Hillary vs. Rudy
It was inevitable that Hillary would respond after Rudy chastised Hillary for not condemning MoveOn.org’s ‘Betray Us’ ad against Gen. David Petraeus. Her response was less than stirring:
“It’s hardly surprising that Mayor Giuliani is running the first negative ad of the ‘08 campaign, given his inability to justify his unqualified support for President Bush’s failed Iraq strategy.”
That won’t measure up to the efficiency with which her husband’s war room responded. It’s also worth noting that she didn’t distance herself from MoveOn’s NY Times ad. More importantly, she isn’t repentant for her statement to Gen. Petraeus’ that his report “requires the willing suspension of disbelief.” She’s clearly implying that he’s either lying or too incompetent to put together data that accurately reflects the situation in Iraq.
It’s also worth noting that Hillary claims that Mayor Giuliani is running the “first negative ad of the ‘08 campaign”, especially after Politico.com quoted an anonymous Democrat senator as making this statement:
“No one wants to call [Petraeus] a liar on national TV,” noted one Democratic senator, who spoke on the condition on anonymity. “The expectation is that the outside groups will do this for us.”
Why would Hillary or any other Democrat directly call Gen. Petraeus a liar when they’re counting on MoveOn for that? It’s also laughable to think that Hillary is chiding someone for going negative after she essentially called Gen. Petraeus a liar. Personally, I’m glad that Rudy’s hitting Hillary hard for using weasel words to call Gen. Petraeus a liar.
That MoveOn.org ad isn’t going away anytime soon. In fact, I think it’s this year’s gift that keeps on giving to Republicans. Democrats won’t distance themselves from MoveOn. Republican presidential candidates will talk about it in their stump speeches, asking why Democrats won’t denounce such a vile organization. I’d be surprised if the RNC didn’t create a web advertisement with the quote “Now it’s our Party: we bought it, we own it, and we’re going to take it back.” Then show Obama, Hillary and the second tier candidates standing silent when asked to denounce MoveOn.Their silence will be deafening.
Technorati Tags: Rudy Giuliani, Hillary, MoveOn.org, David Petraeus, Election 2008
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog
September 15th, 2007 at 7:49 am
Moveon will soon be moving on if the Dems keep supporting (or at least not denouncing) them. I will just sit back and watch the meltdown with extreme joy.
September 15th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
Fascinating the way republicans have seized upon the MoveOn.org ad, and wondered why none of the Democratic candidates have distanced themselves from the effort. Surely, these intelligent people are aware of the swatting they’re taking from the likes of Fox Noise and the rightwingnuts; I guess the question is really, why are they not taking the bait?
Could it be that the country agrees with MoveOn and Hillary? With conditions on the ground so diametrically opposed to what the Bush cabal claims (and with a history of being wrong on every count, that’s no stretch), the people — at least 70% of them — have come to the conclusion that the Iraq War was a mistake and we need to get out. Even the military, historically the republican’s purview, is shifting to the Democrats.
Nevertheless, I agree that MoveOn’s ad is the gift that keeps on giving. There is no way that MoveOn could have ever afforded the widespread coverage of the ad that it has received, and we all know that it is repetition in advertising that makes it work. If only you could post images in the comments section…
Could you post the ad again, please?
September 15th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
I wouldn’t be surprised by Hillary’s tepid playbook response. Nary a one of these clowns; Obama, Pretty boy, Kucinich and the others are going to even answer why they aren’t denouncing Moveon.org.
Thats because Move On is carrying the water for them. They are doing the dirtytricks so they can all stay above it and act like its nothing.
The trade off, of course, is that they have to tacitly toe the radical screaming socialist line, until the election at least.
The plus side is that Americans who are paying any attention at all are seeing all the half assed excuse for answers, and if its one thing Americans want to hear from its candidates, its straight answers, which they are not getting on this kind of crap.
September 15th, 2007 at 11:23 pm
Do the Swift Boat Vets for Truth ring any bells?
September 16th, 2007 at 7:28 am
Not even close. S-boat vets were not a bunch of hysterics attacking an active duty officer they never served with or knew little about.
September 16th, 2007 at 12:07 pm
Nor was the entire Republican party kissing their ass.
September 16th, 2007 at 12:25 pm
[...] Hillary Clinton dominated all other candidates yesterday with 36% buzz share in Wonkosphere. While conservative bloggers continued to discuss Rudy Giuliani’s ad yesterday criticizing her connection to the Petraeus ad (Giuliani has a new accompanying video), liberal bloggers were all chatting about Wes Clark’s endorsement of Clinton, “She will be a great leader for the United States of America and a great commander in chief for the men and women in uniform”. Clark’s endorsement came at a perfect time–it appears to have driven down MSM attention to the MoveOn storyline. Bookmark this post: [...]
September 16th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
No, the Swifters were a bunch of hysterics attacking a war hero, funded by a megalomaniac and coordinated — illegally — with the entire republican party, by saint Rove. Not one republican denounced the Swifters, and yet you expect in this situation that a privately funded (by millions of ordinary citizens, I might add) political action group should be denounced by anyone?
I say again: funny how the republicans can dish it out, but can’t take it.
Can we post the ad again, please? Let’s make sure everyone sees it as much as possible.
September 16th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
Aaww! So, it’s all because that s.o.b. Karl Rove huh? Whose doing the whining now?
And thanks for pointing out yet another difference. “Millions” is it? As apposed to a few vets who raised their own money and ran their own ads without getting the special one time good deal from a freindly New York Times.
Yes, please do run it again! And again, and again. Lets see how much that endears them to the American public, and remind them what a bunch of scum they really are.
September 16th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
Sort of speaks for itself.
September 16th, 2007 at 9:36 pm
Yep, so does this:
According to the March 10, 2004, Washington Post, “The Democratic 527 organizations have drawn support from some wealthy liberals determined to defeat Bush. They include financier George Soros who gave $1.46 million to MoveOn.org Voter Fund (in the form of matching funds to recruit additional small donors); Peter B. Lewis, chief executive of the Progressive Corp., who gave $500,000 to MoveOn.org Voter Fund; and Linda Pritzker, of the Hyatt hotel family, and her Sustainable World Corp., who gave $4 million to the joint fundraising committee.” [20]
So when are the Dems going to own up?
Not that Im holding my breath or anything.
September 16th, 2007 at 10:36 pm
By the way, Swiftboat Vets never implied Kerry was a traitor, only a self aggrandizing phony who they saw as unfit to be President.
I spose your gonna say something about Bush’s National Guard records now, I know you guys like to cut and paste, huh?
Cheers.
September 17th, 2007 at 7:04 am
BTW, Rocky, y’all are always so fired up ’bout the “Swift Boaters” attacking a “verified hero.” I do suppose there’s not another “Swift Boater” that ever got pinned, right?
Seems to me this is kinda like no one ever being able to attack that looney who lost her son because she has the moral high ground by her son’s sacrifice, despite the fact that many of her attackers have also lost sons (and daughters).
Maybe the “moral high ground” on these issues is like everything else in looneys’ lives: relative? Relative in the sense that if it agrees with your agenda and worldview, it’s correct, but if it doesn’t it’s immoral?
When will the relativist kooks get it through their heads it’s not “relative” that counts, it’s “relevant”.