MotherJones Blog: Obama to Clinton: We've Got Our Own Kitchen Sink

«--Previous Post | Blog Index | Next Post--»

Obama to Clinton: We've Got Our Own Kitchen Sink

Going negative worked for Hillary Clinton in Ohio and Texas and the Obama campaign knows it.

On a conference call with reporters this afternoon, Obama's chief strategist David Alexrod acknowledged Clinton's kitchen sink strategy and said, "What's good for the goose is good for the gander." Get ready for an ugly six weeks until Pennsylvania, folks.

Axelrod started in on Clinton with the tax return issue. "The vetting of Hillary Clinton has yet to start. The hard questions haven't been asked," he said. "They've talked about change you can Xerox. You can Xerox a tax return. There's not a lot of preparation... it's important people understand what the sources of income are for the household that is going to be the next president."

This all followed on the heels of a memo from the campaign earlier this morning titled, "TAX RETURNS: What does Clinton have to hide?"

For the record, Clinton has said that she will release her tax returns on April 15. The Obama campaign contended today that 80 percent of Democrats will have voted by that time, and that the returns ought to be released immediately. Axelrod called Clinton a "habitual non-discloser," suggesting that the tax return issue was part of a larger problem. The only other thing Clinton hasn't disclosed, as far as anyone can tell, are her records from the White House, which are held at the Clinton library. The Clinton campaign claims that the Bush Administration is the reason for the delay on that issue. (More on that scandal from Michael Isikoff.)

Axelrod spoke directly the press, saying, "We're asking you guys to do your jobs." It was a familiar line for the press on the call. It echoes a refrain from Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson, who has insisted almost daily on Clinton conference calls that the press has been giving Obama a free ride.

But can Obama replicate Clinton's tactics while maintaining his new politics sheen? Axelrod addressed the question by saying, "This is not a decision to go negative. This is an attempt to see to it that both campaigns are held to the same yardstick." It was a stretch of the truth, but if the Obama camp is going to use the Clinton game plan going forward, stretching the truth in conference calls is going to become standard practice.

Axelrod is already getting good at it. Commenting on the person in America who has received either the most or the second most scrutiny over the last fifteen years, he managed to say, "I don't think there's any candidate who has been vetted less than Senator Clinton."

Comments

What happened to "hope" and "change"? He was way too naive.

Posted by: tony on 03/05/08 at 12:38 PM Respond

since her ‘weep’ in new hampshire...
and the ‘barak, shame on you’ bluster...
hillary is using every advertising game i know of...
35 years of experience...?
maybe she means ‘experiential’...
everything from learning to ‘sunny side up’ an egg...
and who had more than 35 years experience in the realms of government:
cheney...
wolfowitz...
rumsfeld...
haliburton...
and on and on and on...
besides...
she goofed up heath care...
opened the door to ‘for profit’ hmo/s...
they came on like a flock...
add to that rose law firm and 4% government beautification loans to
wal-mart...best depicted as pillage of ‘old hometown merchants’...
and hubby bill clinton himself was some good...some bad...
sure opened the door to a republican congress...
all gore being taken down...
oriental money...like a warm up to who can finance the debt...
barak obama inspires...
offers america ‘hope’ with ambition...

Posted by: jeff London on 03/05/08 at 12:43 PM Respond

The problem is that many people weren't paying attention when Hillary was "vetted" in the 1990s -- and there are millions of new voters who have never heard of such things. Her brother was paid to lobby her husband for pardons for felons, and she claimed to know nothing about it? She made an inexplicable profit on an investment, then tried to hide it by refusing to release her tax return for that year? And so forth.

I am still curious as to whether Hillary agrees with her husband that the president should not be subject to legal process while serving in office (i.e., the president is literally above the law), and the Secret Service should be prohibited from testifying about any crimes committed by the president. (These are both arguments Clinton made in court, when he was president.)

