Clinton Vs Obama, Mystery Creator Revealed.
Hey folks,
The lead up to this coming election is the same as all others. Candidates throwing, dishing, accusing, even to calling names. Attacking their rivals, telling you they are the best for the job. Making promises they know they can, nor will never keep. However, this run up, has started a year early. Clinton and Obama both said, "We will run a clean campaign." Folks, they are lying right there. It is NOT in the liberal nature to be honest to begin with. It is in their nature to attack and attempt to destroy anyone the opposes them. They WILL lie, cheat, and steal, or anything else it takes to win.
But you see, the thing is, they do not want you to know that. They want to come across as "nice." they want to appear innocent of any underhanded tactics. So want do they do? They convince, or pay, someone else to do it for them and then deny having taken any part in it.
Get this, the Hillary camp want you to think that there is not that much difference between her and Obama when it comes to the war issue. From the AP last nigh,
During a public forum on Monday night, Mark J. Penn, the chief strategist for Clinton (D-N.Y.), challenged Obama's antiwar credentials by paraphrasing comments Obama made in 2004 about his uncertainty over the war; former president Bill Clinton reportedly made similar remarks about Obama (D-Ill.) at a fundraiser in Manhattan last week. When asked to support the claims, Clinton officials provided pages of Obama quotations -- some of them abridged -- from 2002 and 2004.
Clinton voted for the 2002 resolution authorizing the war, while Obama, though he was not yet in the Senate, said at the time that he opposed the war. Obama uses the difference to make the point that he has the judgment to be president, even if he has served only two years in Washington.
His argument cuts to the core of what the Clinton campaign is selling to voters, which is the idea that she is uniquely qualified, by dint of a lifetime in public service, to serve as president. The experience argument, they believe, can ease qualms about Clinton, particularly among left-leaning Democrats {LWL} who might otherwise support her but have deep reservations about her vote for the war.
This is funny folks. Basically, Obama told the truth. He has been talking about her flip flopping all over the place over the war. "I stand by the President." "If I were president, there would be no war." It is the right thing to do." "We have no business being in Iraq." When Saddam was captured? "This is a great day. This is why I voted to give the President permission." "If I become President, I will END THIS WAR!!!" "When I’m President, some of our forces will remain in Iraq." All Hillary, through the last four years. All Obama is doing, is pointing out the truth. Meanwhile, he said that he was not privy to all the information at the time, but based on what hew knows NOW, he probably would not have agreed with the use of force in this situation.
But then again, Obama really doesn’t seem so bight. Maybe inexperienced would be a better word.
On Tuesday, Obama released a video declaring his opposition to the war in no uncertain terms, with snippets from statements he made in 2002 and 2004, including this quote: "I don't oppose war in all circumstances. But what I do oppose is a dumb war." Obama has begun circulating pamphlets at his campaign events with the full text of the speech he gave in 2002 declaring his opposition to the war even at a time when it was relatively popular.
"Dumb war"? Is that like saying, "I don’t want to play your dumb game, I’m going to take my ball and go home"? Dumb war? That’s an intelligent statement.
Remember the YouTube video attacking Hillary Clinton? It has been a big mystery now for a few days on who created it. The video showed Hillary as "Big Brother" and the video's final image reads "BarackObama.com." Well, according to The Washington Post,
Hey folks,
The lead up to this coming election is the same as all others. Candidates throwing, dishing, accusing, even to calling names. Attacking their rivals, telling you they are the best for the job. Making promises they know they can, nor will never keep. However, this run up, has started a year early. Clinton and Obama both said, "We will run a clean campaign." Folks, they are lying right there. It is NOT in the liberal nature to be honest to begin with. It is in their nature to attack and attempt to destroy anyone the opposes them. They WILL lie, cheat, and steal, or anything else it takes to win.But you see, the thing is, they do not want you to know that. They want to come across as "nice." they want to appear innocent of any underhanded tactics. So want do they do? They convince, or pay, someone else to do it for them and then deny having taken any part in it.
