Oct 17 - 46/45 - McCain +01
Hillary pulls a Mitt
As if this Hillary mailer needs any commentary (see below); these are the type of mailers that I saw Romney roll out against Huckabee in Iowa and then against McCain in New Hampshire. Embarrassing, desperate stuff.
About this notion of 100% coverage: It's the law in Ohio that in order to drive you MUST have car insurance, right? The law is on the books. Does that mean that 100% of drivers have car insurance? Of course not. And why did those who didn't get car insurance before the law, get it after? Because there were suddenly consequences... penalties... fines.
Similarly if Hillary mandates health care will 100% of those who don't have it suddenly buy in? Of course not. Those who have grown accustom to choosing rent and groceries over coverage will continue to choose rent and groceries over coverage. Others may simply make poor choices (I stupidly lived without coverage for about four years after college). Hillary has yet to explain how she plans to enforce this mandate though. How will she punish those who don't buy in?
Obama has pointed out repeatedly that in Massachusetts where this was actually attempted many poor residents ended up without coverage AND hit with fines; Even with a mandate, 6-10% of the state-residents in Massachusetts don't have coverage. This article from the NY Times sums it up really well: Clinton Attack on Obama Overlooks some Realities.
Still, this is a fair policy point to debate. Maybe Hillary's plan is more comprehensive. Maybe Obama's is more feasible. I'm actually not sure whose is better. But I do know that this type of mailer is a Mitt-esc tactic which shows Hillary's true colors and her win-at-all-costs mentality.
First, Hillary pushes to shut down at-large precincts in Nevada. Then she tries to overturn the DNC ruling and have delegates seated from a state where Obama was not even on the ballot! Now the negative ads and mailers are rolling out.
Our resident Hillary supporter, Annie may not have a problem with all this. Recently in defense of Hillary's other hard-ball tactics she said, "there really is no difference between R[epublican] and D[emocrat] tactics-- there is a difference between winning and losing tactics... I can appreciate the Swiftboat attacks for what they were-- winning tactics."
But are we really comfortable with the Dems adopting no-holds-barred tactics or are we looking for principled leadership which is fundamentally different than Rove-style politics? As Democrats in Ohio decide who to support on March 4th, this is one of the questions they'll need to ask themselves.
About this notion of 100% coverage: It's the law in Ohio that in order to drive you MUST have car insurance, right? The law is on the books. Does that mean that 100% of drivers have car insurance? Of course not. And why did those who didn't get car insurance before the law, get it after? Because there were suddenly consequences... penalties... fines.
Similarly if Hillary mandates health care will 100% of those who don't have it suddenly buy in? Of course not. Those who have grown accustom to choosing rent and groceries over coverage will continue to choose rent and groceries over coverage. Others may simply make poor choices (I stupidly lived without coverage for about four years after college). Hillary has yet to explain how she plans to enforce this mandate though. How will she punish those who don't buy in?
Obama has pointed out repeatedly that in Massachusetts where this was actually attempted many poor residents ended up without coverage AND hit with fines; Even with a mandate, 6-10% of the state-residents in Massachusetts don't have coverage. This article from the NY Times sums it up really well: Clinton Attack on Obama Overlooks some Realities.
Still, this is a fair policy point to debate. Maybe Hillary's plan is more comprehensive. Maybe Obama's is more feasible. I'm actually not sure whose is better. But I do know that this type of mailer is a Mitt-esc tactic which shows Hillary's true colors and her win-at-all-costs mentality.
First, Hillary pushes to shut down at-large precincts in Nevada. Then she tries to overturn the DNC ruling and have delegates seated from a state where Obama was not even on the ballot! Now the negative ads and mailers are rolling out.
Our resident Hillary supporter, Annie may not have a problem with all this. Recently in defense of Hillary's other hard-ball tactics she said, "there really is no difference between R[epublican] and D[emocrat] tactics-- there is a difference between winning and losing tactics... I can appreciate the Swiftboat attacks for what they were-- winning tactics."
