Obama Vows to Fire Staffers Who Investigate Clinton

[BeyondGeography]

Says he will not tolerate his campaign giving reporters information that challenges rival’s ethics.

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

This seems to be the news coming out of the press conference. No other copy on the link.

Smart move for Iowans, who want to see a commitment to discussing the issues. No way David Yepsen can go on hardball now and claim that Obama is rolling in the mud with Clinton.

On edit, here's more from Ben Smith:

==Carrie Budoff Brown, on the road with Obama this swing, reports that he's maintaining his campaign's unforgiving tone on Bill Shaheen and Clinton's apology, which he described for the first time:

We were both getting on our planes. We met on the tarmac. She apologized for Billy Shaheen’s remarks. I said I appreciated the apology. I suggested that all campaigns have surrogates that are eager to have their candidates win and it was important for us as the heads of our campaigns to make sure we are sending a clear message that this is not the kind of tone we should tolerate. At that point she got on plane.

He was asked if he felt she was sincere.

"I’m not going to characterize it beyond what I just said," he said.==

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1207/Apology_not_accepted.html

[Bullet1987]

1. It appears that Obama is trying to position himself above the fray...

which is the smart move to make.

[liberalnurse]

7. Talk is cheap...........

Every campaign does this................don't let the trash talk fool ya.

[Clintonista2]

17. Liberalnurse...

You always have the best signitures lol. I used to LOVE your one with the old lady that talked about ass kissers, but I think I love the dancing moon people one even more lol.

[liberalnurse]

40. Thank You.

A picture can say it all. :hi: O8)

I assign a "sig" to fit the mood. I have a feeling old Maxine will be back soon.

[Cha]

27. Talk is CHEAP and

that's what I think of hillary's "apology".

[liberalnurse]

41. Now Zidzi....you have been around the campaign block before....,

I'm sure we both learned the hard way just how the game is played from our Dean days. I didn't create the game but I learned how it is played.

[Cha]

46. After the last 5 years

as hillary as my senator..I'm not playing games.

[liberalnurse]

49. Okay..............

:loveya: :hug:

[ClarkUSA]

50. "Every campaign" has sent freeperish "WARNING: Obama is a Muslim Manchurian candidate" emails?

No, ONLY the Clinton campaign has done that MORE THAN ONCE and ONLY the Clinton campaign has been "wondering" if Obama was a drug dealer.

Disgusting.

[BringBigDogBack]

56. true

[creeksneakers2]

43. It appears to me he's milking it for all he can.

If he gets to the general is he going to tie his own hands when he fights the GOP? They'll surely bring this up if Obama ever attacks them. He's also likely to get caught with his own staff or volunteers slipping something to the media. How will that look after he's such a big deal about how clean his campaign is?

[ClarkUSA]

51. What he is saying is he will not tolerate or engage in Politics of Personal Destruction.

Talking or investigating POLICY or ISSUE differences or CORRECTING lies and innuendo is all on the table.

[creeksneakers2]

54. Anything he says about a GOP nominee will be twisted as

politics of personal destruction. Say a governor didn't fund schools adequately? Attacking the GOP candidate as irresponsible they'll say. An unsupported character attack the GOP will call it.

They'll say Obama is dangerously naive. They'll say his disdain for fighting is proof. When Obama strikes back they'll say he learned that the world doesn't play nice too late, and now he's losing and desperate. The media will go with the GOP characterization, because that's more like the mentality they like to push with shows like Survivor. That's the more exciting narrative.

Candidates should learn to never ever say they won't do something later.

[parasim]

59. Wow.

So, you're saying that he shouldn't run a clean campaign because if he does the GOP will twist anything he says about a GOP nominee (even if it is true and obviously not a personal attack) into a dirty campaign tactic? And they'll do this by calling him naive and his "disdain for fighting" is proof? and all because of the TV show Survivor?

wow, that's pretty f'd up...

so, do you think he should run a dirty campaign then?

[creeksneakers2]

61. I think he shouldn't limit himself with promises about what

he'll do in the future. I think at some point he may have to return fire against the GOP.

