Mar 3, 2008 10:15am
Clinton Response Ad
ABC News’ Eloise Harper Reports: The Clinton Campaign is releasing a new television ad in Texas today responding to Senator Barack Obama’s ad that accuses her of not reading the National Intelligence Estimate.
Clinton’s ad focuses on Obama never holding a subcommittee meeting on Afghanistan because he was busy running for president, the ad will say.
Watch the ad HERE.
Email
CPAC: Romney Struggles to Convince Voters
Obama Backs Off Birth Control Battle?
While I don’t normally believe that response ads serve any real purpose for the American people, I will make an exception for this one.
The obvious, gross negligence of Senator Obama in his duties as chairman of the Senate oversight committee on Afghanistan should be cause for concern in the deliberations of any informed voter.
Senator Obama has railed about how he feels his political opponents dropped the ball by not finishing the war against terrorists in Afghanistan before going into Iraq, which may or may not be true.
But, if Senator Obama fails to hold even one hearing on the progress of the war against terrorism in Afghanistan because his campaign for political office started at about the same time, who really dropped the ball?
How can Senator Obama, or anyone for that matter, expect the American people to believe that he actually knows or cares about what is happening in Afghanistan?
Bad policy and bad judgment would make a bad President in any country.
Posted by: Ken | March 3, 2008, 11:02 am 11:02 am
You can expect ANYTHING out of Clinton at this stage of the game it is all or nothing for her,They
Posted by: honest | March 3, 2008, 11:02 am 11:02 am
Oranges and apples. However, if I had to make a choice as to which was more urgent and vital I’d say that Hillary’s lapse in not reading the intelligence report was far more damaging to our country. We’ve not only lost thousands of lives but also our country is in extremely dire financial shape because of votes like hers. Our economy is where it’s at because of this war that was waged based on lies and personal political gain. Not one of the lives lost was worth it. Not one. Shame on you Hillary…
Posted by: Brenna | March 3, 2008, 11:04 am 11:04 am
Ridiculous!!!!
She was also campaigning and not in the Senate.
Presidential race is most important beacause it is about the future of the country.
Posted by: Mark | March 3, 2008, 11:26 am 11:26 am
Voters in both TEXAS and OHIO need to be concerned about Clinton failure not to read National Inteligence Estimate before she casted her vote authorizing the WAR IN IRAQ. It was the greatest mistake she did. Now America has lost many lives there(IRAQ).She still needs to apologize to the American people before conceding to BARACK OBAMA tomorrow night.
Posted by: I.A.T Smith | March 3, 2008, 11:42 am 11:42 am
Holding hearings will not change anything in Afghanistan. The only way to change Bush’s failed Iraq and Afghan policies is for Democrats to win back the WH and Barack Obama is our best chance to do that. Keep campaigning!
Posted by: Bob, DC | March 3, 2008, 11:57 am 11:57 am
Senator Rockefeller read the NIE and STILL voted the same as Senator Clinton. I find it disturbing that Senator Obama wants it both ways–continued attacks on Clinton for her decision but welcome the support of Senators Rockefeller, Kerry, Daschle and Kennedy.
Posted by: LOM | March 3, 2008, 11:58 am 11:58 am
He attended meetings and there were meetings held, he just has not “chaired” a meeting. Other people involved in the meetings have already discussed this as a non-issue.
That’s the information that’s being left out here.
Posted by: mo | March 3, 2008, 12:09 pm 12:09 pm
Where are Clinton’s 35 years of experience. She voted because others were voting and did not find out the truth story. 35 years of experience doing the same mistakes over and over. She can’t lead this country. May God bless America.
Posted by: I.A.T Smith | March 3, 2008, 12:16 pm 12:16 pm
Where are Clinton’s 35 years of experience. She voted because others were voting and did not find out the truth story. 35 years of experience doing the same mistakes over and over. She can’t lead this country. May God bless America.
Posted by: I.A.T Smith | March 3, 2008, 12:16 pm 12:16 pm
President Bush and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee are handling the Afghanistan/NATO issue, which has hardly made much progress since 2003. Holding an oversight meeting over Europe relations (note: not necessarily NATO) might sound nice on paper, but is that what we’re looking after? I thought the whole point of Clinton’s criticism was that he’s all words and no action so I wonder how much holding oversight meetings and talking without ability to accomplish much (what’s on the table anyway?) would’ve accomplished–in fact, she would’ve probably picked a fight over how his meetings did nothing.
Last I checked, what has she really done besides a gazzillion NY State building renamings and other useless resolutions? The only one that stands out is labeling Iranian Revolutionary Guards as terrorists in a non-binding resolution.
Hardly any action at all.
