Clinton Launches Obama Attack Web Sites

[GaryC 7]

Clinton Launches Obama Attack Web Sites

ABC News has learned that the campaign of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., has registered the names of two Web sites with the express goal of attacking her chief rival, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.

It's the first time this election cycle a presidential campaign has launched a Web site with the express purpose of of launching serious criticisms on a rival.

Votingpresent.com and Votingpresent.org are domains hosted by the same IP address as official Clinton Web sites, such TheHillaryIKnow.com, which was launched with much fanfare this week.

The Clinton campaign intends to use these new Web sites to paint Obama as cowardly.

Clinton has attacked Obama for having occasionally voted "present" as an Illinois state legislator when it came to contentious legislation.

It was a legislative maneuver that was sometimes part of a plan by Democrats to give cover to vulnerable colleagues, though in some instances it appears that Obama voted present to avoid taking a position with some political risk -- such as with a bill that would have allowed children as young as 15 who committed crimes with firearms on or near school property to be prosecuted as adults.

The Obama campaign referred to the websites as "politically motivated attacks in the eleventh hour of a closely contested campaign" and defended Obama's "present" votes.

"Over more than a decade in public office, Barack Obama has successfully led the way on difficult issues from welfare reform, to the reform of a broken death penalty law in Illinois to a battle for long-overdue ethics reforms in Washington," said spokesman Bill Burton.

"Among the thousands of votes he cast in the Illinois Senate, he used the present vote on occasions when he believed bills were drafted in an unconstitutional manner. On other occasions, he voted present as part of legislative strategies, such as ones crafted by pro-choice forces in Illinois to thwart maneuvering by the opponents of a woman's right to choose."

Clinton has used these present votes to paint Obama as full of words but not action.

"I don't think people want a lot of talk about change," she told Iowans early this month. "I think they want someone with a real record -- a doer, not a talker. After eight years of incompetence, they don't want false hope, they want real results."

The Clinton campaign disputed the notion that its pending attack websites will be the first, noting that after it was revealed that Clinton had taken questions from supporters at events, Sen. John Edwards, D-NC, in November launched the short-lived website PlantsForHillary.com, purporting to be from various forms of flora supporting the New York senator, though that website was taken down after a day.

A Clinton campaign official argued that Obama's campaign has a website called HillaryAttacks.BarackObama.com, which catalogues criticisms Clinton has made about the Illinois senator. (Not to be confused with the anti-Clinton site HillaryAttacks.com, which is not affiliated with the Obama campaign.)

Clinton's campaign has also introduced, quietly, a Web site called Attacktimeline.com, which Clinton officials say chronicles the ways Obama and Edwards were criticizing her publicly long before she began returning fire.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4032659

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Iowa: Going Negative - Winner Barack, Loser Hillary

Des Moines, Iowa -- The Clinton cackle during the last Des Moines Register/Iowa Public Television debate still rings in my ears as I read a press release just rushed out to the media from the Obama campaign with the subject line: Do you Know Susan Klopfer?

No one, except a presidential candidate scouring the state for a persuasive, hardworking and powerful active Dem in the small town of Mount Pleasant, Iowa, has any reason to know or care about her, except for the fact that she has just resigned as Hillary Clinton precinct captain and jumped over to Obama's camp, complete with a video taped endorsement now running on YouTube.

As the Obama press release stated, "Susan Klopfer from Mount Pleasant is a perfect example of what's beautiful about politics here in Iowa: negativity just doesn't work."

Klopfer said, "Barack Obama doesn't believe in negative campaigning. He's focused on what's really important - bringing Americans together so we can finally solve our problems. I'm so proud to call myself an Obama supporter. And I hope you'll share my story with anyone you think is also tired of silly attacks and interested in bringing about real change."

The video shows her ceremoniously taking down a Hillary for Change sign and replacing it with an Obama sign in her front yard.

Of course, this is after the personal attack by Hillary's New Hampshire co-chair Billy Shaheen, who off-handedly mentioned to a reporter that Obama's past drug use could make him vulnerable to GOP attacks in the general. Ouch.

Shaheen has resigned and Hillary apologized personally to Barack, but that really doesn't matter. This is the second attack in as many weeks against Obama by the Clinton backers and the damage was done.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/beverly-davi...wi_b_76921.html

[no name 1]

Obama Campaign Goes Negative on Edwards in Iowa (w/ Update)

by TomP

Mon Dec 10, 2007 at 08:24:25 PM PST

Well, this is interesting. ABC is reporting that the Obama campaign is circulating a pamphlet attacking John Edwards.