Naive and disdain for fighting are the same attacks Edwards is using tonight. Edwards calls Obama a dreamer. That's what the GOP will say about him too. Its the easiest route to assassinating Obama's character I can think of.

Its not all because of the show Survivor. They show Survivor is a symptom of the "those who don't look out for number one lose" mentality that creates drama for TV. If cable news doesn't have drama, it creates it. TV News demands that Obama will have to be either kicking ass or getting his ass kicked.

[parasim]

62. I see. So, "kicking ass" is running a dirty campaign then?

To "return fire" against the GOP he must lower himself to the level of the typical politician? Aren't the citizens of this country tired of that crap yet?

[creeksneakers2]

63. I said when he returns fire, valid or cheap shot,

the GOP is going to spin it as Obama running a dirty negative campaign. And they are going to say the rest of what I said they'll say. I monitor these guys. I know what they'll do.

[parasim]

65. Right. Of course, I know that's what they'll do.

What I was asking was whether or not you advocate him running a dirty negative campaign, because no matter what he does the GOP will spin it that way anyway?

[creeksneakers2]

66. No

He has to fight but he has to fight smart too. Wild punches boomerang.

[LittleBlue]

2. Good

It's going to be harder for the media to turn on Obama now. If they do, they could be accused of the same thing Hillary's campaign is guilty of.

Go Obama! :)

[Bitwit1234]

3. Well he ought to start with the staffers that prepared his

so called senate bills, he said he drafted, sponsored, and co-sponsored, there are a lot of discrepancies theres. I am sure that he did not do it himself. He doesn't have time but he delegated the job, and the person screwed up. With all the discrepancies it makes Obama look bad and not the person who did it.

[tammywammy]

4. I responded to you in that thread

You were wrong, he was a co-sponsor or sponsor on those bills you said he wasn't involved in. So, I don't see this discrepancy you're seeing.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2473421&mesg_id=2474193

[BenDavid]

5. Oh how Obama is getting cocky. Just watch within the next 2

weeks he will say or do something as his ego is over-loading. Just becasue he says he will fire a staffer means the press cannot go after any dirt on him? That's what the press did not do with bush and most all kept saying the press should look. What? Do we have a double standard?

[Franc_Lee]

12. Happiness is: Obama vs. Huckabee - Hillary is done after Feb.5th

[BenDavid]

21. okay lets take a look at the states on the 5th....I cannot see a

state obama can carry except maybe Illinois.....You wanna go all in and make that wager? I have always stated that by the middle of February or before the month ends HRC will have a majority of delegates to become the nominee.

Ben David

[proudmoddemo]

26. I think that's wrong

I think:


Alabama 60--Obama
Alaska 18 --Edwards.
Arizona 67--Clinton
Arkansas 47--Clinton, but by less than thought.
California 441--Clinton, but not by much.
Colorado 71--Obama
Connecticut 60--Dodd
Delaware 23--Biden
Georgia 103--Obama
Idaho 23--Obama
Illinois 185--Obama
Kansas 41--Obama
Massachusetts 121--Obama
Minnesota 88--Obama
Missouri 88--Clinton
New Jersey 127--Clinton
New Mexico 38--Richardson
New York 281--Clinton
North Dakota 21--Obama
Oklahoma 47--Clinton
Tennessee 85--Obama
Utah 29--Clinton
Democrats Abroad 11--Obama

If every state apportioned winner take all:
Clinton: 1098 Delegates
Obama: 798 Delegates

But they don't, so it'll be more like 900 each. I think we may be headed towards a brokered convention, in which case Gore will end up being the nominee.

[Cha]

28. Like you know

the fuck Obama is doing.

[DURHAM D]

6. This might burn him.

He has already retained a staffer that repeatedly tried to plant a story about Bill Clinton's post W.H. sexual activity.

Obama's assertion that he will not allow this kind of activity is already not true - it may generate a new news story or two about his insincerity.

