The McCain campaign was running ads that stated that Barack Obama is not experienced enough to answer the red phone at 3:00 in the morning. Well, the way their campaign has allowed Sarah Palin to take center stage as though she is the top of the ticket, will she have a rollaway bed placed in McCain's bedroom so she can answer the red phone at 3:00 in the morning? John McCain clearly picked this woman, with little or questionable experience, to get media attention and try to pitifully win over former Hillary Clinton supporters. I think that this was a desperate and petty move on his part. I don't believe that Hillary Clinton supporters are going to fall for this obvious farce. She has nothing even close to Hillary Clinton when it comes to experience or strength. How dare she get up there and let the George W. Bush speech writing team write her into a corner by making fun of Barack Obama's experience and record as a community organizer. How does she think grass roots began? This never done before grass roots success that his campaign has become is a result of his experience as a community organizer. Her remarks at the RNC were offensive, sarcastic, and totally useless in letting people know where their party stands on issues. How convenient because she had no new ideas to speak of. Women, Republicans, and undecided voters are supposed to be impressed because she can play the dozens, because she can hurl insults that she read from a teleprompter? The surrogates who are defending her can only point to the fact that she is a soccer mom, that she put a plane up for auction on Ebay, and that she was mayor of a small town. Oh, and lets not forget one of the most popular governor's in the United States. Big surprise, since most of the state is comprised of men looking at an ex-beauty queen. If I were these ladies, I would be very embarrassed to only have these attributes to speak of on national media outlets such as CNN. They talk as if they know her personally. I hope they don't end up eating crow for breakfast after Palin actually starts talking to the media and more information comes out on her. Remember, she is still under investigation. After awhile, McCain may start to wonder how much of a Maverick he truly was in picking her. He better hope that his party does not come up with new rules and make him the Vice Presidential nominee instead of the Presidential nominee! Now wouldn't that be something for the history books or in her case the she-story books!
Ms. Geraldine Ferraro "comments that 'if Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position' as a leading presidential contender." Adding additional insult to this injury is the fact of "Mrs. Clinton, while calling it regrettable, did not break with her." Democrats Face Racial Issue Again. A further dissection of the Clinton campaign's infamous 3 AM commercial reveals more by what it doesn't show than for what you actually see: The Red Phone in Black and White
So, it would at least appear superficially that the Clinton campaign is going to be holding the race card as one up Hillary's sleeve, to put out into the campaign as needed and then, feigning surprise and horror, ask "how the heck did that get there, I'm so sorry!" Only to, while everybody's back is turned, put it back up the sleeve only to fall out again as required. By then the damage to playing on the imagined fears of the electorate will have been done, and any "collateral damage" to her campaign will be minimal. She can't be confronted too strongly about it, lest we who doth protest be considered "sexist." As it stands now, a win-win for Hillary.
Not exactly what we have in mind if we're going to get Senator Obama the nomination and the eventual Presidency. What IS required is the same level of zero tolerance as we New Yorkers have had to use to confront Governor Spitzer with for his financial and innapropriate sexual escapades. If Dr. Samantha Power had to leave the Obama campaign for calling Hillary a "monster," Ms. Ferraro should recuse herself (and her mouth) from Hillary's campaign. And just as the calls for Governor Spitzer's resignation came from a wide blanket of the political spectrum, calls for this rejection of stoking the fears of racism need to come from people across the spectrum. Not only from Barack Obama, his campaign and supporters, but John McCain's as well. These calls even must come from those within Hillary's own campaign who refuse to win at any cost; by striking any low blow; inciting fear, uncertainty and doubt. We all want to present our candidate, whomever we support, as the best qualified for the most difficult job. On these merits, and these alone, will the American people be given the honest campaign they deserve. The legacy of racism should not be ignored, but neither should it be encouraged to "disqualify" a person by virtue of who they are and promulgated forward as a political campaign strategy of choice. In the long run, that serves no one at all as we'll never resolve it as an issue. We have to start, today, by simply saying that these sorts of comments will not be tolerated. Shoot your mouth off, and you're out of the campaign. Period.
