Obama Takes Gloves Off
After reading this article, it’s safe to say that Barack Obama is taking the gloves off against Hillary Clinton. Look at what he just said in Iowa:
“I think the fact of the matter is that Sen. Clinton is claiming basically the entire eight years of the Clinton presidency as her own, except for the stuff that didn’t work out, in which case she says she has nothing to do with it,” Obama said, and added, referring to his relationship with his wife, Michelle, “There is no doubt that Bill Clinton had faith in her and consulted with her on issues, in the same way that I would consult with Michelle, if there were issues,” Obama said. “On the other had, I don’t think Michelle would claim that she is the best qualified person to be a United States Senator by virtue of me talking to her on occasion about the work I’ve done.”
Rest assured that Hillary’s minions won’t let that go unanswered. Metaphorically speaking, that’s a stiff right hook to Hillary’s jaw. It’ll be interesting to see if Bill Clinton plays the ‘Boo-hoo card’ again. That didn’t play well the last time. I doubt it’d work this time. Here’s another shot from Obama that’s sure to sting:
“Our most successful presidents have been people who were successful not because of their wealth of Washington experience,” Obama said, “but because of the life lessons and schools of hard knocks that they had gone through.”
That’s supported by the fact that most of our recent presidents have been governors first. Only two people went directly from being a senator to being a president, with JFK being the last one almost a half century ago.
Hillary isn’t inspiring much loyalty from some Democrats:
I thumb my nose at media elite, and throw my support behind any other Democratic contender, going so far as to pledge my vote in the general election to the Republican, any Republican, if my party nominates this pathetic excuse for a candidate. Here’s why:
1. Clinton does not have the credentials to lead America. She has no track record of successful management of any large organization. She has never led the charge for successful passage of any consequential legislation. Even liberal Democrats give Hillary a pitiful 60% approval rating for piggyback voting, i.e. a failing grade on legislation Clinton supported but did not initiate.
2. She is ethically unsuitable for the office of president. Clinton will do or say anything to get elected. Her recorded support on opposite sides of the same issue recently came home to roost. This isn’t the first time opponents have caught Hillary in the act of doublespeak. Not long ago, Clinton equivocated her stance on the Iraqi war, stating, “I do not think it is smart strategy to set a date certain.” More recently, she introduced legislation setting a date certain to bring the troops home.
3. Clinton casually employs intimidation, marginalization, and fear of elimination to silence detractors. As first lady, Clinton viciously vilified numerous women levying sexual harassment charges against hubby Bubba. Her disingenuous finger pointing exemplifies the depths she is willing to sink to deflect blame. Had Monicagate not blossomed into a full-blown national scandal, Hillary very well may have destroyed the lives of numerous womanized victims.
This is clear-headed thinking for the most part. The mentions of Hillary’s ethical unsuitability and her lack of a successful track record legislatively are things that Republicans will surely pick up on. In fact, I think Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani have already started that discussion.
That’s only a partial list of reasons this blogger gives for not supporting Hillary. You’ll want to read them all at the link above.
Hillary’s campaign has now attacked Obama, though it isn’t on Obama’s comments:
This morning, we learned that Senator Obama has been using his leadership PAC to
give political contributions to officials in the early primary states. In fact, 68 percent of contributions from his PAC have gone to those in states that are scheduled to hold nominating contests on February 5th or earlier.It is our understanding that a candidate’s campaign is barred from using the
candidate’s leadership PAC to benefit his or her campaign which is why we shut down HillPAC when Senator Clinton announced her run for the White House.
The last thing Hillary should do is accuse Obama of being unethical. She’ll lose that fight everytime. Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton has responded to Hillary’s attack:
Whatever happened to the confident frontrunner who said she wouldn’t attack other Democrats just two weeks ago? The latest personal attack from Hillary Clinton is a completely false attempt to misrepresent Barack Obama’s full disclosure of his campaign finances. Senator Obama’s commitment to disclosure is one that Hillary Clinton does not share, and until Senator Clinton is willing to make this commitment, by disclosing her White House records, the list of donors to her husband’s presidential library, how much her bundlers raise, and releasing her personal tax returns to the public, she’s not really in a position to point fingers at others.
I’ve seen Obama growing as a candidate lately. He’s gaining confidence and keeping Hillary off stride. Meanwhile, Hillary has tried regaining the momentum she had earlier but it’s apparent that she’s a bit perplexed at how she should attack Obama. Whenever she tries attacking him, he’s had a sharp reply.
Each time that happens, he gains some respect while Hillary loses ground. That isn’t a dynamic that Hillary can afford to continue. She’s doing her best to slap that image down but she hasn’t found an effective way to counter Obama’s points. She’d better figure out a way to counter Obama’s points or she could be turning her coronation into a real race.
Technorati Tags: Obama, Hillary, Bill Clinton, Nomination, Ethics, Mark Penn, Election 2008
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog
November 27th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
I am the “unloyal” Democrat highlighted in your article. Thank you so much for this link. It is definitely difficult to be a Democrat living in Maryland (an incredibly blue state) who writes an article like the one you publicized.
For some reason, people automatically assume I am an Obama plant or a Republican in Democrats clothing. I am here to state I am neither. When I tell people I am looking very closely at Biden and Dodd and will likely cast my vote for one of them in the primary, they laugh at me. Why? Because they are unelectable? I don’t understand that. Both of them are certainly qualified to be president. So what exactly makes them unelectable? That they haven’t raised enough money? That the national news media ignores them? That no one has made a rock star video about them and posted it on YouTube? That nobody talks about them? This kind of thinking disturbs me. People need to ask themselves why we aren’t talking about them. As far as I’m concerned, we should.
The primary election is one of the only times each American citizen has a true opportunity to participate in the democratic process. Right now, my party has seven credible candidates to choose from. Whatever the media says at this stage of the election, it doesn’t really matter because no one has cast any votes. So, polls, news predictions, they’re all posturing with no substance. All of us need to recognize that.
It is our duty to vote for the candidate who most closely represents our own personal interests in the primary and it is not “disloyal” to do so. If we don’t know who that is, it is easy to do simple research. Look at a candidate’s voting record. Read articles. Look at how they speak and whether they are actually saying anything. Most Americans don’t do this. I find that infuriating.
If Hillary wins in the primaries, so be it. At that point, it will be for all Democrats to decide whether they want a Democratic president at all costs. Thank goodness we are not yet at that point. So, let the chips fall where they may. Right now, we all have a voice. Let’s use it by voting our own conscience.