Circulating among Iowa labor circles, I am told, is this leaflet,which looks to be a standard opposition-research paper against former Sen. John Edwards, D-NC. The shocker? It's from Mr. Positive, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois.

snip

It's a shocker because Obama chief strategist David Axelrod told ABC News that "One of the things people appreciate about (Obama) is he’s not a cheap-shot artist" and this flier is full of cheap shots.

ABC News

Come around after the fold and let's talk about this interesting turn of events from a campaign we keep hearing is "surging," but feels the need to go negative against John Edwards.

* TomP's diary ::

This is not the first time the Obama campaign has left the high road. Of course, when they went negative, Obama didn't know. And senior staff likely did not know.

There was this time.

His campaign staffers, too, have become frustrated by the focus of the media’s attention, specifically that the press has not covered Clinton in the way they expected it would. During an interview this summer, Obama’s friend Valerie Jarrett said to me, unbidden, "He is a man who is devoted to his wife. There aren’t going to be any skeletons in his closet in terms of his personal life at all. Period." And at a campaign event in Iowa, one of Obama’s aides plopped down next to me and spoke even more bluntly. He wanted to know when reporters would begin to look into Bill Clinton’s post-presidential sex life.

Ben Smith's Blog (quoting Marc Ambinder in The Atlantic)

Probably just a low level staffer. Of course, Obama didn't know. And senior staff likely did not know. I'm sure higher level folks would never approve researching Bill Clinton's sex life, or even suggesting that reporters do so. Must be overzealous junior staff.

And there was the Senator from Punjab memo:

HILLARY CLINTON (D-PUNJAB)'S PERSONAL FINANCIAL AND POLITICAL TIES TO INDIA The Clintons have reaped significant financial rewards from their relationship with the Indian community, both in their personal finances and Hillary's campaign fundraising....

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/...

The document, which the Obama campaign tried to clandestinely distribute, was traced back after it landed in the hands of the Clinton campaign. The Clinton camp, in turn, passed it along to The Times, hoping to show that the Obama campaign, like all others, use opposition research in an attempt to define their rivals.

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.

NY Times

Just a screw-up, though. Nothing Obama or "senior staff" ever saw. Of course, Obama didn't know. And senior staff likely did not know. That damn junior staff is at it again.

"It was a screw-up on the part of our research team," said Mr. Obama, an Illinois Democrat. "It wasn’t anything I had seen or my senior staff had seen."

NY Times

And then Paul Krugman decided to criticize Barack Obama's use of right wing talking points to attack the univeral health care plans of Edwards and Clinton. That damn junior staff was at it again.

Something's really gone off the rails when the Obama campaign decides to release an oppo document on Paul Krugman. It's not only the actual attacks that are weak (most of them rely on misinterpreting one comment, then misinterpreting the next, then pretending there's a contradiction), but, seriously, it's Paul Krugman. Arguably the most progressive voice in American media. When I argued that the campaign should take the gloves off, I really didn't expect their target, in this document and in the health care fight more generally, would be progressivism. What in hell is going on over there?

Ezra Klein

Here's a link to the oppo document:

Fact Check: ''Krugman Didn't Always Think So Poorly Of Obama's Plan''

Of course, Obama didn't know. And senior staff likely did not know.

Chris Bowers today brought up some interesting things on Open Left:

Back during the Donnie McClurkin fiasco, it has been confirmed to me from multiple sources that the Obama campaign was preparing opposition research papers of this sort against one of the progressive bloggers who were speaking ill of him at the time.

(Update: I have edited the previous sentence for the sake of clarity and accuracy. I know two separate things, and conflating them is a bit of speculation on my part. First, I know that about a year ago, someone was conducting oppo research on most major progressive bloggers, but I don't know who. After I heard about oppo being prepared against one blogger a couple months ago, I speculated that meant the earlier oppo was conducted by the Obama campaign as well. That is purely speculation on my part. Take it for what it is worth).

When I heard about that, Obama temporarily dropped to last place in my personal choices on Democratic candidates. This is a campaign that appears willing to go negative against a wide range of progressive media figures should those figures step out of line and criticize Obama campaign decisions. Given that, I became personally worried that an Obama nomination would, at some point in the future, result in a public smear campaign, possibly directed by the a new White House communications department, against me and / or many of my friends and colleagues.