Let’s hope Hillary has her triangulation computer wired into the red phone so that she doesn’t have to waste time rushing off somewhere else to consult it about the best decision to make. And let’s further hope that she’s incorporated some national security subroutines into the computer’s main political program so that its “best” decision isn’t calculated solely to enhance her short-term self-interest.
The old triangulation software let her down badly in 2002 when it fooled her into overlooking the absence of any serious national security threat from Saddam Hussein (maybe Hillary’s handlers didn’t feed any NIE data into it?). More tragically, it failed to predict the asymmetric quagmire that would send 4,000 Americans to their deaths, tens of thousands more to lifetimes of disfigurement and disability, displace millions of Iraqis, and heap a trillion dollars’ worth of debt on the next generations of Americans. As far as I know, anyway. I can’t imagine Hillary voted for war in anticipation of the actual outcome.
But the software certainly achieved its immediate short-term objective of making Hillary look strong and determined to her Republican critics and insulating her from challenges that she was yet another weak-on-national-security Democrat. Relying on its spuriously triangulated output and letting the Republicans misdefine national security, she missed a golden opportunity to deride Bush’s chest-beating as the manifestation of his school-yard bully insecurities. Perhaps she calculated that the bully was just bluffing, but that’s a particularly dangerous conclusion when the bully has military forces of unparalleled might to hide behind.
With all her vicarious experience, Hillary lacked the foresight to predict that an overwhelmed enemy would resort to the aforementioned asymmetric warfare – a tactic our Revolutionary War irregulars adopted when they fired at the Red Coats not from the traditional massed ranks but from behind trees. Her 35 years of observations from the side-line evidently provided no insight into the severe confessional divides and tribal differences that would be unleashed, with dire consequences to the Iraqi public, once George Bush took advantage of her vote to open Pandora’s Box.
CEO HILLARY AND HER MANAGEMENT SKILLS
A guy who depends on others to keep his in-box current and needs help keeping appointments straight doesn’t have the executive skills demanded of a president, right? Well, let’s just compare the biggest enterprises either Hillary or Barack have ever run, and that is absolutely sure to be their current campaigns. Which organization has proved to be the most cohesive with least dissension among the ranks? Which organization has suffered repeated shake-ups? Which organization failed to develop plans to compete in states with caucus-based delegate-selection systems that have been in place for decades? Which organization has had to trot out a steady series of new slogans and “voices” as their initial efforts flopped miserably? “Solutions” for America? Sounds like something out of a chemistry or math textbook. Do we have reason to be confident that this will be the final learning experience that perfects Hillary’s executive talents?
Hillary’s closest brush with actual, as opposed to virtual, executive experience came as CEO of 1993’s health care “solution”. During that earlier learning experience, she cooked up a plan in secrecy with her inner circle of advisors, ignored the ingredients proposed by wiser heads outside that circle, disdained pleas for compromise, and pushed it over to Capitol Hill on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. The plan not only went down in flames but became a contributing factor in the loss of the Democratic majority in 1994.
Then there was her deft executive (emphasis on the third syllable) touch in engineering the firing of the White House travel staff. Nicely done, Hillary!
But that’s want we want in a leader, isn’t it? It’s what we got in Bush, anyway. Ya gotta be tough to COMMAND. Ya gotta FIGHT. Ya gotta drop your g’s from those pesky participles when talkin’ to certain audiences.
BUT FORGET ALL THAT; IT’S THE ECONOMY, STUPID
Right! You don’t want to choose someone that’s all hat and no cattle, all speech and no action. Barack doesn’t know squat about cattle while Hillary has a proven record. She has turned cattle into gold and knows how to put that experience to work on behalf of those suffering economically. Hillary’s Cattle Pyramid Program will match up one cattle baron with each of several hundred thousand voters facing foreclosure.