Posted by: Luis de Souza | March 3, 2008, 12:17 pm 12:17 pm
Regarding National intelligence, I don’t know how people accused 77 US Senators of neglecting the importance of our national security and authorizing war just be flippiing coin… Senator Obama accused his 77 fellows doing wrong at that time and he had good judment, however, he was not even qualified to make decisions. Every one could talk anything just by standing-by. He has kept 17 years good judgment on his friend – Rezko until federal prosecutor told him: sorry, senator Obama, you were wrong from DAY ONE…
Posted by: Truth | March 3, 2008, 12:22 pm 12:22 pm
I have no doubt Hillary Clinton will do anything and say anything necessary to win the nomination. Why? Because she is convinced in her mind that she is the only person who could possibly be president. The idea that someone else–someone whom the electorate seems to prefer in spite of her non-stop attacks–might be up to the job is enough to send her into another frenzy.
I have NO DOUBT this woman will engage in enough dirty tricks to pull this out, over the desires of the population. Her ego and arrogance knows no limit. I came into this nomination process not even knowing who Barack Obama was and over the last few months I have been shoved toward him by the incompetence of the Clinton machine and her on-going, shrill, at times almost hysterical, campaign speeches. I am appalled that women support a fellow woman who trades gender to win, who cries when things aren’t going her way, stamps her foot in anger when someone dares to contradict or question her, and in general demonstrates on every level why some women should never succeed. She is a disgrace to independent, proud, resourceful women everywhere.
Posted by: Kitty | March 3, 2008, 12:39 pm 12:39 pm
Can’t even compare the two. If Clinton can’t understand what her not reading the intelligence report did and then what her vote did then she sure as hell is not fit to not only not be president of the United States but she’s also not fit to serve as U.S. Senator!
Obama never holding a subcommittee meeting on Afghanistan because he was busy running for president in no way carries the same weight, the same irresponsibility because he did not drop bunker buster bombs on an innocent country like what Clinton did via Bush!! Also, anyone running for president must campaign and she knows that. Obama had just become a member of the submittee in January 07 when he decided to run for president and we all know the campaign trail can’t wait. If that’s the case why didn’t Hillary Clinton not campaign and just stay in the senate and vote whenever there were votes and never miss one during this time? Also, folks want to try to make something out of Rezko matter when there is nothing, absolutely nothing pertaining to Obama. They keep saying for Obama to come clean about Rezko and he keeps saying he has, that there is nothing more, just like they keep harping on the Muslim thing when there is nothing there. Do they expect him to say he’s Muslim just because they keep bringing it up bringing it up bringing it up all in effort to smear and attack.
Posted by: RuthieM | March 3, 2008, 12:43 pm 12:43 pm
Senator Obama is not Rockefeller. Rockefeller voted for Iraq like many others and Senator Clinton but it still was not Obama, and Obama is the one running for president. Judgment. Honor. Vision. Experience. Senator Obama, a true leader!
Posted by: RuthieM | March 3, 2008, 12:45 pm 12:45 pm
Isn’t Senator Obama trying anything he could to accuse his rivals and gain what he wants?? He has been dancing with the biggest political fixer in Chicago for 17 years without notice…Do we still lke him to fool America another 4 years?? If some one says yes, then he/she must be blinded..
Posted by: Truth | March 3, 2008, 12:48 pm 12:48 pm
I see perfectly fine, thank you, and I will see your 17 years of nominally relationships with a person who has yet to be judged by a jury of his peers with 35 years of close, personal, and definitely criminal conspiracy of the Clintons with a host of folks.
How quickly you forget the past in your effort to shape the future.
Posted by: Kitty | March 3, 2008, 12:53 pm 12:53 pm
Isn’t Senator Obama talking about the present and future?? Why is he now talking the PAST now?? If so, how could he turn the page??
Posted by: Truth | March 3, 2008, 1:00 pm 1:00 pm
BTW, did Senator Obama addmit himself his relationship with Rezko was “headbone mistake”?? – 17 years mistake???
Posted by: Truth | March 3, 2008, 1:16 pm 1:16 pm
I was specifically addressing the attempt to link Obama’s apparently one time dealings with a man (and not an on-going close relationship of suspicious activity) that the Clintons are attempting to paint, especially through surrogates, with the wide-spread, multi-year continual saga of Clinton corruption before and during the Presidency. I think it is truly laughable that the Rezko thing is being bandied about right now, since the guy hasn’t gone to trial and there really has been no substantive evidence (in spite of a lot of digging) of any real misdeed on the part of Obama, while the Clintons and their truly opportunistic past appears off limits. Oh, I forgot–she’s been vetted which, I guess, means that we aren’t allowed to mention the criminal past of her close cronies or her hands-on connection to them.
Posted by: Kitty | March 3, 2008, 1:23 pm 1:23 pm
@Posted by: Kitty | Mar 3, 2008 12:39:58 PM”
“I am appalled that women support a fellow woman who trades gender to win, who cries when things aren’t going her way, stamps her foot in anger when someone dares to contradict or question her, and in general demonstrates on every level why some women should never succeed. She is a disgrace to independent, proud, resourceful women everywhere.”
Yes, I couldn’t agree more. It is so disgraceful to have the first woman EVER to come this far in the nomination for President of the United States. Definitely sends a message to grandmothers, mothers, sisters, nieces and daughters everywhere that you can’t be or do anything you want in life. I’m going to back to bed since there is no point in trying.
