The way Obama handles smears.

Like most Obama fans, I've been very impressed with the way Obama has handled smear tactics both from the right and from his own party. No matter how trivial, exhausting, absurd the attack, he's able to respond with a cool, even, thoughtful tone the vast majority of the time.

However, while he's at it, I wish he would bother to take more of a thougtful, forceful tone when it comes to the other candidates as well. For example, when Hillary was attacked on Bosnia-gate, Obama has the chance to raise his hand, make his voice heard, and say "This is a non-issue. It has nothing to do with our economy, with the war in Iraq, with the price of gas. You're attacking Mrs. Clinton on a topic which should have no bearing in our debate as to who should win the nomination. You should be ashamed of yourselves for bringing this up at all."

If he had taken that high road, not with just himself, but also with the other candidates, then we has to repeatedly defend himself it will come across as even more genuine, and less as just deflection, which is how the opposing candidates and their followers view them.

There were several debates where Obama had the opportunity to not only deflect attacks from himself, but also to deflect some of the more absurd attacks that were leveled on his opponents.

Finally, if he had went so far out of his way to defend Clinton when she was being demonized, how then could Clinton respond when Obama was the one receiving the mud slinging? She would look soooo much worse for doing so.

I cannot ask this same question of Hillary, unfortunately, because she's been the one hyping up the conservative talking points the entire time. "Is he a Muslim?" answer: I'm not sure." That pretty much told me all that I needed to know about her from the start.

After all, she did get up in that ABC debate and admit that she had knowingly lied about Bosnia.

Impressive for a non-smearer who supports someone who doesn't smear.

I'm entirely too lazy to look up the exact quote... which doesn't make her quote any less absurd unfortunately.

That's puts a totally different light on it.

:eyes:

He's a muslim, sorta. But I believe him.

Nice mixed message.

1st words out of her mouth are Of course not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHFREDHB-nQ

The OP is still a distortion.

Because he wasn't properly unctious to Her Majesty at a debate.

:eyes:

And I'm guessing you forgot how she'd just compared him to Bush before the "likable enough" remark.

1st words out of her mouth are Of course not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHFREDHB-nQ

and that includes their choice of language and representation of the facts.

Imaginary sniper fire, obliterating Iran. Those are not just words, and other nations are not ignoring them.

and the Bosnia story is very relevant because it was a bald faced lie that she put forth as the truth. I've had enough of the in your face lying from the present administration.

It's not even his job to not be an asshole. But for the most part, he chooses not to be. If you want to run on "taking the high road" then why not take the even higher road? He argues so vehemently against "politics as usual", and he has chance to take those voiced concerns further still.

I do think that Hillary lied, that she was exposed on the Bosnia story, but everyone knows that. A 9 year old child knows that. Obama had the chance to say "It doesn't matter the validity, let's just talk about the issues." He's has that chance many times. Don't get me wrong folks, I'm Obama 100%. I just think that he could have helped himself even more had he employed this tactic. "Out with the old Washington politics...."

And she lied about it four times!!

She lied about it to score some kind of phony war girl gravitas - after her people did absolutely NOTHING when John Kerry was attacked over his very real war service.

She lied about it after sending over 4,000 soldiers to their death on the advise of the exact same people she still has advising her.

Four times she lied about it. If Bush had done that, you would never hear the end of it around here and rightfully so.

And she discounted the lives of the people who were defending her then and those that defend her now. She showed a lack of respect for our service people when she lied. Plain and simple.

people are just chomping at the bit to link this to his campaign. As for the other Clinton issues, he has steered the media away from issues that could hurt Clinton when directly asked about them.

I am not demonizing Obama for anything he's done. He's done nothing wrong, and he's been more then fair in his treatment of Hillary. Take your guard down and listen to the sentiment of this thread. Obama is one of the few candidates who is in a position to employ this kind of tactic. The guy is clean unlike very few politicians before him. He can take it to even higher level.

My response was simply that he should NOT respond to the Kantor smear....it will only link him to what is going on. I also feel that if Clinton should steer clear of this, so as not to validate it.

I also pointed out that Obama has protected Hillary from the media and will continue to do so when questioned about the "Smear du jour".

When people were trying to paint him as a racist.

I may not speak out in favor of Hillary either. She would probably use it as a weakness and she hasn't done the same thing for him.

This is kind of like when someone is the biggest asshole you've ever met, and you're response to them is "You're a very sweet man, but you're hurting. I hate to see you so angry." You take all the fight and sting out of their blows. Obama has done this successfully to degrees. He is usually quite engaging in disarming ways with his adversaries. I love that about him. I want even more.