She’ll no doubt master the macro-economic scene as well. After all, from her Senate seat she carefully watched the Bush economy recover from that Clinton dot.com bubble. Yet another vicarious experience will stand her in good stead as the Hillary economy recovers from the Bush housing bubble. And she can devote more time inflating that cattle bubble for the next president to deal with.
HEY, DID I MENTION I SUPPORT OBAMA?
Do we really want to open that monstrous, Rove-inspired, no-blow-is-too-low Clinton play book again?
Hillary Clinton's ad aired in Texas before last week's vote and implied a lack of experience on Barack Obama's part.
"What I don't like about the ad is its fear-mongering," Knowles told ABC's "Good Morning America Weekend Edition" on Sunday. "I think it's a cheap hit to take. I really prefer Obama's message of looking forward to a bright future."
The well-known Clinton ad aired in Texas before last week's vote and implied a lack of experience on Obama's part. It showed an exterior of a Colonial-style home and old stock footage of Knowles sleeping in bed.
A narrator describes a phone ringing in the White House: "It's 3 a.m. and your children are safely asleep. Who do you want answering the phone?"
Clinton won the Texas primary by a 51-47 percent margin.
Knowles said she didn't see the ad until Jon Stewart lampooned it Thursday on "The Daily Show." Her brother noticed it was her, and the family replayed the commercial on their digital recorder to be sure.
"They were parodying this ad, kind of poking fun at it," Knowles said. "My brother was like, 'Is that Casey?' And we just erupted. Sure enough, it's me."
The file footage was originally shot for a railroad company advertisement. The Clinton campaign bought it from Getty Images.
Knowles, a senior at Bonney Lake High School who turns 18 next month, has been campaigning for Obama. She attended his rally at Seattle's KeyArena on February 8. Her mother, Pam, told The News Tribune of Tacoma that Casey cried and trembled after shaking the candidate's hand.
The next day, she was a Democratic precinct captain for the state's caucuses. If she plays her cards right, she could go to the national convention.
Not to mention that she could be in another ad. After her identity became known, Obama's campaign contacted her.
That said, Knowles said she plans to vote for whichever Democrat wins the nomination.
This is just too good. Turns out the girl in the bed in the Hillary Clinton "Red Phone" ad is now 17, will be 18 in April and is a big Barack Obama supporter. Her image was "owned" by another company who had the footage from stock footage shot many years ago.
Here is the story: Girl is Obama Supporter
'The so-called "red-phone ad": The first girl in the ad is young Casey Knowles. It's stock footage from eight years ago when she worked as a TV extra - footage owned now by Getty Images and used by the Clinton campaign.
"It's really sort of ironic that my image would be used to advocate for Hillary when I myself do not," said Casey.
"It's perfect timing because I have a candidate that I really identify with," she said.
NOTE: Casey's family only knew about HRC's red phone ad because Jon Stewart ran it on The Daily Show on Thursday 03 06 08. Imagine if Casey had seen it on March 2. THIS would have been the big news story all day March 3.
a small hinge of history...Wag the Dog anyone?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-david/on-the-red-phone_b_90338.html
Larry David on the Red Phone...funny stuff and like all great comedy enough truth in it to really matter.
Pass it along.
Have a laugh...and then
Go back to work...CALL EMAIL BLOG DONATE
and do it all as positively as possibly.
Stay above the fray...be like Obama to support Obama.
JWZ
We need to inform the voters and media of the actual "Day One "scenario of President Obama vs. Hillary. Day One is not about a red phone, its about being effective with congress and the citizens!
"Day One "for President Obama --- Reaching out and Coalition building with Democrats, Republicans, and Independents of Congress, the business and technolgy worlds and of citizens.
Forward progress for our Country.
"Day One" for Sen. Clinton---would produce rancorous gridlock and dead end politics of recrimination and stagnant stalemate.