Get this, the Hillary camp want you to think that there is not that much difference between her and Obama when it comes to the war issue. From the AP last nigh,
During a public forum on Monday night, Mark J. Penn, the chief strategist for Clinton (D-N.Y.), challenged Obama's antiwar credentials by paraphrasing comments Obama made in 2004 about his uncertainty over the war; former president Bill Clinton reportedly made similar remarks about Obama (D-Ill.) at a fundraiser in Manhattan last week. When asked to support the claims, Clinton officials provided pages of Obama quotations -- some of them abridged -- from 2002 and 2004.
Clinton voted for the 2002 resolution authorizing the war, while Obama, though he was not yet in the Senate, said at the time that he opposed the war. Obama uses the difference to make the point that he has the judgment to be president, even if he has served only two years in Washington.
His argument cuts to the core of what the Clinton campaign is selling to voters, which is the idea that she is uniquely qualified, by dint of a lifetime in public service, to serve as president. The experience argument, they believe, can ease qualms about Clinton, particularly among left-leaning Democrats {LWL} who might otherwise support her but have deep reservations about her vote for the war.
This is funny folks. Basically, Obama told the truth. He has been talking about her flip flopping all over the place over the war. "I stand by the President." "If I were president, there would be no war." It is the right thing to do." "We have no business being in Iraq." When Saddam was captured? "This is a great day. This is why I voted to give the President permission." "If I become President, I will END THIS WAR!!!" "When I’m President, some of our forces will remain in Iraq." All Hillary, through the last four years. All Obama is doing, is pointing out the truth. Meanwhile, he said that he was not privy to all the information at the time, but based on what hew knows NOW, he probably would not have agreed with the use of force in this situation.
But then again, Obama really doesn’t seem so bight. Maybe inexperienced would be a better word.
On Tuesday, Obama released a video declaring his opposition to the war in no uncertain terms, with snippets from statements he made in 2002 and 2004, including this quote: "I don't oppose war in all circumstances. But what I do oppose is a dumb war." Obama has begun circulating pamphlets at his campaign events with the full text of the speech he gave in 2002 declaring his opposition to the war even at a time when it was relatively popular.
"Dumb war"? Is that like saying, "I don’t want to play your dumb game, I’m going to take my ball and go home"? Dumb war? That’s an intelligent statement.
Remember the YouTube video attacking Hillary Clinton? It has been a big mystery now for a few days on who created it. The video showed Hillary as "Big Brother" and the video's final image reads "BarackObama.com." Well, according to The Washington Post,
The mystery creator of the Orwellian YouTube ad against Hillary Rodham Clinton is a Democratic operative who worked for a digital consulting firm with ties to rival Sen. Barack Obama.
Philip de Vellis, a strategist with Blue State Digital, acknowledged in an interview with The Associated Press that he was the creator of the video, which portrayed Clinton as a Big Brother figure and urged support for Obama's presidential campaign.
He said,
"It's true ... yeah, it's me," de Vellis said Wednesday evening.
He said he produced the ad outside of work and that neither Blue State nor the Obama campaign was aware of his role in the ad.
"But it raises some eyebrows, so I thought it best that I resign and not put them in that position."
Of course not. I’m thinking he will not have problems paying bills.
In the interview, and later in a blog written for the Huffington Post, de Vellis expressed pride in his creation, while acknowledging that his employers are "disappointed and angry at me, and deservedly so."
"It changes the trajectory of my career," he said.
I bet it does. Glad that big mystery has been solved. {Sigh} As time draws nearer, this one, Obama vs Clinton, is starting to prove to be fun to watch. Now if the Republicans can get something going, this will be a very interesting election run up to watch in total.
Peter
Sources,
The Washington Post-Clinton Camp Aims to Minimize Differences With Obama on Iraq
AP- Mystery creator of anti-Clinton ad ID'd
No comments:
Post a Comment