the law profession and induced the association to adopt measures to combat it. She was twice named by the National Law Journal as one of the 100 most influential lawyers in America, in 1988 and in 1991.

[Double Standard]

HILLARY IN THE WHITE HOUSE

Along with Senator Ted Kennedy, she was the major force behind the State Children's Health Insurance Program in 1997, a federal effort that provided state support for children whose parents were unable to provide them with health coverage. She promoted nationwide immunization against childhood illnesses and encouraged older women to seek a mammogram to detect breast cancer, with coverage provided by Medicare.

She successfully sought to increase research funding for prostate cancer and childhood asthma at the National Institutes of Health. The First Lady worked to investigate reports of an illness that affected veterans of the Gulf War, which became known as the Gulf War syndrome. Together with Attorney General Janet Reno, Clinton helped create the Office on Violence Against Women at the Department of Justice. In 1997, she initiated and shepherded the Adoption and Safe Families Act, which she regarded as her greatest accomplishment as First Lady.

She helped create Vital Voices, an international initiative sponsored by the United States to promote the participation of women in the political processes of their countries.

[Double Standard]

Clinton as Senator
(Just a few highlights)

Clinton has enjoyed high approval ratings for her job as senator within New York, with all-time high of 74 percent approving (including half of Republicans). She is currently polling in the 60s.

According to Sourcewatch.org:

Clinton has pressed for education, labor, and technology infrastructure programs to assist economic development in depressed regions of New York. For example, in 2003, Clinton solicited Tata Consultancy Services to set up shop in economically beleaguered Buffalo, New York.

In 2005, Clinton co-sponsored with Senator Lindsey Graham the AMTAC proposal regarding incentives and rewards for completely domestic American manufacturing companies. As an advocate for her state, Senator Clinton led a bipartisan effort to bring broadband access to rural communities; co-sponsored the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act; included language in the Energy Bill to provide tax exempt bonding authority for environmentally conscious construction projects; and introduced an amendment calling for funding of new job creation to repair, renovate and modernize public schools.

In May 2005, Senator Clinton joined forces with her former adversary, House Speaker Newt Gingrich, on a proposal for incremental universal health care. In June, 2005, Senator Clinton united with Senator Bill Frist to push for the modernization of medical records, claiming that thousands of deaths caused by medical mistakes, such as misreading prescriptions, can be prevented by greater reliance on computer technology.

Clinton sought to establish an independent, bipartisan panel patterned after the 9/11 Commission to investigate what went wrong with federal, state and local governments' response to Hurricane Katrina. She failed to win over a two-thirds majority needed to overcome procedural hurdles in the Senate rules.

On November 29, 2005, Clinton, together with Joe Lieberman and Evan Bayh introduced the Family Entertainment Protection Act. The act is intended to protect children from inappropriate content found in video games. Similar bills have been filed in some U.S. states such as Michigan and Illinois, but were ruled to be unconstitutional.

Hillary Clinton recieved an "A" on the Drum Major Institute's 2005 Congressional Scorecard on middle-class issues. She received an A+ from Save Darfur (Obama also did well, getting an A).

Following a May 2007 Supreme Court decision limiting workers' rights to sue for federal wage discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Civil Rights Act of 1991, Clinton, along with Sens. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), and Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), introduced legislation to clarify congressional intent on the issue in an effort to "restore full protection against wage discrimination."

Caucuses/Non-Legislative Committees:
Democratic Policy Committee
Democratic Technology and Communications Committee
Board Member, Legal Services Corporation
Senate National Guard Caucus
Senate Rural Health Caucus
Senate Steel Caucus
Chair, Steering and Coordination Committee
Chair, Task Force of National Health Care Reform.

Committees:
Armed Services, Member
Environment & Public Works, Member
Health, Education, Labor & Pensions, Member
Special Committee on Aging, Member
Subcommittee On Readiness and Management Support, Member
Subcommittee on Airland, Member
Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety, Member
Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities, Member
Subcommittee on Superfund and Environmental Health, Chair
Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Member

[Kiku]

Just for the record, I am not associated with Obama's campaign. I did create an account on his site to tell them a video link was broken. I'm just a mom interested in the campaign. Hillary's Iran vote took me by surprise, and her negative campaign put me over the top, so I did some homework on Obama.

The press has produced some amazing articles. Thanks for working to keep the campaigns honest.