They showed the clip of Hillary mocking his speeches. When they asked him to comment he replied that her acting was good and sometimes we all have to let off steam. I think he took the high road in this case also.

I absolutely loved that moment. One of my favorites.

and come out smelling like a rose for doing it. I think he's conflicted with how to deal with stuff like this. He could...

A. Do what you're saying
B. Let them roast a little bit and slightly denounce so that he says he denounced it.

It's a tactic, I realize. Obama wouldn't be saying that something wasn't true about another candidate. He would just use it as an opportunity to bash the hell out of the pundits asking the questions, and come to the aid and defense of someone who has been a monster toward him. High road? How could one get higher? And then how could Hillary possilbe smear him further after such an event?

Do you suppose she just found out about that or do you think she has been aware of that for a good long time? A lot longer than any of us knew about it?

What do you think?

Don

did what you suggest in the ABC debate that people think he lost. When the Bosnia thing was brought up he clearly gave Hillary an out by saying that she's entitled to make some mistakes and that he makes mistakes. I don't know how much higher one can go on the high road. Geez, the guy gets no respect.

I respect Obama completely. He has all my respect. Saying that "she's entitled to mistakes" isn't far enough though. He could have used that opportunity to absolutely digg into George Stepha;ojs;lfjs;lfj whatever the hell his name is, and he would have been doing that in the name of defending someone else, rather then just deflecting criticism from himself.

I'm saying that he should be doing this not to help out Hillary from harsh attacks, but to make him look even better, and allow him to take some very necessary jabs at the media that he couldn't really get away with doing otherwise.

"I cannot ask this same question of Hillary, unfortunately, because she's been the one hyping up the conservative talking points the entire time. "Is he a Muslim?" answer: I'm not sure." That pretty much told me all that I needed to know about her from the start."

Here's the video

Interviewer: Do you believe Obama is a Muslim

Hillary: Of course not. There is no basis for that. I take him on the basis of what he says. And, you know, there isn't any reason to doubt that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHFREDHB-nQ

I just feel bad because everyone ignores you and that must make you feel left out. So, I just wanted to let you know that I read it. Cheers.

Clinton would have told him in no uncertain terms that she could defend herself and he would look like a sexist ass

Hillary can protect herself and she has done so very well. Too bad she couldn't be as civil as the Republican nominee when asked direct questions about her opponent. The Republican should never look better than the Democrat.

...and that would be her right. But Obama could have simply retorted "This isn't about you Hillary. This is about this entire line of gotcha questioning that the pundits enjoy engaging us in. Whether it's bringing up what my preacher said in a speech once while I wasn't even in attendence, or else calling you out on the way you recalled an event that happened all of 10 years ago, this line of questioning is lowbrow, and frankly I thought ABC better then this when I agreed to this debate."

it would have been paternalistic. Especially if he would have shushed her after an objection.

Wouldn't fly at all.

They are the face they "want" to portray only. The fact is that Obama and his campaign have always played dirty -- character smears being their mainstay.

Team Obama has done all they can to demonize Clinton; naturally Obama would not step in to defend the victim of his own often surreptitious attacks.

In summation, I think you're a crack smoker so we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't debate with crazy people, sorry.

It behoves you to make that distinction.

You've provided a summary of the fact you disagree, by calling me a "crack smoker" and "crazy"?

I see. :eyes:

We don't say things as well as we should... and what did she do? She mopped the floor with him on "Bitter" for political gain.

I'm not attacking him. I know he's taken the high road. He's my candidate. He's terrific. I get it. We get it. That wasn't the point of this thread.

The way I read it, you say Obama should have taken the high road so Clinton couldn't take the low road. We've demonstrated that he has taken the high road and it hasn't influenced her in the least.

Et alors?

... then it's a waste of time to explain it to you.

and you don't have a comeback.

I'm not sure why it's important to you either.

(3-6-2004 Center for Public Integrity article repost from Common Dreams)
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0306-04.htm

I've been impressed at how our future President has handled all the Team Clinton crap-it is a reflection of his character.

Btw, Mark Penn is still "polling and advising" for Team Clinton.

"Know Your DLC: Mark Penn"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5515506

That's something on which I disagree with him -- it highlighted HRC's campaign tactics (lying), so was, and is, a legitimate issue.

The commander and military people that were in charge of that trip were outraged. She told a story that shows they did not perform their duty of keeping the first lady and pres's daughter safe.. The commander sadi there is no way they would have landed in such a situation she describes.