Ben Smith has the first ad broadcast by the pro-HRC American Leadership Project in Ohio:
The key line: "If speeches could create jobs, we wouldn't be facing a recession."
« Teamsters Plan To Endorse Obama | Main | More From The American Leadership Project » "If speeches could create jobs, we wouldn't be facing a recession."20 Feb 2008 01:23 pm Comments (27)
Pretty benign ad, actually. But the speeches vs. solutions thing didn't work, and it won't work. Why? Because Obama has a good record: -- Graduated first black president of Harvard Law Review having won trust and support of conservative members. -- Passed over 600 high-money law firm offers to work for civil rights practice at fractional pay. -- Added health insurance for 20,000 children, welfare reforms, earned-income tax credits, and increased minimum wage in Illinois. -- Reformed death-penalty cases, requiring that interrogations be video-recorded. Passed Illinois Senate 58-0. Signed into law by Illinois governor who first opposed Obama’s bill. Obama succeeded by building consensus with conservative opposition. -- Opposed Iraq war publicly, long before invasion. Accurately depicted it as of undetermined length, undetermined cost, undetermined objective, with a great likelihood of civil war breaking out. -- Expanded program to locate and dismantle stray Russian WMD with Republican Senator Lugar. -- Passed major ethics and lobbying reform bill with Russ Feingold, insisting upon tougher restrictions around gifts, meals, etc. And extended the interval preventing exiting congress members from moving directly into lobbyist positions. -- Toured Kuwait, Jordan, Israel, and Palestinian territories, telling Palestinian Authority Abbas that US would never recognize Hamas leaders until they renounced mission to attack Israel. -- Cosponsored Secure Orderly Immigration Act by John McCain. Passes Senate 62-36. Makes undocumented persons who have been here 5+ years only allowed to stay and apply for citizenship if they pay back-taxes, learn English, and have no criminal record. -- Communicated frankly to Michigan automaker executives of need to increase fuel-efficiency standards by at least 3% per year. -- Many aisle-crossing bi-partisan solutions throughout 10 years of senate experience (8 state, 2 federal). -- 100% approval rating from the League of Conservation Voters, Planned Parenthood. National Education Association gives him an “A” on their most recent scorecard. -- In Illinois State Senate sponsored 780 bills, 280 were signed into law. -- In first year as US Senator, held 39 town-hall meetings throughout his state, sponsored 152 bills and resolutions, and cosponsored 427 more. -- Designated US Senate point person on ethics by Speaker Harry Reid. 
What a dumb ad. Right after saying we're in a recession, it goes on to talk about the work Hillary's done in the Senate. The obvious question is "why are we in a recession with Hillary has been doing all this hard work in the Senate?" The obvious conclusion is that "if hard work and a resume could create jobs, we wouldn't be facing a recession."
Passed over 600 high-money law firm offers to work for civil rights practice at fractional pay. That a lot of offers. I don't even think Mitch McDeere had that many.
It takes more than speeches - it takes a bunch of millionaires pooling their money to rescue your failed campaign! A fighter for the working class, a stooge for the gilded class, and ready on day one!
Those" latte-drinking, Prius-driving, Birkenstock-wearing, trust fund babies are going to ruin the Democratic Party". I think some people were just disenfranchised wouldn't you say?
I'm really surprised that anyone is funding these ads. Not because they're bad ads -- although they are -- but because I can't imagine that anyone, even someone very wealthy, enjoys throwing away his or her money.
"Tell Hillary to keep working on these solutions for the middle class" That is what I am trying to tell her by voting for Obama! Keep doing what you are doing...in the SENATE, not the white house.
My question is: Did Hillary really do these things? "passed legislation" does that mean she showed up for the vote? "worked to end tax breaks"? which ones?
My question is: Did Hillary really do these things? "passed legislation" does that mean she showed up for the vote? "worked to end tax breaks"? which ones?
My question is: Did Hillary really do these things? "passed legislation" does that mean she showed up for the vote? "worked to end tax breaks"? which ones?
I apologize for the triple post. must have happened while I was in another window reading my mail.
How is that not outright advocacy for a candidate? Funny, after reading this post I was about to ask the same question about Marc's blog. (Ooops, did I just say something "otherwise objectionable"??? Can Marc sue me now???)
The Home Stretch- Hillary's Personal Alamo: http://newsusa.myfeedportal.com/viewarticle.php?articleid=53 She really, truly, absolutely needs Ohio and of course Texas. Things could be interesting the next couple weeks, for sure.
"If speeches could create jobs..." What an absurd hypothetical that is! I would rather seen something really dirty, befitting a 527 than this. How about this ad narrative: Barack Obama says he's the candidate of change. But he accepted real estate contributions from convicted felon Tony Rezko [flash to a picture of Rezko]. Is that the kind of change you want? Barack Obama says he supports a woman's right to choose. [flash to some haggard looking young, preferably minority, woman] But he abstained from voting on a record number of abortion laws while serving in the Illinois Senate. Is this the support of choice women deserve? Barack Obama says he wants healthcare reform. [flash to an emergency room filled with white pipe-workers, plumbers, and gas station attendants] But his plan will leave uninsured over 15 million hardworking Americans. Look past the speeches, and vote for a real candidate of change, of choice, and of healthcare reform. Hillary Clinton.