But are we really comfortable with the Dems adopting no-holds-barred tactics or are we looking for principled leadership which is fundamentally different than Rove-style politics? As Democrats in Ohio decide who to support on March 4th, this is one of the questions they'll need to ask themselves.
By Robert - 2/18/2008
19 Comments:
I believe Obama pulled a Mitt first with his NAFTA mailer which is being called 'just short of mail fraud'.
http://www.buckeyestateblog.com/obamas_misleading_mailer_on_nafta_hits_ohio
There's also a story about it at NPR, MSNBC, etc. Is that not just as desperate? Face it, this late in the game there is going to be lots of mudslinging. You know, the kind that makes the average citizen dislike politicians.
Wow, Bob. So many attacks, I'm not sure where to start.
In reality, HRC and BO's healthcare proposals are both MANDATES. Hillary's is a mandate for all Americans, while Barack's is a mandate for American children; both plan on paying for the program by rolling back tax cuts for the $250,000 plus crowd. There are exceptions to both candidate's requirements, and both recognize that some will opt out of the program.
Now I will go back to our discussion of the Swiftboat ads-- if you remember, some of the comments criticizing HRC and her campaign referred to the tactics as "Republican Tactics." My response was that there is no difference between R tactics or D tactics, there are simply winning and losing tactics. The Swiftboat attacks (though R driven and paid for by PFA) were clearly winning tactics. Whether pundits like ourselves "liked" them or not is irrelevant-- they were effective and influenced voters.
I'm not sure why it is so provocative to you to say that these ads were effective. Other campaign ads have been just as influential. Perhaps this is part of the new "HOPE" campaign-- that all candidates and their uncoordinated 527 organizations will sit in a circle and sing kumbaya? Get real.
Bob, its pretty clear to me that you understand winning campaign tactics. I mean, you're the one that slammed me in your post without proding. What's worse?: one campaign pointing out differences in policies using creative marketing or calling out a colleague for something she believes in strongly to reinforce a weak point.
Let the readers decide.
Chandra,
Here's a link to the mailer you mentioned. I don't think it's in the same league but it's definitely worth talking about and I'd like to break down the various quotes in the piece. I'll try to find some time tomorrow to address it.
Annie,
Yes, let the readers decide. And while they're at it they can decide if you're a hypocrite.
You're criticizing me for slamming you in my post without prodding. If I remember correctly, in your last post (that wasn't a Clinton-spotting) you did a bit of unprodded slamming yourself.
Do you remember claiming that I "CONVENIENTLY left facts out of my LITTLE research project"? A condescending shot which was CATEGORICALLY FALSE. When I called you on it, pointing out that I included AND cited EVERY SINGLE POLL you responded with:
"Whatev. Did you ask Obama to be your valentine this year?"
Unprecedented, in just three short months you've squandered any benefit-of-the-doubt credibility you had at this site.
Annie,
Another thing...
You can try to reframe the issue, and say that we were arguing about whether the Swiftboat ads were EFFECTIVE, but we were arguing if Swiftboat-style ads were ACCEPTABLE coming from the candidates we support.
Very, very different.
As we discussed tactics that some thought were unconscionable you coldly argued that there are only winning and losing tactics and that you "can appreciate the Swiftboat attacks for what they were-- winning tactics." Then you said that the ads "were not dishonest" and that the group that released them was "genius" for their implementation.
You've clearly adopted the Clintonian win-at-all-costs tenet, it's OK, it's a popular philosophy these days, just be proud and stand by your words.
For those who may be new to the site, or who missed the initial back and forth between Annie and I, I highly recommend going back and reading her post: The One and all the comments. This was the one and only time here that Hillary's pros have been defended, debated and dissected.
Hillary's plan would probably cover more people, which is a good thing. But Hillary's plan is never going to happen. She'll never get the votes in the Senate, especially when mandates are about as disliked by the GOP as the idea of another Clinton in office.