[Eddie]

It is not strange that Clinton is now planning to use dirty tactics. This is one of the best things she is noted for. All her private investigators, and News Media, especially the Clinton News Network will now be gunning for Obama.
They are now bringing up that he used dope when he was younger, (so did Bill), they are asking the media to check into Obama to see what they can find on him. I personally believe they are not going to find much of anything that is detrimental to his character. He is a man of honesty and integrity who stands for major change for all Americans, not just a select few. Clinton is promising the people that she is the one who can lead and make changes. What those changes will be is higher taxes that willaffect the middle class and poor. We have had enough of the Washington insiders. It will be refreshing to have someone outside the circle like Obama.
Keep an eye on Hillary for she is going to get down right nasty in trying to show that Obama is not who he says he is. Just like she tried to cover up Bill's elicit sex affairs when he went after the women who didn't want him. Also, I believe if she was on the up and up, she would open up the White House Papers. The problem with that is she will prove she was lying about a lot of things.
Hillary is not Presidential material, and her background proves that. One example, she put on a great act of the hurt wife when the Monica scandal hit. She tried to lie for her husband, but that backfired.
Eventually, people will see her for what she is, and they will watch her fade off into the sunset.

[Believer in the Better]

Hillary (if she gets credit for her co-dependent, co-presidency): Botched an opportunity to deliver health care, brought us a devastating trade program (China and NAFTA), participated in a (very undignified) psycho-drama administration (read David Georgen's account), co-opted the Republican welfare-to-work program that destroyed a lot of poor families and greatly benefited coroporations that enjoyed a burgeoned labor force and reaped tax write-offs in the process. And she voted, not once, but twice, to grant Shrub's invasion permission. And her campaign tactics make her look like Rove in drag.

(To paraphrase Texan Jim Hightower, 'it's not that we don't like her; we just can't stand that skunk she's dragging along beside her.' And fellow Texan, Molly Ivins--who never missed a chance to remind people that she had warned against the election of fellow-Texan George Bush, emphatically advertised that she would NEVER vote for Hillary.)

Edwards: Close your eyes and listen to his litigator- approach. Sounds like Bush with the cocky, "for us or against us" proclamations and refusals to engage in negotiations with anyone or group that doesn't agree with him. That approach of dividing has played a role in the mess we're in at this very moment.

Obama: Not enough experience? Reformers don't get the chance to build a long resume' because the powers cream them quickly because they threaten their strangle-hold. And he takes the tough stands, doesn't engage in the mud-slinging but doesn't allow mud-balls to be ignored. He's a judicious unifier and includer, giving every argument dignity and honor, but always coming down on the side of justice and right--and brotherhood. He's our only hope.

It's time for a sea change!

[Roger Waun]

I'm so tired of the Harvard, Ivy League crowd making a claim to leadership in this country.
Just look at the money that has been bundled by Ivy League Wall Streeters in support of both Hillary and Obama, and you'll see what Edwards is talking about when he warns about trading Corporate Democrats for Corporate Republicans.

Its time we stop cow-towing to these elitists!

Let's choose a person with a working class background who cares about maintaining a large American middle class, while helping our most vulnerable citizens survive.

[Marks]

Who is afraid of Obama's "Muslim" roots? READ HIS STORY! I'm in Kansas just learning about his Mother's life began here and her parents helped to raise him.
He was a child taking to Indonesia, but went to high school in Hawaii. His mother was named "Stanley" after her father makes his story pretty funny.

Too bad for Hillary at the moment, having to dismiss Iowa because she landed in third place.

If Billary defines past Democrats, Obama should distance himself farther from them. Where is the "coming together" after these primary events.
Gore was a difference choice than Bush, but I hated the John Kerry Presidency pick. That to me was like when Democrats picked Michael Dukakis.
I don't want Bill back in the White House. Increasingly that's what Hillary has to fight. It's not Obama. It's how people perceive her personality.

Do we want Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton in the White House? The World would think we're crazy giving ultimate power to those families.

Jeb Bush would be after her wanting to be President?

She should stop talking down about Obama's inexperience.

Of course he doesn't have a long political career and that's a good thing.

I'm glad this primary process will go pretty fast, but my focus is on the NFL playoffs more than these political playoffs.

[Under35]

Although I admire Clinton's dedication, she represents an "old guard." I loved Bill Clinton - he inspired us and saw us through one of the greatest economic booms. Unfortunately, I simply do not believe Hillary has what I call the "it" factor. I truly am inspired by Obama. I think we need a fresh face, a new start -- someone who can lead America and put us back on the global map. That's Obama's appeal -- I think he can help secure the future of this country for me, my family and my kids.

[Jim McDonnel]

With the catastrophic mess that Bush has left in America and in the world we need more than a nice guy who gives a good speech. We need someone with experience and a lot of it. Not just Hillary's intelligence and experience, we need the benefit of President Bill Clinton's experience, track record on economical and foreign issues, and his good-standing in the world.

The only way to get everything we need at this momentous and consequential time is to vote for Sen. Hillary Clinton.

Kiku--Thanks for your comments. I certainly agree with you that Bill Clinton should have done more to help in Rwanda. Clinton has called failing to act in Rwanda his greatest regret as president. Clearly there is no upside to act p