(Ooops, did I just say something "otherwise objectionable"??? Can Marc sue me now???) Nah, he'd have to read the comments first. And we all know that's not gonna happen.
Scratch the point about voting for Hillary. That would violate 527 rules--sorry about the mistake there. Or what about this one: Barack Hussein Obama says that Ronald Reagan was a transformational president. But Reagan's policies left working families in the lurch. Barack Hussein Obama says that "words matter." But he steals his own speeches from other politicians. Barack Hussein Obama says he's ready to be Commander-in-Chief. But he wants to invite America's enemies to the White House. Barack Hussein Obama--misinformed, misguided, mistaken. You deserve a better choice.
If bland, ineffective campaigns could win delegates, we wouldn't be in a position where we need to siphon dollars to fund bland, ineffective, thinly-veiled campaign ads from bullshit 527s.
I'm an Obama supporter (or, if you prefer your anti-Muslim inflammatory rhetoric straight up, I'm a Barack Hussein Obama supporter), but I find nothing objectionable in this ad. The standards of political discourse have really gotten tame if this can be characterized as an "attack ad."
drwohl, What?! "Barack Hussein Obama" is his name. Why can't I use it? I'm simply trying to identify the candidate in question. I'm not anti-Muslim! Come, though, this is really a very boring 527 ad. If Clinton is going to rely on these, she might as well encourage whoever is producing them to make them more interesting.
wj: You seem to forget that this is a primary election. Certainly in a general election, the uber-negative 527s are going to come out in full force. But in a primary, what good would it do to alienate half of the Democratic Party? Hillary is handcuffed from going completely nuclear because blowing up another Party member means blowing up yourself.
Craig, I guess you're right. We'll have to wait for whatever 527 group the Freedom's Watch people scramble together for some real entertainment. But Clinton's people surely could have done better than THIS without going all "Hussein" on the man.
WJ: Really? Do you always refer to Hillary Rodham Clinton, William Jefferson Clinton, James Earl Carter (not to mention the great James Earl Jones), and so on? I dunno, I think if you just said "Barack" or "Obama", the not-unintelligent readers of these comments just maybe, possibly might know whom you mean. (Are there any other Obama's running for President?) David Richard Wohl
drwhohl, But you don't get the *purchase* with any of those other middle names that you get with "Hussein." If I were hired to run a 527 add in the general election, I would absolutely use his middle name in the add. All I need to do is to create a negative association around him that distracts voters from actual issues. And you'd have to be silly not to concede that his middle name, uttered in a sonorous, midwestern, middle-aged baritone over and over again wouldn't achieve that effect. I'm just saying: we should all get ready for it.
Right now, the track record of the Obama campaign itself is on a par with the best campaigns ever run. Easy to say you could take on the Clinton campaign and do what Barack has done these last weeks in hindsight, but not 12 months ago. However, it is the "surrogate factor" that could hurt the Senator right now. What we don't need are huge outlays of competing 527's muddying the waters or surrogates who only serve as distractions. Best thing for Senator Obama would be for his campaign and his ground game to win this for him by continuing to excel as they have...while he makes the pitch to the public that he can best unite the party to defeat John McCain and win gains in the House, Senate and the states in 2008. Barack Obama has made the case for his spot on the ticket by driving turnout and with convincing wins in state after state. The Clinton campaign has run in such a way so as to make that his presence on the ticket impossible if she is the nominee. Senator Clinton, in attacking Obama as she has...scorched earth...has given the voters another reason NOT to vote for her. There is no way to get Obama on the ticket with a vote for HRC. That is now clear to everyone.
"If speeches could create jobs, we wouldn't be facing a recession"... Ok... Logically that assumes that the current President's 'speechifying' prowess would have ensured that we wouldn't be facing a recession. Anybody here want to testify to that? The reality is that this little thing known as the 'Constitution of the United States' makes the case, quite plainly, that the legislature legislates and the President can either agree or veto. Short of trying to advance the current President's theory of unitary power or a rewrite of the constitution, the only power that the executive has is the so-called 'bully pulpit' when it comes to legislation. The key word being pulpit... Which implies a certain level of persuasive abilities... Which would involve some oratory skills. Call me crazy... So, to me, short of an embrace of the unitary executive and/or a change to the constitution, or even an embrace of the Bush2 style or government, what is this add really trying to get at?
It's a fair ad. Both BHO and HRC are well meaning, dedicated politicians. But, I WOULD like to hear BHO's plan to create jobs. Unless we have a whole generation that truly goes to work and with good jobs, the housing market will be depressed (and worse) for a long, long time. I fear the days of Jimmy Carter--and you didn't want to graduate from college when he was President (great man, though is was/is). You heard it here. We are headed for economic trouble or a far left administration and the BHO supporters better get with the program and ask for facts and plans. Now!
|
Subscribe to this blog by Email Twitter || On Facebook || QIK Live Channel  Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
|
| 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
How is that not outright advocacy for a candidate? Because it says "tell her" instead of "vote for her" at the end?
That's obviously just a campaign ad for hillary. Even Republican PACs follow the rules better than that (by just attacking the opponent)
Posted by Simon | February 20, 2008 1:29 PM