Obama Camp Registers Anti-Clinton Web Sites

[KennedyGuy]

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=4036024&page=1

Though Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., has pledged to keep criticisms of his rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, focused on the issues, ABC News has learned that his campaign secretly registered an internet domain name called desperatehillaryattacks.com, a Web site that may seem to insult the former First Lady personally.

The domain name -- and another one, Desperationwatch.com -- connects to a known Web site where the Obama campaign catalogues Clinton's attacks on the Illinoisan, hillaryattacks.barackobama.com But DesperateHillaryAttacks.com has not been known until now.


Lets see all the anti-Hillary Obabmabots join in and accuse Obabma of the same dirty politics you were all so shrill about yesterday...
What's that I hear?

Oh..nothing...

[babylonsister]

1. So you're suggesting they shouldn't defend themselves?

That would be dumb. The Clinton campaign started this; try not to lose sight of that, k?

[Alamom]

20. I believe his was first. Obama's has been online since the 1st of December.

Clinton's are not on-line or they were not when reported yesterday.

[ccpup]

2. the standards held to Hillary by the obamabots

are much higher than the ones they hold to their own guy. He doesn't "attack", he points out "differences", you know?

:sarcasm:

[cali]

3. lol. all of this is standard political shit.

it's the hypocrisy that's so interesting to watch.

[Tom Rinaldo]

Yep. That is the only extrordinary part of any of this. n/t

[ccpup]

4. oh, damn!

forgot the whole "defending himself" angle. But I see that's been covered.

yes, the hypocrisy is hilarious. But that IS politics ... regardless of one's Hope and Change lingo.

[Dawgs]

5. Those aren't anti-Hillary sites. They're sites to defend the Hillary attacks.

Nice try though.

[ronnykmarshall]

10. Let's all rise and sing ...................

Santa Santa Obama
Padre de todos los ninos
De los tiranizados, de los descamisados
De los trabajadores, de la America

[Tom Rinaldo]

11. Uh huh. Like "desparate" attacks that dare to ask question about Obama's literal voting record.

Lets see; votongpresent.com vs desperatehillaryattacks.com.

Oh that evil Hillary.

[ccpup]

12. good point to make

now, which site sounds more desperate? and -- if he's surging so strongly in the Polls -- why is he claiming she's the one who's "desperate"?

Hmmmmm ...

[ronnykmarshall]

6. Nothing to see here ..

Keep moving.

It's OK when Obama does this.

Didn't you get the memo?

[William769]

9. Check your E-mail.

I sent you a little present. :)

[ronnykmarshall]

15. Thanks!

:loveya:

[William769]

7. I wonder if we will see the outrage from the same people?

Probably not.

[zulchzulu]

8. HERE'S A WEB SITE DAMNING CLINTON'S WAR VOTE!!!

http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html

[NewYorkerfromMass]

14. It was a good speech

and a good vote. Same as Kerry's but not as good as his.
I don't see how it's so damning.

[Cameron27]

25. I have to agree with you,

I hadn't read it until a few weeks ago and I was surprised that it was so cautionary against a bush invasion.

[oasis]

27. "..bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the UN more likely

and therefore, war, less likely" HRC.

She's making a strong case for the UN to be the "deceider".

[JackORoses]

13. How is a site based on Clinton Attacks seen as an attack? It's not as if they catalog her failures.

[Tom Rinaldo]

17. Accusing someone of running an underhanded campaign is a form of attack

Surely you know that. And it can be a very potent form of attack. Surely you know that also.

Not all attacks are unfair - that is left for voters to decide, but castigating a politician for making "desperate attacks" is literally going negative. By commonly understood usage "desperate attacks" are not based on legitmate poltical issues worthy of discussion. They, if the charge is true, are exactly what they say they are; acts of desperation when reasonable alterntives are unviable or unavailable.

So Obama is "attacking" Clinton with a claim that she is trying to trick the public into supporting her over Obama by making "unfair" claims. Clinton is "attacking" Obama by pointing to aspects of his voting record that she believes are "unflattering" to his current political ambitions. Each is negative but it is hard to argue that asking voters to look at aspects of an opponents voting record is underhanded campaigning. That is exactly what campaign debates are usually all about.

[JackORoses]

21. Not when they are actually running an underhanded Campaign. Then its called Honesty.

[Tom Rinaldo]

23. I said what is fair is left for the voters to decide

By standard political definition going positive means calling attention to why voters should like you, and going negative is calling attention to why voters should not like the other guy or gal.