Posted by: TKD on 03/05/08 at 12:53 PM Respond

It seems like a lot of people these days think that cynicism is a sign of intelligence. It is not. It is intelligent to be skeptical, to question, but not to be cynical. Cynicism shows lack of creativity and imagination - key components in intelligence.

Obama's campaign believed that a bottom up campaign featuring a new comer could take down one of the strongest political families in history. And you know what? They are right. He is still ahead in votes and will be by the time the convention arrives. More than 1 million people have contributed to his campaign and he has a generation of young people ready to work for him in the fall. How did he do that - by being positive and offering hope.

Posted by: kimbiaje on 03/05/08 at 1:32 PM Respond

Barack,

I'd like to thank you for all you have done to lead us so far. I know you'll keep going because you've still got a technically insurmountable delegate lead and your message is predicated on belief and hope and looking at how we rule ourselves in a different way.

In many ways, you are the opposite of Hillary Clinton. Besides the demographic obvious -young, male, tall, dark-skinned- you are also respectful of your opponent. You congratulate her on her wins when necessary -she does not even mention your name at all when it's her turn to do so. You maintain your campaign theme and values regardless of the situation of the day -she shifts like the wind in her message and her mood. You champion transparency and open government -Hillary won't even release her own tax returns. You speak directly to us in your ads -Hillary just approves her own soundbites and the trumped up charges and scare-tactic allegories of proxies. Hillary fights with her fists and refuses to admit she can and has made mistakes -you fight with your mind and acknowledge that you're not infallible or perfect but elegantly capable of taking lessons.

Hillary asks us to trust her to take care of us while we go about our lives -you ask us to trust ourselves and to take part in making this country and all of our lives better.

We -you and I- suffered a small defeat last night and it was frustrating in the face of the wave of inspiration you've built, but I'd like to thank you for your grace and for reminding me that I had been starting to assume too much. I had been letting you become the proxy for my hopes and the redemption of this nation's history of oligarchy, international prima noctis, fear-mongering, class warfare, racism, slavery and xenophobia.

I am reminded that you are just a man -a great man- but no savior or redeemer. You will make a wonderful and generationally-defining president and I will be proud to have lived through this time. I will continue to support you with my head and my heart. But I am reminded that I have to do my part as well. If I want change and progress and redemption, I have to bear my own water along side you. I have to take part and do more than wish your success.

This is what you were trying to tell me when you said "We are the change we've been waiting for." I was right here the whole time. I just never realized how powerful I was until you asked me to look in the mirror.

You are my president, Barack. But I am your general. Thank you for asking me to participate. I am glad to be reminded that you have done so.

-Scott "Hussein" Concinnity

Posted by: Scott Hussein on 03/05/08 at 1:40 PM Respond

Oh, and have you heard the latest? H. Clinton is the purported author of SCHIP and Head Start Preschool. (Shhhh, she was in college when Head Start was started by Maria Shriver's father, Sargent Shriver; and she wasn't even in Congress when SCHIP was created. But don't tell anyone to look into this).

Posted by: Karen on 03/05/08 at 1:53 PM Respond

HRC can try to play games but if BHO is the real deal he will hand her her backside on a platter.

No last minute smear will save her now.

Obama '08!

Posted by: capt - Hussein on 03/05/08 at 2:38 PM Respond

(Sorry, my apologies if this post is off topic.
This NEWS is so important to our future Please post it thruout the blogsphere & in any news media you can find).

REAL News you won't see on TV

This election is about 29 nuclear power plants /Cheney's NEXT Big ENERGY Monopoly Ripoff.

New Nukes Built by GE, Westinghouse, Excelon Corp. of Illinois & 3 consortiums. Excelon has been one of Obama largest contributors since his entry into politics.

Obama Voted FOR the Cheney Energy Bill (H.R.6) in 2005 & is in favor of nuclear. McCain is in favor of nuclear. Clinton Voted AGAINST the Cheney Energy Bill and says her Energy Plan does not include nuclear.

A vote for Obama or McCain will get you 29 nuclear power plants.