Posted by: LOM | March 3, 2008, 1:28 pm 1:28 pm
One-time deal: Senator Obama bought his house just next to Mr. Rezko; he was elected to Ill. State Senator with the funding of Mr. Rezko; again, with the same funding he was able to be elected to US senator; he was even running president with the same funding, until Federal prosecutor told him: Senator Obama, you were wrong from DAY one… Maybe, someone doesn’t think it a big deal when your American Idol claim himself the best on judgment and integrity…
Posted by: Truth | March 3, 2008, 1:37 pm 1:37 pm
I have worked for a long, long time and has done very well in my career. In all those years I have never seen any professional act like Clinton has in the last 30 days. She has not been a woman I can admire nor one I recommend as a model, and if the only reason you are voting for her is gender over consequence, then maybe under cover is the place to stay.
Posted by: kitty | March 3, 2008, 1:52 pm 1:52 pm
The same pattern as Senator Obama: cannot confront but running away with issue…
Posted by: Truth | March 3, 2008, 1:58 pm 1:58 pm
Kitty — We all have ups and downs in our professional career and fortunately, we don’t have the burden of being scrutinized with every step we take and have EVERYTHING we do spun into a negative or positive light.
I think it is unfortunate that you want to summarily cast her as a disgrace for women everywhere based on 30 days of activity. It’s okay to disagree with her tactics, approaches, etc., but to denigrate any candidate by calling them a disgrace is absurd.
I’m sure you’ve read the occasional comment where women are saying unite and vote for Hillary, but I’m sure it goes well beyond gender. I’m sure people would be screaming if I said people are only voting for Barack because he is black. This is surely not the case for either side–people care about the issues and reflect how each candidate will best represent them in their plight for the American dream.
Stick to the issues. I’m happy to have an intelligent conversation based on the issues that matter. Tearing each other down is completely contradictory to what Barack’s core message is in this campaign.
Posted by: LOM | March 3, 2008, 2:10 pm 2:10 pm
The SNL cameo began the programmed countdown to Hillary’s concession speech on wednesday. Threats of legal challenges, Florida, Michigan, Ohio voting machines, etc are negotiating ploys within the democratic party to exchange guarantees in return for going quietly.
The party, the press, McCain and the Clinton’s already know it’s over. This is posturing time.
Appearing on SNL after losing would be awkward. Appearing before her concession is positioned as being a good sport.
By the way, no one reads long posts like the ones above. Think about it… you didn’t read them either, did you?
Posted by: Gorgon '08 | March 3, 2008, 2:37 pm 2:37 pm
mo – there were no hearings on Afghanistan per Obama’s own admission.
Posted by: DCVoter | March 3, 2008, 2:53 pm 2:53 pm
Rockefeller, an Obama supporter read it, as Obama pointed out. Rockefeller voted for the resolution too. So your point BO? Rockefeller’s vote was better even though it was exactly the same vote as Hillary’s?
Posted by: irma | March 3, 2008, 3:28 pm 3:28 pm
Rockefeller, an Obama supporter read it, as Obama pointed out. Rockefeller voted for the resolution too. So your point BO? Rockefeller’s vote was better even though it was exactly the same vote as Hillary’s?
Posted by: irma | March 3, 2008, 3:53 pm 3:53 pm
Obama is stuck in the spin cycle. I would post more, but Irma said all I wanted to.
Posted by: Belle | March 3, 2008, 4:04 pm 4:04 pm
Obama, although not having done anything on this committee, most definitely would have noted it as one of his “experiences” as an Afghan expert. That is why he doesn’t really have any depth of experience to speak of. It’s the same as what he did as community organizer; basically signing people up. Then there’s the whole speech thing. Great orator who plagarizes from his friends and others. His last attempt to combat Hillary on her ad, was a copy of her own ad with a type and voice over. That is why he is known as a mimic.
Posted by: irma | March 3, 2008, 4:45 pm 4:45 pm
Hillary needs to release her tax documents.
The issues with Bill Clinton taking $20 million dollars from his billionaire buddy for a buiness trip Bill Clinton said he did not take is very troubling.
Either Bill Clinton Lied or the Billionaire is trying to buy his way into the Whitehouse.
Hillary need to make public her taxes.
Posted by: BILL5321 | March 4, 2008, 9:58 am 9:58 am
Hillary will stand to make millions of dollars on nuclear energy as a result of BILL Clinton business dealing in Africa.
What is Hillary view on Nuclear energy?
She loves it!!!!
Posted by: BILL5321 | March 4, 2008, 10:00 am 10:00 am
Senator Obama is the Pied Piper– Since the voters do not question ‘the change’ he offers
THE FOOL, FOOL THE FOOLS
Posted by: Marilyn | March 15, 2008, 11:48 pm 11:48 pm
NBPPand Obama on fox now
Posted by: Bishop | March 19, 2008, 9:05 pm 9:05 pm