Chris Bowers, Open Left

Of course, Obama didn't know. And senior staff likely did not know. Junior staff run amuck. Again.

And now we have today:

Circulating among Iowa labor circles, I am told, is this leaflet,which looks to be a standard opposition-research paper against former Sen. John Edwards, D-NC. The shocker? It's from Mr. Positive, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois.

snip

The cheapest shot ... that Edwards somehow has something to do with Whirlpool when the company was closing down Maytag plants in Iowa, Illinois, and Arkansas.

Why is that a cheap shot? Because the link is that Edwards worked for the controversial Fortress Hedge Fund while it owned stock in Whirlpool as it was shutting down those plants.

But some argue a far more direct link exists between Obama and those plants shutting down. It's not one I agree with -- I think both are silly attempts to link candidates to lost jobs -- but I think the one linking Obama to the Crown family to those lost jobs is slightly less ridiculous.

The Crown family -- Lester, Renee, James, Paula -- have been supporters, fundraisers, and bundlers for Obama.

Lester Crown was on the board of Maytag when it decided to shut down a plant in Galesburg, Illinois, and sent those jobs to Mexico.

snip

Shortly after that merger was announced, Whirlpool shut down those plants in Iowa, Illinois, and Arkansas.

Do I think Obama is responsible for the plants shutting down? Nope.

But he should know better than to attack Edwards on the same subject.

ABC News

So was it really an Obama campaign document? Must be a mistake, right? Nope.

(UPDATE: The Obama campaign says this document came because a local union requested information on the differences between him and his opponents.)

ABC News

But, hey, you know it by now:

Of course, Obama didn't know. And senior staff likely did not know.

Overzealous junior staff run amuck. Again.

It is amazing how those junior staff mistakes always end up with negative campaign attacks on Obama's opponents. I guess it's coincidence.

As for attacking Edwards on his support of workers, let's let organized labor talk for itself:

Steelworkers Union and Coal Miners Union endorse John Edwards.

Mark Erlich, the Executive Secretary-Treasurer of the New England Carpenters union, speaks to union carpenters at the Carpenters union's endorsment of John Edwards for the Democratic nomination for President in Nashua, New Hamsphire. September 8, 2007

John Edwards receives the endorsement of nearly one million members from SEIU Iowa and nine other states in Iowa City, Iowa, on October 15, 2007.

The Executive Committee of the International Union UNITE HERE has resolved to authorize the Chicago and Midwest Regional Joint Board to support its members’ efforts on behalf of the Presidential campaign of Senator John Edwards. That affiliate will commit staff, volunteers and financial resources to the Senator’s campaign in Iowa starting immediately as election laws allow. It will sign on to a participation agreement already in effect in that state which includes affiliates of several other unions, including SEIU, the Carpenters, the Steelworkers and others.

UNITE HERE

There are more. Unions with millions of workers endorse John Edwards.

Maybe the junior staff is going negative with bullshit attacks because of the Peru Unfair Trade Agrement?

"I'm disappointed by today's Senate vote to approve the Peru trade deal and expand the failed NAFTA model that has cost us more than a million jobs. The Peru trade agreement is an example of how corporate interests and their lobbyists and cronies have corrupted the Democratic Party. Like the failed free trade agreements before it, this agreement puts the interests of the big multinational corporations first, ahead of the interests of American workers and communities. By supporting this agreement, Senator Clinton and Senator Obama have sent a powerful message to workers across America that they're willing to put the profits of Wall Street over the interests of Main Street."

Edwards Statement On Senate Vote On Peru Trade Deal

For a candidate supposedly surging into a lead, that damn junior staff sure is acting like it's a close race and it must go negative against John Edwards.

Meanwhile, in contrast to negative campaigning, John Edwards is presenting a positive message of change in Iowa:

When I talk about the Two Americas, this is what I mean – the very wealthiest and most powerful have manipulated our government for their own ends. They use their wealth and their power to keep themselves wealthy and powerful at the expense of everyone else. And when they do that, they're holding America back.

"But that's about to change. You can feel it here in Iowa. Because America can't be held back. Because America belongs to us. When we face obstacles, you know what we do? We get up. We rise up. We right wrongs and we make our nation the way we want it to be. That's what's happening in this election. That's what's happening here in Iowa. That's America Rising."

