Obama needs to make a big point of illuminating Hillary's fearmongering.

[Voice for Peace]

America is sick of it, we've had enough.
Shine a light on what she's doing.
Rally the experts.
Illuminate.
When you turn on the light, you can see clearly what the dark things are,
and where the real dangers lie.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

1. K&R. IMO Obama can combine a sharpening of differences with HRC and his anti-Washington

message from previous state efforts by showing how HRC/Bill Clinton and McCain/Dubya are similar in--

--carefully crafting messages and visual images of fear;

--the appearance of selling their influence to lobbyists and corporate monopolists for cash;

--maintaining unprecedented secrecy about things the public has a right to know

--etc.

But Obama has to simultaneously show how his own campaign and his own Presidency would --

--focus the will of the American people on achieving their hopes, not crippling Americans into silence throught fear;

--cast out the moneychangers and greedy special interests from domination of policymaking;

--put negotiation of the details of national health insurance on CSPAN;

--etc.

IMO Hillary has provided the American people with a "teachable moment" the Obama campaign can use to great and lasting advantage.

[Voice for Peace]

6. All good points, thanks

And thanks for the extra kick.

End the secrecy. I don't want a president who has things to hide.

I'd like to see a president who actually does listen to the people, not just give them lip service.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

2. Kick!

[anonymous171]

3. Can he use that Bill Clinton quote about not voting your fears?

[ProgressiveEconomist]

4. Exactly! That belongs in an anti-fearmongering Obama ad, exposing HRC's "red phone"

along with the "one Presidential photo op per month" that became the primary mission of Dubya's Homeland Security Administration

[shadowknows69]

5. He should have clips of Bush in his ads saying similar things to Hillary

[Voice for Peace]

7. One of the problems with this unfortunately

is that alot of Americans are still afraid of terrorists, and are ignorant about Iran and the rest of the Middle East.

When I watched this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOytXkCw0NY even though it was NOT supposed to be pro-Clinton, I felt the video had the effect of re-instilling the fears of 9-11.

[Voice for Peace]

8. Wish I could rec my own posts.

:(

[tekisui]

10. Here is one for you, knr!

[Voice for Peace]

11. Thanks! It's a worthy cause.

[tekisui]

9. We Are Not Afraid, Anymore!

[stillrockin]

12. Yes. Wake up. This person is destroying Democratic unity.

[hedgehog]

13. Ready for War on Day 1 !

[kentuck]

14. Obama's big mistake is going negative...

and getting in the mud with the rest of them. He cannot win that way. He wins by being different from them. He needs to use his rationale and communication skills to defeat them - not negative responses in kind.

[Voice for Peace]

17. He can respond with the truth, without going 'negative.'

If she were pointing out legitimate flaws, it would not be considered negative.

But she's not. She's playing a dirty, dangerous game. Even if she 'wins' she
is going to lose. You can not trade integrity for power and end up as
a winner.

I think Obama can come on strong without resorting to the kinds of deceptions
manipulations and fearmongering she's engaging.

[Nine]

15. fearmongering like his Harry & Louise type ad?

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/24/obama-goes-... /
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/opinion/04krugman.htm...

December 24, 2007, 10:00 am
Obama goes Harry and Louise

A friend sends me this:

Have you seen or heard about the radio ad that Obama is running in Iowa about health care?

It has a man and a woman talking, with the man leading off saying that health care mandates “force those who cannot afford health care insurance to buy it, punishing those who don’t fall in line.”

This is what I’ve been complaining about. I was willing to cut Obama slack on the lack of mandates in his plan, even though the economics says they’re necessary; I figured that in practice, if elected, he’d end up doing the right thing.*

I started ramping up the criticism when he started attacking his opponents from the right, making the lack of mandates a principle rather than a compromise — because that was poisoning the well, making it much harder for any future Democratic president to implement a plan that will work.

And whaddya know, now he’s running an ad that bears a striking resemblance to the infamous “Harry and Louise” ads, run by the insurance industry, that helped block health care reform in 1993.

Call it the audacity of cynicism.

* Let me repeat the argument: “The point of a mandate isn’t to dictate how people should live their lives — it’s to prevent some people from gaming the system. Under the Obama plan, healthy people could choose not to buy insurance, then sign up for it if they developed health problems later. This would lead to higher premiums for everyone else. It would reward the irresponsible, while punishing those who did the right thing and bought insurance while they were healthy. ”

[Voice for Peace]

16. Unfortunately, your argument doesn't work for me because I am one of the

people who doesn't want a mandate for health insurance.