Obama presser today at 12:15 EST

[BeyondGeography]

http://thepage.time.com/2007/12/15/obama-adds-his-own-iowa-press-conference/

I expect a call for open government and for ex-Presidents to fully disclose contributors to their libraries, in light of Bill's $10 million "gift" from the Saudis:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/14/AR2007121402124.html

The press will be looking for a cokiepalooza, but I look for Obama to play offense on a whole new front.

[babylonsister]

1. Whoa. This should be interesting. nt

[jefferson_dem]

2. Thanks for the heads-up, BG.

Link broken, by the way.

[BeyondGeography]

3. Thanks for noting...fixed n/t

[Evergreen Emerald]

4. sooo...more attacks from Obama? Personal distruction

Lovely. And the sheeple cheer.

[Bullet1987]

5. How do you know there will be personal attacks? And where did MORE come from?

Obama hasn't said anything personal about Clinton YET! I hope there aren't though. I hope there are people in the Obama campaign that know the backlash that'll come from going negative back against Clinton.

[Evergreen Emerald]

13. seriously? Have you forgotten October and November? Here:

http://www.attacktimeline.com/

This will help in refreshing your memory.

[slick8790]

14. "Paid for by Hillary Clinton for President" n/t

[Evergreen Emerald]

15. So?

Are you seriously attempting to suggest that those attacks did not occur?

[slick8790]

17. No, I'm not saying that at all.

I'm saying what they define as an attack on a page designed to support Hillary would be significantly different than what a neutral third party would call an attack. I'd say the majority (not all, I give you that) of those "attacks" are what the primaries are for, pointing out difference between candidates in order to let the voters pick the best one. Also, where's the Hillary attack list? I think it'd be about the same in size as the other two, at least recently.

[Evergreen Emerald]

18. Good: that is a start

Now, if you decided that suggesting that Clinton is a liar or has issues of character is not a personal attack, yet discussing illegal drug us IS..then you would be unreasonable.

[Cameron27]

16. Thanks for posting that,

I hadn't seen it before. It's good to keep handy.

[Forkboy]

6. Even if there are more attacks the Hillary camp can no longer complain.

Not all, but far too many of her supporters have acted in a way that renders any complaints about attacks laughable. They no longer have a leg to stand on when it comes to personal destruction tactics. That's the bed too many of you have chosen to make for yourselves. Even here you attack while complaining of attacking. :shrug:

[Evergreen Emerald]

8. Wait, shouldn't you be complaining? Or are you a hypocrite?

[Forkboy]

19. I have complained about attacks from all sides here.

And I've defended all the candidates at one point or another, not just the one I like. I've seen things from Edwards, Obama and Hillary that suck, and have said so many times. I've been open in saying that i don't like Hillary or Obama very much, but I've still defended them because they are Democrats. Whether it's this drug thing with Obama, the lame tip story with Hillary, the haircut with Edwards or the UFO with Kucinich I've defended each of them here because I don't want to see us win by out sleazing the Republicans.

[Evergreen Emerald]

20. oh forkboy, just like your candidate

you attempt to re-write history.

[Forkboy]

21. And just like yours you lie.

Tell me, what am I re-writing?

And for bonus points, tell me who my candidate is.

[Adelante]

7. Thanks, BG

Looking forward to it.

[MethuenProgressive]

9. How much of his personal history will he blame on Hillary Clinton this time?

He needs new writers.

[jenmito]

10. Thanks! They're going to show it right there at that link?

[BeyondGeography]

11. Nah; looks like Clinton News Network or Fox may be our only hope

:scared:

MSNBC is tied up with Russert right now for an hour.

[jenmito]

12. I know MSNBC won't show it, but I just played the video by Halperin and he said it would be covered

there. I assumed he meant right there, by him, at that link...