NBC's First Read: New Obama Web Ads Hit Clinton in Iowa, NH

[flpoljunkie]

New Obama Web Ads Hit Clinton

The Obama campaign has bought flashy Web banner ads in Iowa and New Hampshire with the message:

--One candidate had the judgment to oppose the war from the start.
--One candidate knows it's irresponsible to send troops to war without a plan to bring them home.
--One candidate believes it's naïve to believe we can resolve conflicts without talking to our adversaries.
--Ready for a new direction?"

Click link below to see the new banner ad:

http://www.barackobama.com/judgmentmatters.html

[Colobo]

1. Obama Strikes Back!

[TeamJordan23]

2. When I pick my president, I think judgment is the top quality I look for. nm

[goodgd_yall]

3. He is NOT the one candidate of all 8

What a bunch of bs. Typical campaign ad.

[Ethelk2044]

4. He is for me.

[journalist3072]

5. Exactly! eom

[flpoljunkie]

30. Obama's ad is his answer to Hillary--she is the one he is obviously referring to.

[Grandrose]

6. Let it rip!!!

Way to go Obama! We shall see who is naive! :D :kick:

[MannyGoldstein]

7. Mrs. Clinton's Hand Grenade Seems To Have Come Down On Her Own Head

So much for the "Obama is naive" strategy. They seem to have started testing an "I am being victimized for being a woman" strategy. Or perhaps back to the irritating "resistance is futile" strategy?

[Colobo]

8. Yeah- the resistance one has been in play for a while. The victim one is new.

[silverweb]

9. Very nice.

GObama!

[Placebo]

10. What a bunch of rubbish.

So much for Obama's hollow rhetoric about a "New Kind of Politics." :eyes:

[MannyGoldstein]

11. He Was Attacked By Mrs. Clinton. He Slammed It Back At Her.

Seems very, very fair to me.

[jefferson_dem]

16. BS.

How in the world does Obama's promotion of his own position on diplomacy and his own judgment on American foreign policy matters mean he's violating any desire for a "new kind of politics"?

[emilyg]

21. and it will back-fire. Watch out Obama.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

12. Apparently the truth was the first casualty of the Clinton-Obama war

==--One candidate had the judgment to oppose the war from the start.==

Dennis Kucinich opposed the IWR and actually voted against it. Kucinich has never voted to finance the war, unlike Obama. As Kucinich pointed out during the debate, it is disingenuous of Obama to say he "opposed the war from the beginning" and then vote to finance it consistently for two years. The old excuse was Obama did it to support the troops. So why did he finally vote against funding the war a few months ago when there was intense pressure from the base for him and HRC to switch their position on funding the war? Kucinich is the only true, consistent anti-war candidate.

==--One candidate knows it's irresponsible to send troops to war without a plan to bring them home.==

See, Kucinich, Dennis.

==--One candidate believes it's naïve to believe we can resolve conflicts without talking to our adversaries.==

This apparently depends on which day it is. On Sunday Obama said he would only talk "under certain conditions" (the same position as HRC, Edwards, and everyone else, except perhaps DK), then on Monday Obama switched to "without precondition" (unique), on Monday night and Tuesday he was back to his Sunday position (the same as everyone else), and now the official line is that he differs from HRC on this (which means he is back to his Monday position at roughly 8 o'clock). It is difficult to assess the validity of this claim from Obama with him changing his position on this as often as someone changes their socks.

The other candidates favor talking with our enemies too. The difference is, using Obama's Monday debate position and his apparent current position, they want to lay the groundwork first with low-level contacts to make sure that the discussions would be fruitful. It isn't as if they are going, let's say, randomly invite them over for tea... If we accept Obama's Sunday position and the position his campaign took after the debate and on Tuesday then there is no difference between him and the other candidates on this.

==Ready for a new direction?"==

Which direction would that be?

[Colobo]

13. Trying to bring Obama down to see if Edwards goes up won't work.

[TeamJordan23]

14. DMC, Did he say "Only one candidate"? The ads are promoting the candidate who put them out there. nm

[jefferson_dem]

17. His wild spinning reeks of sheer desperation.

And i can understand why...

[draft_mario_cuomo]

23. Apparently you have been ignoring the polling for the past week

;)

[jefferson_dem]

24. Touche. Good on Edwards for the latest Iowa numbers.

Rather him than Hill. ;)

[draft_mario_cuomo]

25. Don't forget the Rass numbers. As JE once said, "Objects in your mirror are closer than they appear"

;)

Btw, for all my criticism of Obama I would enthusiastically support him if he wins the nomination. As you once said, all this fighting is within the family. Come Super Tuesday we will all unite. :) Of course, until then we will tear each other to pieces lol! I hope people realize things are going to degenerate much further at DU by December and don't even think about primary season! :rofl:

[draft_mario_cuomo]

19. That is clearly implied nt

[draft_mario_cuomo]

18. Sure. Too many Obama supporters assume people do not have legitimate criticisms of him

Do you really think one post at a site with over 100,000 posters is going to damage the Obama candidacy? I, and others, do not criticize him to boost HRC, Edwards, or anyone else. If we did we are morons because what we say will not even chink his armor. We simply disagree with him at times.

Edwards is doing fine on his own right now and I hope Obama continues doing what he has been doing lately. Edwards does not need the help of an obscure DUer. :)

[MannyGoldstein]

15. Good Point On The "One Candidate" Stuff

But it *is* clear that Obama correctly called this war from the start.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

20. Yes, I applaud him for speaking out on the war when too many Dems (including my candidate) did not

When he is right he deserves credit and I agree with him on probably 80-90% of issues and if he is the nominee I will enthusiastically support him. If the ad said "Senator Obama opposed the war from the beginning" the ad would be accurate. I think Obama is opening himself up to attack from Kucinich. Remember, DK went after him on this during the last debate. This only invites further attacks from Kucinich that would undermine one of his most potent drawing points, the IWR. If Kucinich is able to muddy the waters on his Iraq record and paint him as being HRC-lite since he got to the senate on Iraq this ad could prove to backfire on Obama.

[sandnsea]

26. Dean made that mistake in 2003

Dennis jumped all over his ass and I'm sure he'll do it this year too.

As to your ABC propaganda, well, you may as well use Faux news bullshit. They've come to be about the same.

[alteredstate]

22. Wow

Go Obama!

[flpoljunkie]

27. I would also recommend watching the linked videos, particularly the "Then" video

http://my.barackobama.com/page/s/newleadership

[flpoljunkie]

28. More detailed information on these banner ads from the New York Observer...

The Barack Attack on Hillary, Abbreviated
by Jason Horowitz
Published: July 27, 2007

The fight between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton has come down to this: four sentences which the campaign says will appear as banner ads on the web sites of the Concord Monitor, Des Moines Register and other New Hampshire and Iowa papers this afternoon.

"One candidate had the judgment to oppose the war from the start.”

"One candidate knows it's irresponsible to send troops to war without a plan to bring them home."

"One candidate believes it's naïve to believe we can resolve conflicts without talking to our adversaries."

"Ready for a new direction?"

http://www.observer.com/2007/obama-keeps-hammering

[flpoljunkie]

29. Obama is now running these ads "Judgment Matters" online at DailyKos, Talkingpointsmemo for starters

They look like this:



http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com

http://www.dailykos.com