Our Country would suffer from Sen Clinton's past baggage with Congress and the Country, the "remnants" of her husband's lies, and the long lasting animosities she has engendered over her often mentioned 35 years in "public service".
Did CNN play a part in the Texas/Ohio Primary's Outcome? It has taken me a while to feel like writing anything after Tuesday's let down... I did, however, get up the strength to write a comment to cnn.com to point to the part they played in how Tuesday's Texas/Ohio primaries turned out. Here's the little love note I sent to CNN today: "Well...If only I could have been a fly on the wall in your staff meeting the week prior to the March 4th primaries... What would I have heard? Perhaps the dialogue may have gone something like this... "Okay people, we have to let up on all the gushing over Obama. I know, I know... he's fantastic and fabulous in every way that counts, that's clear - the country is clearly saying that. And look, I find myself daydreaming about this guy and how great it would be to have him at the helm too, but we've gotta snap out of this, people! We really have to do something to appease that whining Hillary. We have got to totally slant our coverage in Hillary's favor this week. If not, if we're not careful here, we might actually help this black man get into the white house!!! Woah! you say, did we really go that far? Yeah, we did! So it's time to do some major damage control. Starting today, we're launching 'POD' - Project Obama Destruction. Okay, so heads up, here's what we'll do...we'll totally run every negative story that's out there, I mean everything from the Muslim costume pictures, we'll stay on Tony Rezko's trial night and day, the NAFTA/Canada comment - run that one into the ground, people! We'll totally re-run all the Saturday night live clips. Hillary's got this great 'Red Phone' ad... we'll run that one day and night. Be sure to try to catch him looking flustered when we bombard him with uncomfortable questions all at once. Cut him off if he tries to explain. Do anything, I mean ANYTHING - negative projections -nothing is off limits here - just make sure you make him look bad!! Rush Limbaugh wants this thing to get 'bloody', oh, we know how to deliver 'bloody'!! Besides, do y'all realize that if a nominee is selected after this Texas/Ohio race, people will tune OUT! Do any of us really want THAT!!!? Do you realize our viewership is soaring at all time record high? The longer we keep this race going, people, the longer the public will tune in! Hello!! Can you say, 'cha-ching'!! Okay folks, we've got our work cut out for us this week. Go work your magic - work those PODs! Alright everyone, crowd around, c'mon, get close, hands together in the middle...ready? 'P-O-D, GO!! P-O-D,-GO!! P-O-D, GOOOOO!!!! Whoo Hoo!! Good meeting guys!!" Can't you just see it? I'm sure that'll be an email I'll never get a response from! I'm Vinette D and that's my opinion!
vinettesopinion@blogspot.com
I wanted to post my comments that I sent to the Live with Dan Abrams show about for the POed part of his show. I had some good ideas and hope someone can let me know what they think.
Example idea that I sent (I am new at this so bear with me...):
"Segment about contracts to foreign companies I work for one of the two companies (I wont say which one because I am not speaking on their behalf) but you would think that yes American jobs would be key in awarding these contracts, but the superior technology used, which helps keep our superior edge military wise, would be paramount. Surely, Hillary Clinton and her "vast" national security experience that supposedly has over Obama would tell her that. Also, someone please remind her that there were two companies that won the contract one well known American aerospace company and one well known fore gin aeronautics company, Does she really think that those planes will be built overseas? (would we even allow that?)"
Click Read More for the rest....
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/03/focus_group_clintons_3_am_ad_d.html
Watch all the way to the end (I know, it's hard) and watch the opinions fall off a cliff when Hillary comes onscreen!
Political malpractice indeed.
Bill Clinton urges people to vote for the candidate of hope, not fear.
Watch it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGW38Zy4bJo
Here's the quote: "If one candidate is trying to scare you and the other is trying to get you to think, if one candidate is appealing to your fears, and the other one's appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who want's you to think and hope."
So what was that red phone ad about? Ironic, no?
