Mark Penn explains "Why Hillary, Not Sen. Obama, Is the Democrat to Beat McCain"
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 13, 2008 - 4:37am.
Rapid Response
Hello Everyone:
Here is an excellent article where Hillary Clinton's chief strategist Mark Penn explains "Why Hillary, Not Sen. Obama, Is the Democrat to Beat McCain:"
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/blog/view/?id=43371
Why Hillary, Not Sen. Obama, Is the Democrat to Beat McCain
by Mark Penn, Chief Strategist
in News
2/11/2008 2:30 PM
During this campaign, one of the key arguments for Hillary's candidacy is that she's tested, vetted and ready to lead on day one. How does this factor into voters' decisions now that it appears John McCain will be the Republican nominee? Let's envision how a general election between the Democratic nominee and John McCain will unfold, based on recent elections:
The GOP Attack Machine Will Redefine the Democratic Candidate; Hillary Has Withstood That Process. As soon as the Democratic nominee is selected, the entire force of the GOP attack machine will bear down on that nominee. This attack machine has been built and honed over decades; it is formidable, and employs all forms of media, from talk radio to major newspaper columns to television, email, blogs, websites, direct mail, and extensive ground networks. It was able to skew public perceptions of two well-respected Democrats, Al Gore and John Kerry, creating impressions about them that were wildly out of step with reality. Hillary Clinton has withstood the full brunt of that machine and actually emerged stronger.
Sen. McCain Will Run on National Security; Hillary Wins That Argument. When it came to national security, "strong and wrong" won out over "right and weak" in the 2002 and 2004 elections. With Hillary, that is not and will not be an issue: Based on what they know of her and her experience, voters believe Hillary is fully ready to be commander in chief. She will be strong and right. Voters know she has the right policies - ending the war in Iraq, re-establishing our relations with our allies - and they know she has the strength of leadership that America's next president will need in a world that can turn dangerous in an instant. As such, the Republicans will not be able to play the national security card against Hillary Clinton, like they are now doing against Senator Obama, and that makes her a fundamentally stronger candidate against John McCain. Case in point is what George Bush said on Sunday morning about Sen. Obama, "I certainly don't know what he believes in. The only foreign policy thing I remember he said was he's going to attack Pakistan and embrace Ahmadinejad." With Hillary, the Republicans' national security argument blunted and the election debate will shift to healthcare and the economy - areas of decisive strength for Hillary.
Sen. Obama's Negatives Will Rise; Hillary's Are Already Factored In. Sen. Obama himself has been saying that even after a year, voters in places like Texas and Florida don't really know him that well. So how much do independent voters know about Barack Obama, his voting record and his past positions? Even less than Democrats know. For example, he recently told voters in Idaho that he favors the Second Amendment - but he didn't mention that, in the past, he supported a complete ban on all handguns. If he were the nominee, the Republican attack machine would have immediately rolled out his full record - and his independent Idaho support would have evaporated. So far, the Republicans have been laying low. Sen. Obama has never faced a credible Republican opponent or the Republican attack machine, so voters are taking a chance that his current poll numbers will hold up after the Republicans get going. With Hillary, the GOP has already tried just about every attack and has failed. Those attacks are already factored in her ratings, where she remains competitive against Sen. McCain. But when it comes to Sen. Obama this is a big unknown, and the likelihood is that his negatives will rise.
The Resiliency of Sen. Obama's Coalition Will Be Tested; Hillary's Coalition Is Stronger. The grind of a general election will erase the freshness and excitement of the primary season and the success that Sen. Obama has earned in states he has little chance of winning in November will erode. It may even crumble. Sen. Obama will have to fall back on core Democratic voters to stay competitive with McCain. But this is where Hillary has already built a powerful base, with overwhelming support among women, Latino voters, and other stalwarts of the Democratic Party. Hillary's coalition, which has carried her to victory across the country, is a winning coalition against Sen. McCain since it draws from the voters Sen. McCain will need to win. Look no further than Super Tuesday for proof: Hillary won by double digits in the big states that any Democrat must win to defeat John McCain. And in Missouri, Hillary won all the swing areas, getting 110 of 115 counties.
Current Poll Numbers Don't Tell the Story of What Will Happen: Sen. Obama Routinely Underperforms While Hillary Overperforms. After winning the Democratic nomination in 2004, John Kerry vaulted to a 17 point lead over George Bush. Even on Election Day, virtually every pollster said John Kerry would win. It did not happen. Today, commentators are touting a Time poll that shows Sen. Obama faring slightly better than Hillary Clinton against John McCain. Last week, the pundits were using a handful of polls to argue that Hillary Clinton would lose NJ, CA and MA. None of that happened. Instead, Hillary Clinton has repeatedly confounded pollsters and the chattering class by doing better on Election Day than the polls suggested she would -- in NH, MA, NY, NJ, CA, and AZ. Her 2000 election was no different - exit polls suggested she might lose a close race but she ended up winning a landslide victory when the actual votes were counted.
Hillary is the best candidate to take on Sen. McCain and defeat him. She has outperformed at the ballot box throughout her career. She will neutralize the argument on national security so the election will turn on her ability to manage our economy and reform healthcare. The GOP will not be able to increase her negatives in a way they can with an untested candidate. And Hillary's core voters - working class, women, Latinos, Catholics - are exactly the voters that comprise the key swing voters the party has needed in the past to win. This is an observation I made in the Washington Post after the 2004 election, "Middle-aged women and Hispanic voters were key voting blocs that made the difference, swinging the vote from Kerry to Bush. In fact, in 2004 women made up 54 percent of the U.S. electorate, the highest percentage in history. Their interest in and impact on politics has been increasing." (Washington Post, 3/21/2006)."