[liberalnurse]

8. Exactly, they all do it .....

Even candidates for state offices and/or state primary level....they do it because they, the staffers, all of them have it in their blood! I'm not condemning it by any means because I'd do it too! I'm just letting my peers understand that this is delusional rhetoric Obama speaks today.

[Tom Rinaldo]

11. Investigating opponents is proper

What type of information then gets used and why, and whether it is used in a relevent and appropriate context is where the rubber meets the road of fair play.

[Cha]

29. You wish.

[Adelante]

9. I'm waiting for more information

I need to think about this.

[MADem]

10. Consider the source, here, now. It's 'EWWWWWW--Politico'

Whenever you see anything coming from these cretins, pick it apart for any kind of slight 'slant' that you can find. These POLITICO clowns are Republicans, and they will subtly put that GOP agenda out in front.

It is said that the GOP oracles are pushing hard for an Obama nom because they think he's the easist to beat. POLITICO is one tool in their toolchest.

Lesson: If it is IN POLITICO, look askance. Ask the Cui Bono? question.

Don't believe me? See here for some ugly history: http://bigheaddc.com/category/politico/

The multi-million dollar Politico publication, funded by the GOP-leaning Allbritton Communications company, has successfully squashed another competitor via back door bullying. In effect, the publication, well-known for its lack of diversity and conservative leanings, has bullied a small Hispanic upstart publication into changing its name, or to face a mighty lawsuit.

“Not content with taking stories that Hispanic journalists have already published and passing them off as exclusive, and THEN sending e-mails to Hispanic journalists …it seems that The Politico now also claims they own the Spanish language…,” according to RedBloguera.net.

The blog notes that the “Politico has forced La Política, an online newsletter dedicated to Hispanic political topics, to change its name because with all their millions they apparently can’t handle the existence of an online magazine that covers topics they completely ignore… even if their name is in Spanish…”

Insiders familiar with the situation say that Jim Vandehei, a top editor at the publication, played a large role in bullying La Política into changing its name to Candidito USA — or face a million dollar legal fight. Sources say, too, that Vandehei’s wife, Autumn Hanna Vandehei, a former Tom Delay staffer, likely played a role in the dealings. In Washington circles, Hanna Vandehei is well-known for opposing diversity initiatives.

They're baaastids. Drudge is a better source, and that's not saying much. At least after his snarky, false headlines, he links to a source citation....

And on edit, beware, too, of TIME MAGAZINE bearing gifts. They've got an agenda too, and it ain't terribly progressive.

[aquart]

14. And yet, Politico is linked as a source here incessantly.

We have so many people here who would buy the Brooklyn Bridge if they were told Hillary didn't want them to have it.

[MADem]

67. Yeah, that's sadly the truth.

If The Nation decided to switch their endorsement to her, they'd claim it was a rightwing rag!

I have no problem with people who don't like a candidate, so long as they have VALID reasons. But when they rely on bullshit to win the day, that's pretty sad.

[emulatorloo]

16. POLITICO are total right wing hacks. Yet many at DU still imagine they are credible

Thanks for posting the link.

=====

[MADem]

68. Those baaastids at Allbritton Communications are mendacious!

And they aren't even subtle--see how 'into the mix' they are? http://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2007/05/behind_the_scenes_at_the_gop_d.html

And how did Politico, the start-up online news organization, score its coveted role in co-hosting the debate? Because Fred Ryan, the chief operating officer of Allbritton Communications Company, which owns Politico, also happens to be chairman of the board of the Reagan library.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

13. As a volunteer on his campaign, I can tell you that staffers are scrupulous

About insisting that no Democratic opponent is to be criticized in any way.

[aquart]

15. Uh huh.

Is anyone actually this naive?

[mrreowwr_kittty]

18. Are you suggesting that I'm lying, or what? nt

[SoxFan]

20. It's naivete, it's the truth

Obama's staffers never bash the other Democratic candidates. Even in private, they try to maintain a positive tone. The remind me of the Paul Tsongas troops back in 1992, who, aside from a few rounds of Harkin, Brown, and Clinton impersonations over a beer, never said a bad thing about the other candidates.

