Taylor Marsh – TaylorMarsh.com – News, Opinion and Weblog on Progressive Politics

Senator Clinton responds to ad below

Today a Gallup Poll
came out illustrating one clear thing. Democrats are paying the price for not
acting more aggressively on Iraq. Bowers has much more. Pelosi is pulling out all the stops, starting
with backing Murtha for majority leader, but she\’s taking heat over the pork in the legislation meant to lure no votes into the fold. The GOP is furious, calling it \”vote buying,\”
but Pelosi
is willing to play hardball to get the House on record on the war.

Bottom Line It is difficult to pinpoint precisely what is behind the drop off in optimism about Congress among Democrats. One possibility is that Democrats are disappointed that their party has been unable to do anything substantive about the Iraq war — the dominant issue in last November\’s midterm elections. The increase in the price of gas and/or other economic concerns may also be a factor. Overall satisfaction with the way things are going in the United States and ratings of economic optimism are both down in the March Gallup Poll. Gallup

Now read
this.

The fact is that the American people see stories about Walter Reed, the U.S.
military \”death spiral,\” as well as \”the surge\” in action,
with the feeling that Democrats can do more. Democratic Party voters expect more too.

Iraq still rules, so it\’s not surprising that the same argument has hit Obama
– Hillary contest, this time at Harvard. When the bell rings, candidates, go to your corners.

Mark Penn, appearing Monday with top strategists for the leading 2008 Democratic presidential campaigns, also cited two quotes he said undercut Obama\’s oft-cited opposition to an October 2002 congressional resolution authorizing military action in Iraq. Clinton, a senator from New York, voted in favor of the resolution. Obama, now a U.S. senator from Illinois, was a state senator at the time. In one, Obama said \”there\’s not much of a difference\” between his views on the war and those of President Bush. On other occasions, Obama said he was not sure how he would have voted if he had been a senator at the time, were he to have had access to government intelligence. Both citations prompted a furious reaction from David Axelrod, the Chicago political consultant advising Obama. He said the quotes lacked context, were incomplete and were examples of the kind of political \”savaging\” that is alienating voters. \”I really think that it is important, if we\’re going to run the kind of campaign that will unify our party and move this country forward, that we do it in an honest way, and that was not an honest answer,\” he said. Penn refused to relent, saying Axelrod was presenting a \”false choice.\” Joining them on stage was Jonathan Prince, an adviser to former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C. He jokingly pushed his chair from between the two men as they started to argue. Penn said: \”When they got to the Senate, Sen. Obama\’s votes were exactly the same. So let\’s not try to create false differences when we both agree it\’s time to deescalate, when we both agree it\’s time to end this war, and let\’s be clear that Sen. Clinton thinks that, Sen. Obama thinks that, former Sen. Edwards thinks that, and once we agree on that, I think we can go together quite well as a party.\” Axelrod retorted: \”The immutable fact is that had we followed Sen. Obama\’s advice in 2002, we wouldn\’t be talking about de-escalation right now.\” Edwards, like Clinton, voted for the resolution. Unlike her, however, he now says his vote was a mistake. … .. Democrats clash over war positions at Harvard campaign forum

Obama\’s campaign better get ready. The closer he gets to Hillary in the polls
the harder Camp Hillary will play. Mind you, there\’s nothing wrong with playing
hardball. I\’m all for it. But the question of whether Obama and his team are
tough enough for what comes at candidates is yet to be proven. After the swiftboating
of John Kerry, any candidate we choose better be ready for the GOP presidentical
bare knuckle brawl.

The good news is that Obama isn\’t shy about his anti Iraq war stance, which is featured
prominently on the site, complete with a timeline. His team says it was put together for the 4 year commemoration, but it serves as a tough counterpunch to Camp Hillary.

Clinton\’s latest stance on Iraq has been moving since Take Back America last
year. We heard her most recent and most candid assessment late last week. One difference is
that Clinton does not have Iraq prominently featured on her homepage.

Barack Obama does, with the caption
Leadership on Iraq. Opposed the war from the start – A clear plan to end
it.

Oh, and about that ad, Obama and his team deny any involvement. If you want
the rundown on it, here
it is.

Clinton\’s response to the ad came via email:

Q: What do you think of the video? \”I haven\’t seen it but I\’m pleased that it seems to be taking attention away from what used to be on YouTube and getting a lot of hits, namely me singing \”The Star Spangled Banner.\” Everybody in the world now knows I can\’t carry a tune. I thank heavens for small favors and the attention has shifted, so maybe people won\’t have to tune in and hear me screeching about \”The Star Spangled Banner.\” Q: Should the video be removed? \”You know, that\’s for somebody else to decide. I don\’t have an opinion one way of another. I think anything that drives interest in these campaigns and gets people who otherwise are not at all interested in politics, I think that\’s pretty good. I might quibble a little bit about the content but if we get more people, especially young people, thinking about politics, I\’m happy about that.\”