Obama '08?

The things learned on Fox News. . . .

In the recent contentious debate, Obama pummeled Hillary for her term on the Wal-Mart board of directors and she countered with his association with (Tony?) Rezko, Chicago slum lord.

Now this photo has surfaced of Bill and Hillary Clinton with none other than the infamous Rezko. (Experts are checking to see if it has been photoshopped, but it appears to be the real deal.) I had to go to Breitbart to get it and they apparently lifted it from the Huffington Post.

Isn't politics fun?

It wouldn't surpise me at all if the photo was supplied by the Clintons themselves. It gives them another opportunity to point to a photo op that thousands of people have had with the Clintons vs an alleged 17-year relationship between Obama and Rezko.

Foxfyre wrote:

The things learned on Fox News. . . .

In the recent contentious debate, Obama pummeled Hillary for her term on the Wal-Mart board of directors and she countered with his association with (Tony?) Rezko, Chicago slum lord.

Now this photo has surfaced of Bill and Hillary Clinton with none other than the infamous Rezko. (Experts are checking to see if it has been photoshopped, but it appears to be the real deal.) I had to go to Breitbart to get it and they apparently lifted it from the Huffington Post.

Isn't politics fun?

It wouldn't surpise me at all if the photo was supplied by the Clintons themselves. It gives them another opportunity to point to a photo op that thousands of people have had with the Clintons vs an alleged 17-year relationship between Obama and Rezko.

You can read the Today Show transcript and watch the video here to see how it is playing out and why it is so obviously another Clinton campaign trick.

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/NBC_confronts_Hillary_with_slum_lord_0125.html

Obama's Feb 5 Strategy Develops....

24 Jan 2008 12:22 pm

So how does Barack Obama campaign after South Carolina?

The outlines of a strategy are becoming visible. Obama and his surrogates will operate under the assumption that the more aggressive Hillary Clinton campaigns, the more outbursts Bill Clinton has, the more voters in interior red and purple states will find the Clintons off-putting and that the negative feelings will obscure the Clinton mantra that only she (and he) can stand up and protect their interests.

Advisers believe that the more the Clintons poke at Obama, the more sympathetic he becomes, and the more she plays into his contention that she's a divisive, polarizing figure; Obama's polling shows and his campaign's strategists sense that it reminds Democrats in the interior of the country of the Clinton of yore: cold, unlikable, sarcastic -- and coastal. In states like Arizona, Kansas and Idaho and Missouri, Clinton will scare off independents and will lose support among younger women, in particular.

Also: Obama's brain trust believes that Clinton's decision to essentially cede South Carolina to him will backfire, as it will allow him to demonstrate that Iowa was not a fluke -- he can turnout young voters everywhere -- and, that African Americans will resent her refusal to participate in "their" primary.

The coastal prizes of California and New York will be tough, but Obama may well do better in enough congressional districts to keep the margins close -- better, Obama's team believes, than Clinton will do in the interior of the country.

Purple and Red-state surrogates abound: Gov. Janet Napolitano and Sen. Claire McCaskill will argue, in subtle terms, that only Obama can unify the country, which will be interpreted as a knock against Clinton's downward pull on other Demcorats on the ballot.

The concern is out there: one reason Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, carefully tended to by the Clinton world, has stayed neutral is that she fears that having Clinton on the ticket would hurt other Democrats in her state, a Clinton adviser who spoke to Sebelius said.

Once again, the campaign has one theory and the national political press corps has another.

The coverage so far has centered on the notion that Obama allowed Bill Clinton to break his stride and mess up his head, forcing him to spend half of his stump speech reciting and rebutting Clinton allegations. His unsurprising assumed victory South Carolina would reinforce the perception that Obama appeals only to young, rich, white people and to black voters.

Obama's campaign manager and surrogates are hosting a conference call later and will fill in some of the details.

As a white, middle class, 28 year old American, I'm voting for Obama.

Hillary has nothing that he doesn't have - except for liabilities.

Cycloptichorn

Butrflynet wrote:

It wouldn't surpise me at all if the photo was supplied by the Clintons themselves. It gives them another opportunity to point to a photo op that thousands of people have had with the Clintons vs an alleged 17-year relationship between Obama and Rezko.

It's a good tactic if that is indeed what it was. Like you said, it gives her the opportunity to reference a 17 YEAR relationship with Obama. A photo with this guy means nothing if there is no other contact. I have a photo with Senator McCain when I lived in Arizona.

I'm not sure who I'm voting for - yet, but it won't be Hillary. As much as I hate McCain's stay the course in Iraq, he can be trusted more than most of the others to do the right thing for our country,

I'm not sure who I'm voting for - yet, but it won't be Hillary. As much as I hate McCain's stay the course in Iraq, he can be trusted more than most of the others to do the right thing for our country,

cicerone imposter wrote:

I'm not sure who I'm voting for - yet, but it won't be Hillary. As much as I hate McCain's stay the course in Iraq, he can be trusted more than most of the others to do the right thing for our country,

Really? Seems he was a "doormat" for the Bushes! :wink:

McCain has taken positions that drive liberals nuts, and he has taken positions that drive conservatives nuts

teenyboone wrote:

Really? Seems he was a "doormat" for the Bushes! :wink:

A teeny bit of research would demonstrate how unscientific 'seems' is. :wink:

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

McCain has taken positions that drive liberals nuts, and he has taken positions that drive conservatives nuts

Hell, he's taken a lot of positions that would have driven himself nuts a few years earlier. Or later. And then reversed those again.

OCCOM BILL wrote:

teenyboone wrote:

Really? Seems he was a "doormat" for the Bushes! :wink:

A teeny bit of research would demonstrate how unscientific 'seems' is. :wink:

Dunno. He talked a good game, but when push came to shove he almost always voted for the Bush line after all. But by then, of course, all his critical talk in the preceding weeks or months had bolstered his "maverick" image, tainted only a little by the one-day story of how he ended up simply voting party line..