[annie1]

23. If that is the case, that is awesome. : )...

but when i'm online, so many of his supporters foam at the mouth and say the most nasty hateful disgusting things. A couple of your supporters should go online and ask Obama supporters to simmer down. It's very hard to want to hear about him through the foul mouthed visciousness.

[Cha]

31. Thank you, catburgler, for

volunteering on his campaign!

[R_M]

37. Sure they are.

NOT!

[mrreowwr_kittty]

38. Do you have some proof of that? Put up or shut up. nt

[shraby]

19. Question is, if he doesn't investigate the

Clinton smears, can he be expected to investigate Bushco if he wins????

[annie1]

22. Well there is really nothing left to dig up on her and...

republicans still currently do dig, so it's not like he would miss out. She put him in a verrrrrrry good place by her early actions. Now he gets to look goody too-shoes. dumb. Move!!!

[sandnsea]

24. I thought you didn't like to bash Dems

Isn't that what you said just seconds ago??

[annie1]

30. by bash i mean...

"got a bj in the white house" "liar" "war monger"

that sort of thing. I'll say "she's shade", "to the right of", someone might be "off their rocker", that type of thing. things i could come back to and still vote for the person calling one of names, hateful gargbage, that's a bash. Hil is often off her rocker, but i could still vote for her.

[sandnsea]

32. Oooh, you make your own rules

I see. :eyes:

[annie1]

34. are you upset that i said...

he gets to play goody too shoes? well i suppose everyone has their definition of what's a bash. then i apologize, i should have been more clear. :).

[Cha]

33. Next to hillary...Obama is

fucking Santa Claus.

[maddiejoan]

42. apt analogy

as Santa Claus is also mythical.

[annie1]

58. Surely you remember what they did to Gore...

and compared to Obama, gore is an angel. Gore is the man, and even now conservatives go after him for how much electricity he used in his home while trying to make him home more energy efficient. It makes me sick when morons keep talking about Gore's house by quoting a conservative think tank. Obama? yeah, they got plenty. They don't actually NEED anything real.

[napi21]

25. Sorry Obama, but that's NOT the way to win! If he had said

"I will fire anyone who makes up stories, or falsely embellish things about my opponents" THAT would show being above the fray, but INVESTIGATE his opponents? That's just dumb!

[Evergreen Emerald]

35. I don't remember him firing any staffers after this:

http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/011506.php

<edit>

That said, there are others who ought to resign or be fired as well - although I would guess that Chris Matthews and Joe Trippi* don't agree. For example (emphasis mine, throughout this post):

<Obama's> 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 postpresidential sex life.

<edit>

Unlike the Clinton campaign, which has the bad habit of firing people or making people resign when they do things they should not be doing, another campaign had (has?) a different standard on smears:

Asked about the document <Hillary Clinton, D-Punjab>, Bill Burton, a spokesman for Mr. Obama, said: “We did give reporters a series of comments she made on the record and other things that are publicly available to anyone who has access to the Internet. I don’t see why anyone would take umbrage with that.”

Asked why the Obama campaign had initially insisted that it not be connected to the document, Mr. Burton replied, “I’m going to leave my comment at that.” ..

<edit>

And I didn't see any firings or resignations after this incident either:

In August, Obama’s team scored a significant hit by helping to place a story in several newspapers revealing that Norman Hsu, a major Clinton donor, had skipped town after having pleaded no contest to a charge of grand theft 15 years earlier and still faced an outstanding warrant... (Hsu had also contributed to Obama.)

Obama's free passes

[R_M]

36. All talk, no walking.

[MethuenProgressive]

39. What a crock of shit.

"If we get caught," is closer to truth.

[Skip Intro]

44. Classic arrogant Obama, refuses to characterize Hillary's apology as sincere.

Oh, his prepared statement would lead you to believe that, but given the opportunity to say he didn't think she was lying, he passed.

And what the hell is it with his camp that makes them think they can tell other candidates what kind of campaign they have to run? I mean, could you be more arrogant?