No nukes were built for 30 years because the banks wouldn't loan the money - too risky. Cheney 's Energy Bill solved that problem for them by GUARANTEEING Taxpayer Payback of any loans that default. (The Congressional Budget Office rated the risk of default at 50% or greater.)

Its the most obsolete - expensive - and dirty form of power plant we could build.

GE owns NBC & MSNBC. Westinghouse owns CBS. They are planning to reap BILLIONS -RISK FREE-. THAT is WHY they are PROMOTING Obama for president & smearing the Clintons.

(More info see Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting website):
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3258

Posted by: elme on 03/05/08 at 3:49 PM Respond

Let the two corporate candidates destroy each other.
DEAN 2012!

Posted by: Liberal Larry on 03/05/08 at 4:19 PM Respond

Unfortunately, this is going to the convention and after that the party will be divided. If Clinton steals the nomination at the convention; Obama should not take the VP no matter what. Personally, I'd vote for Clinton if she's the nominee but I won't go out and volunteer or campaign for her. I'll vote for her as the lesser of two evils.

Posted by: Tom Paine on 03/05/08 at 5:02 PM Respond

Scott,
That letter was really beautiful, and it echoes my sentiments exactly. I assume you sent the letter to Sen. Obama. I'm sure it will offer some solace.

Posted by: Sandy on 03/05/08 at 10:07 PM Respond

So far, Obama has conducted his campaign in very respectable manner, whereas whenever chips are down Clintons have engaged in all kind of smear tactics.

If it is all for 3 am call, I would rather have McCain handle that instead of HRC. As you don't in HRC White House, the call may be for Bill from ...Moinca

GO OBAMA, it is time take off the gloves, HRC needs to be knocked out she would not let you win on points...

Posted by: Victor Green on 03/06/08 at 4:50 AM Respond

Obama begins with a broad assessment of life in America in 2008, and life is not good: we're a divided country, we're a country that is "just downright mean," we are "guided by fear," we're a nation of cynics, sloths, and complacents. "We have become a nation of struggling folks who are barely making it every day," she said, as heads bobbed in the pews. "Folks are just jammed up, and it's gotten worse over my lifetime. And, doggone it, I'm young. Forty-four!"

Oh, woe is her! Just listen to how deluded this person is:

"You're looking at a young couple that's just a few years out of debt," Obama said. "See, because, we went to those good schools, and we didn't have trust funds. I'm still waiting for Barack's trust fund. Especially after I heard that Dick Cheney was s'posed to be a relative or something. Give us something here!"

Give us something here?

Can you believe this nonsense? You want to know how much this couple has been given lately?

The Obamas' financial standing has risen sharply in the past three years, largely as a result of the money Barack earned from writing "The Audacity of Hope." In 2005, their income was $1.67 million, which was more than they had earned in the previous seven years combined.
Just after Barack was elected to the United States Senate, Michelle received a large pay increase-from $121,910 in 2004 to $316,962 in 2005

Obama is a hypocrite.

Posted by: Ira on 03/06/08 at 8:06 AM Respond

The Obama's earned 1.67 million??....Paltry earnings compared to the other canidates. Once we see the Clintons tax returns, the truth will be told

Posted by: rock on 03/06/08 at 12:13 PM Respond

The Obama's earned 1.67 million??....Paltry earnings compared to the other canidates. Once we see the Clintons tax returns, the truth will be told

Posted by: rock on 03/06/08 at 12:13 PM Respond

I am very concerned about this election. It seems that we the people have decided to rely on TV for the majority of our information about the canadates. I am concerned because apparently there is no longer any investigating reporting in relationship to this years election. Like the man said CBS is corporate owned, and NBC is also owned by Corporate America. Why all of a sudden once Hillary started to complain about coverage .... Obama dropped off the screen and now we have Hillary 24/7 on our screen. Does this mean that we no longer have a media that is free to report the news without the corporate over-sight.

Posted by: Jill Smith-Tornabene on 03/07/08 at 7:53 AM Respond

Posted by: Jill Smith-Tornabene on 03/07/08 at 8:01 AM Respond