And the other thing is that Hillary is pulling her classic robot-style triangulation about how mandates will work. She refuses to say fines will be in play.....that would not be an election winner.....so she has a plan that cannot be enforced.
As far as the Swiftboat tactics issue. I think of it everytime I see a new Hillary post on this site. The tactics were not only declared winning, but the swift boat ads were actually declared HONEST. I may have actually soiled myself when I learned John Kerry actually was a fraud in Vietnam. It was never recanted.
I said it then and I will say it again: I am glad that the "pro-Swift Boating", pro-dishonest campaigning wing of the Democratic party supports Hillary and not Obama.
Easy answer they all do. If there was a white male included the answer might be more difficult.
Chuck, I know Kerry accepted the millon dollar challenge on the Swift Boat issue. Has he collected?
I think how a candidate runs their campaign tells us more about them than their rhetoric. Obama has benefited greatly by Hillary's attacks because it has given him a chance to showcase his patience and character. It's not going to get any better for him if he gets the nomination. If he does win the presidency, he'll be faced with lunatics and backbiters from dawn til dusk. I want to see now, not later, how he handles the pressure.
I was very disappointed in Kerry's response to the Swiftboaters, who he should have been able to discredit quickly. His response was too little too late. Mencken
Chandra,
Here's a link to Hillary's Fact-Hub where she discusses the mis-quote.
It looks like the writer who wrote the news story did in fact report that she "thinks" it was a boon to the economy within the text. Did the writer misquote her or misrepresent her? I don't know. Is Newsday a credible source? I don't know. But, and I'm still looking, so far it doesn't look like the Obama camp misquoted the article itself.
The use of quotes around the word "boon" is definitely suspect, since the quotes refer to the source article and not the horse's mouth.
Still, and this could be based on my own complete and total bias, I don't see this piece as being in the same league as the other, which is a gross mischaracterization in my eyes, not just an iffy quote out of context.
I'm still trying to find the actual Newsday article from 9/11/06. Let me know if you see a link anywhere to that article.
OK, well I can't find that "boon" article for the life of me. (Neither Obama's nor Hillary's Fact-hubs provide a link.)
But I did find this at Time Magazine (see below). Notice that Time does include the boon quote but is careful to indicate that it's from the piece and not directly from the candidate.
Either way, here's what I gather, and correct me if I'm wrong. Obama's main claim in this piece is:
"Only Barack Obama consistently opposed NAFTA"
Even this pro-Hillary piece from the Huffington Post explains that as first lady she was opposed to NAFTA, BUT had no choice but to tow the party line for her husband. Maybe so, but we're concerned with her public stance on NAFTA not her private reservations.
And there are three powerful quotes in this piece, only one of which Hillary seems to take issue with at her Fact-Hub.
So I don't think that this piece is a gross mischaracterization (like the other), although I will concede that the use of the quotations around the word boon was over the top.
From Time Magazine:
"AS LATE AS SEPTEMBER 2006: Hillary Said NAFTA Was A Victory For President Clinton, Would Lead To An Economic Improvement. In 1996, on a trip to Brownsville, Texas, Clinton “touted the president’s support for the North American Free Trade Agreement, saying it would reap widespread benefits in the region.” In her memoir, Clinton wrote, “Senator Dole was genuinely interested in health care reform but wanted to run for President in 1996. He couldn’t hand incumbent Bill Clinton any more legislative victories, particularly after Bill’s successes on the budget, the Brady bill and NAFTA.” And according to a Newsday issues rundown in 2006, “Clinton thinks NAFTA has been a boon to the economy.” [New York Newsday, 9/11/06; United Press International, 11/1/96; Living History, p.231]"
Chandra,
And if you scroll down the page at the Time article you find similar criticism of Hillary's stance on NAFTA from Bloomberg News and the San Francisco Chronicle.
Is it true? I'm not really sure, but it goes to show that the message wasn't invented by the Obama camp.