But the claim was made yesterday that there was something underhanded about Clinton taking out domain names that might call into question Obama's voting record. Negative - yes, underhanded - bussshit. Again, it is the double standard being applied, not this act by Obama's campaign that is being questioned. At least it is the double standard of some posters going ballistic upon hearing of Clinton's web names but instead attacking Clinton again and defending Obama when they hear about his web names.

Again, literally, here are the names reserved: votingpresent.com and desperatehillaryattacks.com

[ericgtr]

16. I was hoping to see Obama turn the other cheek on this

:(

[Tom Rinaldo]

18. You know, when I posted a "Desperate Times Call for Desperate Measures" Poll on DU

I was being playful and riffing off of what I just thought was the copy cat tendency of posters on DU to pick up on a phrase and work it to death. Now with this article (and this domain name which may have predated the Clinton one for all we know) it really is looking like the use of "desperate" as a tag word was always an intentional part of an orchestrated political campaign tactic by Obama:

But Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton denies that his campaign is calling Clinton "desperate." Rather, he insists, they are calling her attacks "desperate."

"Hillary Clinton has been launching desperate attacks on Obama for many months now and our Web site has carefully detailed and refuted each one," Burton told ABC News...

Obama, for instance, sent a fundraising e-mail to supporters earlier this month in which he said he would "respond to each of the Clinton campaign's desperate attacks directly and honestly."

Here is a link to the poll I put up a few days ago by the way:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3852553


P. S. If Obama only within the last month or so has closed the gap on Clinton, how can one of his representatives claim that "Hillary Clinton has been launching desperate attacks on Obama for many months now" What was there to feel desperate about until recently? Wasn't she ripped into for acting like her victory was "inevitable" until just a few weeks ago?

[killbotfactory]

19. You think listing the attacks Clinton made against him is dirty politics?

WTF?

[Tom Rinaldo]

22. Not me. Nor do I think calling attention to aspects of Obama's voting record is dirty politics

But yesterday on DU there were numerous threads claiming exactly that. It is the double standard that bothers me, the holier than thou claims, not this potential web site that bothers me.

[killbotfactory]

24. Yes, it annoying when people act as if any criticism of their candidate is out of bounds

I've seen it numerous times from supporters of all stripes, with Clinton being the most obnoxious about it (but that was before the "fun" started).

[Cameron27]

26. Clinton was not the most obnoxious in this primary,

who pulled out the selling the Lincoln bedroom smear, the bush/cheney smear, the defender of DC corruption smear? Who's campaign aid was pushing Marc Ambinder to dredge up any info about Bill's sex life. Between Obama and Edwards the attacks on her were both obnoxious and ugly.

[killbotfactory]

29. Every time someone criticized her over the issues

There would be a great wailing and gnashing of teeth from the clinton supporters saying it's dirty politics or some other bullcrap excuse to deflect honest criticism, like "republican talking points" or "Clinton has already won and you're ruining the chances of the nominee".

[Cameron27]

30. No, this primary started with some nasty crap thrown

at Clinton, not criticism over the issues:

...“Hillary Clinton, D-Punjab”

"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.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200712/clinton-obama/3?ca=iQXKMn%2FDF3O7uJqC0c790m7Uvm%2Bnaw3W14%2BdBvJpJDs%3D

After the Philly debate she was skewered by Russert,Obama, Edwards and Dodd for her answer on the Immigrants Drivers' License issue, but when Obama couldn't answer the same question for Wolf, nada, nothing. Obama is still going after her for the Clinton papers, and yet he can't produce his own...because he threw them out.

[Tom Rinaldo]

32. You forget something as plain as day

As long as the Democratic race stayed focused on all of our candidates attacking Republicans instead of each other, Hillary Clinton was on an easy glide path to victory. She was way ahead in every poll - she was the clear achknowledged front runner running a classic front runners campaign; keep it positive, keep it general, stay far above the fray and build a sense of inevitability by focusing all your fire on the Republicans who you claim you will be up against in the Fall. This is text book Politics 101.

It has always been the candidates who have less to lose, who are lagging behind, who have to do something dramatic to shake up the dynamics of the race, who go negative first.

[Tom Rinaldo]

28. Meanwhile, back on topic...

Do you think it was sleazy of Camp Clinton to register the domain name:

votingpresent.com But...

...perfectly fair and reasonable for Camp Obama to register the domain name:

desperatehillaryattacks.com ?

[ChiciB1]

31. WOW... They Both Are Going At It!! I'm So Sorry... n/t