America Rising

I'll let Barack Obama have the last word. Above the attack piece on Paul Krugman is this quote from Barack Obama:

"I want to campaign the same way I govern, which is to respond directly and forcefully with the truth,"

~ Barack Obama, 11/08/07

source

Edited December 21, 2007 by devilette

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

All I can say is: Go Mr. O.

He's the best candidate the Dems can put up in November 2008.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

All I can say is: Go Mr. O.

He's the best candidate the Dems can put up in November 2008.

Actually, Edwards would be better.

But Obama is cool too. Anything but the She-Devil Herself.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

All I can say is: Go Mr. O.

He's the best candidate the Dems can put up in November 2008.

Actually, Edwards would be better.

But Obama is cool too. Anything but the She-Devil Herself.

What would make an ambulance chaser the better candidate?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

All I can say is: Go Mr. O.

He's the best candidate the Dems can put up in November 2008.

Actually, Edwards would be better.

But Obama is cool too. Anything but the She-Devil Herself.

What would make an ambulance chaser the better candidate?

Come on...why do you bust his balls for being an attorney?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

All I can say is: Go Mr. O.

He's the best candidate the Dems can put up in November 2008.

Actually, Edwards would be better.

But Obama is cool too. Anything but the She-Devil Herself.

What would make an ambulance chaser the better candidate?

He has an actual message, even if his personal lifestyle doesn't quite match up to it. Obama and Hillary are both light on actually having a message.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

All I can say is: Go Mr. O.

He's the best candidate the Dems can put up in November 2008.

Actually, Edwards would be better.

But Obama is cool too. Anything but the She-Devil Herself.

What would make an ambulance chaser the better candidate?

Come on...why do you bust his balls for being an attorney?

I'm just not too fond of the personal injury attorney breed.

All I can say is: Go Mr. O.

He's the best candidate the Dems can put up in November 2008.

Actually, Edwards would be better.

But Obama is cool too. Anything but the She-Devil Herself.

What would make an ambulance chaser the better candidate?

He has an actual message, even if his personal lifestyle doesn't quite match up to it. Obama and Hillary are both light on actually having a message.

What's that message (whatever it is) worth if he can't live up to it?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

All I can say is: Go Mr. O.

He's the best candidate the Dems can put up in November 2008.

Actually, Edwards would be better.

But Obama is cool too. Anything but the She-Devil Herself.

What would make an ambulance chaser the better candidate?

Come on...why do you bust his balls for being an attorney?

I'm just not too fond of the personal injury attorney breed.

Sure, they contribute to a lot of frivolous litigation and can act like vultures at times, but they're also the regular joe's last line of defense against corporations and other powerful organizations that willfully cause them harm.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

All I can say is: Go Mr. O.

He's the best candidate the Dems can put up in November 2008.

Actually, Edwards would be better.

But Obama is cool too. Anything but the She-Devil Herself.

What would make an ambulance chaser the better candidate?

Come on...why do you bust his balls for being an attorney?

I'm just not too fond of the personal injury attorney breed.

Sure, they contribute to a lot of frivolous litigation and can act like vultures at times, but they're also the regular joe's last line of defense against corporations and other powerful organizations that willfully cause them harm.

I do take that into consideration but I think that in the balance they do much more harm than good. Read the warning labels on products these days and tell me why some of those are even necessary. Common sense tells you most of what's written on them. But OH NO, I gotta sue that microwave manufacturer because they did not tell me that I can't dry my dog in that device. And I gotta sue Mickey D's cause their fcuking coffee was hot. Give me a break already. The vast majority of these ambulance chasers are just leeches.

Edited December 21, 2007 by Mr. Big Dog

[Ban Hammer 12,863]

i so love watching dems candidates throw gas and matches at each other

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

i so love watching dems candidates throw gas and matches at each other

Well, the Repulicans are taking pretty good shots at Huck lately. It's not a Dem phenomenon.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

i so love watching dems candidates throw gas and matches at each other

Yep its hillarious. The only hope they got is CHAD CENTRAL! I dont know how to VOTE! I would like to vote if somone would teach me. I was influenced by a republican lawyer that made me do it. I really didnt want to but they held me at gun point. The machine I voted on was defective and I want to vote again but I need lessons. On and on and on!

[Ban Hammer 12,863]

i so love watching dems candidates throw gas and matches at each other

Well, the Repulicans are taking pretty good shots at Huck lately. It's not a Dem phenomenon.

but the dems are like the mena girls - and NO ONE can fight like them.