On the other hand, I can't imagine you'll find a single news story about how Obama thinks that a portion of Americans don't DESERVE to have health care coverage.
This post has been removed by the author.
I re-read my comments above. Let me be clear:
1) I like Hillary's health care plan better.
2) I think it is less likely to pass.
But above all this, I find all these policy "differences" a bit moot. Has a president ever said, "this is what i think" and actually get it???
The Senate and House will chew up any bill they present. Any candidate will be lucky to get close to the reforms they want. Then add on the Hillary hatred by the GOP and I don't see her getting anything passed.
Robert- Your inability to respect another's point of view is obvious with your personal attacks. I realize class might fall outside your 'masculine net' but perhaps you should try to rope a litte in.
If you're new to TCS, here is the insulting, misogynist comment that anonymous is alluding to. A few weeks back I said (in defense of the new staff members):
"I'm definitely glad that we enlarged the staff. I honestly welcome differing view points. I think the new staffers have put up some great posts, and caught some points which may have slipped through our masculine net (like the extensive Roe V. Wade coverage). These posts definitely help to round things out."
Terrible, I know.
annie,
we can go through prez elections and choose winning campaign tatics that were pretty reprehensible.
the willy horton ads that bush 1 used.
nixon tactics, both legal and illegal.
i won't even go international and back further into history.
it's the win at any cost mentality that leaves such a bad taste.
the swift boat ads were outside the official bush 2 campaign, but that doesn't lessen thier distaste.
the dem primaries are not even close to this level and i hope they never get there, but if it all comes down to winning, then where is the line drawn?
Buy cheap WOW Power Leveling,sell wow gold.welcome to buy cheap wow gold-We can have WOW PowerLeveling,buy wow gold game, World Of Warcraft Gold,wow Gold, world of warcraft gold deal,Cheap WOW Gold. Welcome here to buy the professional World Of Warcraft Power Leveling service, World Of Warcraft PowerLeveling for Cheap Wow Powerleveling, WoW Power leveling Guide. The best of luckgoogle Best wishes
Allow me to offer my heartiest wishes.
Don‘t waste your time on a man/woman, who isn‘t willing to waste their time on you. bjseek Hi Best wishes。bjseek by数据恢复loves xicao xicao lovesby bjseek数据恢复专业从事数据恢复领域的产品开发与技术服务自主研发RAID数据恢复服务器数据恢复分析程序来提供高、中、低压锅炉钢管、合金无缝管无缝钢管钢管化肥专用钢管，流体无缝管、结构无缝管、石油裂化无缝钢管、地质钢管、液压支柱钢管通常说的加密狗的破解大致可以分为三种方法，一种是通过硬件克隆或者复制一种是通过SoftICE等Debug工具调试跟踪解密一种是通过编写拦截程序修改软件和加密锁之间的通讯。娱乐幸福女人娱乐博客相册导航google排名google排名google排名台州网站建设优化推广台州网站建设优化推广台州网站建设|网站推广|网站优化|网络公司台州网站建设|网站推广|网站优化|网络公司 google左侧排名google左侧排名google排名论文发表资讯刊物信息，协助客户制定论文发表方案google排名google优化网站优化搜索引擎优化搜索引擎排名网站优化搜索引擎优化百度优化SEOgoogle排名SEO同声传译同声翻译我们致力于提供一流的同声传译设备租赁服务，在同声传译领域，同声翻译设备租赁具备一流的新一代博世会议设备租赁服务。更衣柜文件柜流水线SEO流水线台州鞋帽服装|台州食品饮料|台州礼品|台州阀门水泵|台州服装机械|台州家电及制冷配件|台州模具塑料|台州医药化工|台州汽摩及配件百度搜索夕草SEO北京google左侧排名广州google左侧排名上海google左侧排名杭州google左侧排名
The best of luck Best wishes Best regards .by bjseek
Post a Comment
<< Home