Obama campaign tactics

Obama Campaign Tactics

Today, Sen. Barack Obama echoed Republican talking points by repeating a totally false claim by Republican Bob Novak about the tactics of the Clinton campaign.

It might be a good time for Sen. Obama to take a look at the tactics of his own campaign.

The Obama campaign pedaled an opposition research document, titled Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-Punjab), attacking Hillary for her ties to the Indian-American community:

Senator Barack Obama disavowed the document his campaign aimed at Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton last week, saying today that it was "stupid and caustic." The headline of one of the documents, which referred to Mrs. Clinton as 'D-Punjab,' touched off a furor among Indian-American groups that called on Mr. Obama to apologize for the remarks.
The Obama campaign made a false attack on Bill Clinton:

More Obama oppo is online today, including a detailed document on Bill Clinton and Ron Burkle (.pdf) and a story, which turned out to be false, about Bill Clinton giving a paid speech on 9/11/06.
The Obama campaign took credit for placing stories attacking Hillary regarding Norman Hsu:

In August, Obama’s team scored a significant hit by helping to place a story in several newspapers revealing that Norman Hsu, a major Clinton donor, had skipped town after having pleaded no contest to a charge of grand theft 15 years earlier and still faced an outstanding warrant... (Hsu had also contributed to Obama.)
The Obama campaign was 'digging for damaging facts' at the Clinton library:

How far is the money being spread? The Obama campaign spent $27 at the Arkansas state archives and $9.30 at the Clinton library, digging for damaging facts on Clinton. Asked what Team Obama found, spokeswoman Jen Psaki conceded, "Not much."
The Obama campaign's communications director compiled a list of opposition research stories on Hillary that he was pitching to reporters:

I couldn’t help but notice some of what he had scrawled on a whiteboard hanging on his wall:

HC Bio > NY Post
HC Travel (AP?)
Tax Returns (Balz?)
Darfur investments (HF)
JE 527

HC is, of course, Hillary Clinton...These were obviously notes about stories the campaign was pushing or anticipating...
11/17/2007 2:43:50 PM #

http://facts.hillaryhub.com/

:rofl:

If you think this is going to help Obama, I think you're going to be surprised. We'll see how it turns out in the end.

Maybe that's why he bit when Novak lied to him. Obama's planning Novak-like attacks himself.
:kick:

compared with the day before that?

We can always count on her campaign to tell us why she's right and Obama's wrong.

For our next assignment, we'll go to Gravel's site to see why he says he's the best of all the Dems...

:rofl:

por supuesto.

I mean, he said so.

Novak must be right, and Democratic Senator and candidate Hillary Clinton must be wrong...

That's pretty weird, even from you people.

*shakes head in disbelief*

"I am profoundly and indubitably offended that Clinton had nothing to do with any dirt she was refusing to use on me to avoid an ugly attack she was not going to attack me with. I am profoundly offended and demand that Clinton stop respondng to me when I demand a response from her regarding an attack on me she is refusing to do. How dare she suggest that I am listening to republicans when I simply listened to a republican who said she was not going to attack me. That is the trouble with the Clinton politics."

:rofl:

I am delighted that Novak planted this "story." It has provided me with a chance to attack a fellow Democrat for refusing to remain silent when ugly, swiftboating type rumors were spread by the Republicans. It's so much more fun to attack a fellow Democrat than the Republicans.

but it's also pretty accurate.

Mark Penn is working overtime today.

Hillaryworld got caught planting ugly rumors about Obama, so they decided to whip up
a swiftboat story pointing a nah-nah-nah-nah finger at Obama. Typical.

It's obvious that Hillaryworld is in netroot/media damage control mode. I have no doubt
that this "story" has been planted with every journalist on the Clinton Rolodex by now.

Or do you believe everything Novak tells you, too? :rofl:

Turnabout is fair play, isn't it?


Or is it?

What's next? A tell-all exposé on Obama from HillaryIs44?

NOT!

I do smell desperation though.

Now that's what I call desperate.

inquiring minds are waiting.

Garbage in, garbage out.

Inquiring minds can phone home and get more talking points from Mark Penn.

Otherwise just keep showing your desperation. I prefer the latter.

Maybe you can get HillaryIs44 to write something as "proof". lol

I'll check back later. Not.

You tact in this subject is making you look the fool. You have no proof, just your own beliefs, which are fine as long you admit that's ALL it is. But don't play DU for idiots, because anyone but true groupies can see you're flailing about like a fish out of water in a desperate attempt to portray this is the light YOU see it in, and you have no real interest in what's true or not. If you did you'd back up YOUR charges, instead of making a claim and then demanding others prove you wrong. Try writing a scientific paper where you make claims, offer no proof, and then demand other scientists prove you wrong. You'd be laughed out of the field.

How many more times will this act play out before Obama (and, less likely, his fan club) wises up and learns not to listen to right wingers shit stirrers like Novak?

Hillary apologists blame Obama. How many more times will the Clinton party machine act like amoral thugs
whose means justify the ends?

*crickets*

"burden of proof" ring a bell?

My neighbor's car won't start. Don't forget to blame Clinton, Clark!

It. Won't. Work.

Obama is a naive and inexperienced and he fell for Novak's bs. Obama apologists just whine about the ill treatment they think he is getting but he brings it all on himself. Stop your whining.

BS in, BS out.

and I saw Obama for what he is: a charlatan. I liked Edwards but then saw how desperate and vile he could be. Now I like any of the candidates except those two. You don't like it? Pound sand.

"...the right-wing ... know her opponents have no political impulse control and are so desperate, especially after Thursday's shellacking, that they'll grab at anything; even if it hoists us all on some wingnut petard."

No political impulse control; It's time they started thinking before they jump.

is this supposed to bring respect to the Clinton campaign?

:shrug:

Isn't it?

The issues are sourced. They are resonsive of attacks. you would want Clinton to respond to attacks wouldn't you?

Just because you say something is true, doesn't make it so.

swiftboaters had no sources. And frankly, there is a difference in responding to someone who asked you to respond, than to swiftboat.

I'm supposed to take that seriously? You are killing me!

How embarassing for his campaign!

I ain't clicking on the link, but the OP wording and off-kilter paragraph breaking read like an old LP record being played with someone sticking their finger on the record intermittently. Or it read like an old cassette tape that had been eaten earlier and restrung back with wrinkles. Very 90's...