It's been pretty clear for a week to ten days that the Clinton campaign feels a little heat from some movement toward Obama in some polls, and has therefore gone on offense, attacking him on how he has used money from his leadership PAC and on ads that claim his health plan would cover everyone.
Today, we have stories about Hillary herself joining the attacks, questioning Obama's "courage and convictions," and claiming that she has been under some kind of unremitting assault for months and is now ready to respond: "I have been, for months, on the receiving end of rather consistent attacks. Well, now the fun part starts. We're into the last month, and we're going to start drawing the contrasts."
It's one thing to have a spokesman like Howard Wolfson lashing out. It's another thing to do it yourself, which is a fairly clear sign of concern, but gets the message across. Isn't it a whole different thing, though, to call it "fun"?? Isn't this something politicians are supposed to regret and feel bad about, lament the fact that they can't spend more time discussing their energy conservation plans?
Did she really mean to say it's "fun"? Doesn't that just support everyone's stereotype of the ruthless, say anything and do anything Hillary?
Comments (1)
That's why Hillary's going to end up losing the nomination to Barack. No doubt about it,