[Skip Intro]

45. And something glaring here - he REALLY wants to make this subject OFF LIMITS and fast.

I don't know what to say to those who can't see that.


Why? Why does he want silence on this issue so badly?


And this has nothing to do with my personal views on Obama, but as a political junkie - he's standing in front of a door complaining that it is morally wrong and dispicable to ask him what's behind the door. He's already told you, right? Ok, then. Why the "outrage?"

[Little Star]

47. He's smooth, I'll give you that. If he gets the nod the repugs

will have many more coke questions so he might as well answer them all now. Hillary has been about as vetted as any candidate can possibly be. Her warts are out there already which doesn't leave much but the same old, same old for the repugs if she gets the nod.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

53. Well all candidates want their personal foibles to be off limits, don't they?

What do you think a better way for Obama to handle it would be? Should he have said nothing while Shaheen and other surrogates continued peddling the "drug dealer" smear? That's what the outrage is about, and justifiably so.

[Little Star]

48. If I were Hill, I'd say let em' investigate. Have at it! The.....

republicans have been after her for sooooo long I doubt they missed much.

[Tactical Progressive]

52. Obama pretending to be on the high-road again?

Even after all his lies about Hillary?

Even after his smears on the Democratic party?

Even after trying to get reporters to investigate Bill Clinton's post-Presidential sex life?


Smear merchants don't come much more ugly than Obama. At least none that I've seen in the Democratic party.

[BringBigDogBack]

55. Good move

[Adelante]

57. Transcript

"All I can say is that tha i's not what the American people, I think, are looking for right now and that's part of the reason why, that's part of the message of change that we're delivering in this campaign," Obama said.

Question of Obama, asking whether his campaign operatives are gathering "personal" information about rivals.

"I have been very clear to my staff. Look, every campaign is doing comparitive research on policy," Obama began.

Questioner interrupted with clarification.

"I understand, so I'm just going to answer your question. Every campaign is going to be looking at, you know, did they flip flop on a health care issues or, you know, are they consistent on their trade policy -- that I think is exactly what presidential debates should be about and I have no problem with that at all. I have been very clear to my campaign. I do not want to see research that is involved in trying to tear people down personally. If find out that somebody is doing that, they will be fired. I've been absolutely crystal clear about this and I've been clear about this for a very long time and, you know, you're free to talk to my campaign manager who is around here somewhere for confirmation of that. That's not what I believe in. That's not who I am and frankly just from a practical, political perspective it's contrary to the kind o fmessage of change that I've been talking about in this campaign."

Follow up to clarify where the line is and whether raising questions about Clinton library financing, records there is fair.

"Well, the only issue that's come up with respect to the presidential library is when during the last debate when Russert asked ab out it and I was asked about it and I indicated at that time that releasing records and transparency in terms of tax records, for example, that I don't consider to be trying to undermine somebody. It has to do with us making sure that we are transparent and accountable and open to the public," Obama said.

So why did members of your staff go to the Little Rock Library?

"That I can't answer because I don't know that for certain, but they would not be looking for personal items. They'd be looking, again, keep in mind that -- and this is the argument that I made earlier -- Senator Clinton's argued that her experience as first lady is relevant. That means we and what I said publicly was if you are saying that this is your relevant experience, we should know what decisions you were involved in in the White House. That is part of her public function and part of the argument she's making publicly in terms of why she would be a better president," Obama said.

http://learfield.typepad.com/radioiowa/2007/12/obama-in-the-lo.html

[fightindonkey]

60. Buh Bye Obama!

Political hack!

[derby378]

64. How badly does Obama want to be President?

If I were to offer any advice to Obama, it would be something like this: "You want to shut down the Clinton campaign? Here's how you get them. She pulls a knife, you pull a gun. She sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of hers to the morgue. That's the Chicago way, and that's how you get Clinton."

They're both natives of Chicagoland. Surely they didn't think the rest of the nation wouldn't notice, already.

Edited to clairfy: No actual campaign staffers were harmed in the typing of this post. I'm speaking strictly in terms of which campaign comes out on top.