This is exactly what I have been saying about Barack Obama's lack of electability for the longest time when I made the points that "Hillary's high negatives are an illusion compared to Obama or any other Democrat" and "Sen. Robert Menendez got it right about Obama's lack of electability:"
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13992
Hillary's high negatives are an illusion compared to Obama or any other Democrat
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 28, 2007 - 4:49pm.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14599
TRANSCRIPT: Sen. Robert Menendez got it right about Obama's lack of electability
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 4, 2008 - 6:36am.
Please forward this information on because ALL Democratic primary voters should definitely consider these points and should also be fully aware of what will more than likely come up about Obama in the general election BEFORE this primary is over!
Mitch Dworkin
http://www.securingamerica.com/
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/10756
StopIranWar.com: "War is not the answer"
Submitted by Wes Clark on February 21, 2007 - 11:40am.
http://www.securingamerica.com/ccn/node/7191
Listen to Gen. Wes Clark fight for Dems on Sean Hannity's radio program: An excellent example for all of us to follow and what we all need to be doing to help fight back against extreme right wing Neocon smear propaganda!
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_021208/content/01125113.guest.html
Obama's Dangerous Ignorance
February 12, 2008
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I'm sitting here reading this Obama interview, and I am in stunned disbelief. Nobody can be this ignorant. Scary ignorant. From high atop the EIB Building in Midtown Manhattan, one of the most frequently visited tourist attractions in all of Manhattan, I am Rush Limbaugh, behind the Golden EIB Microphone. Great to have you with us. Here's the phone number, 800-282-2882, and the e-mail address is
. It's a Q&A with Barack Obama December 20th in the Boston Globe, Charlie Savage wrote the story. Try this one. This is number five. "Does the Constitution permit a president to detain US citizens without charges as unlawful enemy combatants?" Obama's answer: "No. I reject the Bush Administration's claim that the President has plenary authority under the Constitution to detain U.S. citizens without charges as unlawful enemy combatants." Memo to Obama: It is not the Bush administration's position. The Supreme Court held in 2004 -- this is the famous case, US vs. Hamdi. The president has the power to detain American citizens without charges as enemy combatants. Now, I just have to think here -- I don't know what to think. He's either ignorant or he's saying something far more dangerous. If he is saying that he's not bound by the Supreme Court's interpretation of the law, liberals would have a stroke if Bush claimed the kind of authority that Obama is claiming in this -- and ignorance.
Liberals are out there going bonkers every day over how stupid Bush is. This Obama interview is just scary. Let's see. Find another one here. He gets it wrong on who ratifies treaties and who consents to them. He says the president doesn't have the authority to abolish treaties. And the president does! Bush abolished the ABM treaty shortly after taking office because Bush said it's irrelevant. The Soviets are gone. I'm getting rid of this. The liberals went nuts, but they couldn't stop him because the president does have the authority to get rid of treaties. Obama says here that the president does not have the authority to undermine Congress, the Senate here, which ratifies treaties. The Senate doesn't ratify, they consent to them. The president makes treaties, negotiates them, comes up with them. When's the last time you saw Gorbachev meeting with some senator at Reykjavik or anywhere else? Gorbachev met with Reagan, for crying out loud.
This interview sets McCain up. There's a sitting duck out there. There's a sitting duck for McCain if he wants to exploit this. Andy McCarthy posted an article today, National Review Online, discussing the announcement that military prosecutors have decided to seek the death penalty against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and five others who are complicit in the 9/11 attacks. This is the 9/11 Six, and the article raises the issue of what kind of enforcement paradigm we're going to have. Do we go back to the September 10th approach of treating foreign jihadists as if they were ordinary criminal defendants entitled to all the rights and privileges of the civilian justice system, or should we treat the enemy as a war criminal in a conflict in which it's vital that we protect the intelligence we depend on to save American lives? In other words, are we going to go back to the Jamie Gorelick Clinton days where we're going to treat these enemy combatants as just civilians in court and we're going to hear testimony and we're going to divulge intelligence secrets of what it took to nail them, or are we going to treat them as enemy combatants, military tribunals and this kind of thing?
As McCarthy wrote today, it's a real opportunity for Senator McCain to separate himself from Obama and Clinton. We still have the military commission option because Congress passed the Military Commissions Act in 2006, and McCain voted for that. Obama and Clinton voted against it. Now, the next commander-in-chief will surely have an opportunity to end military commissions in order that the terrorists held at Gitmo, including the 9/11 Six, be transferred to the civilian justice system. What do our three plausible candidates think should be done with Khalid Shaikh Mohammed? This is a gift, and McCain should grab it, but he probably won't, because he wants to shut down Gitmo. He believes Gitmo is bad. He believes that torture happens in Gitmo. But McCarthy is right. This is a golden opportunity for McCain to put into play and demonstrate his vast experience at national security and protecting the country, because Obama and Clinton both want the 9/11 Six and future terrorists like this to be brought home here, put in the civilian justice system, and tried the same as we would try a bank robber, in time of war.

Now, McCain gave an interview to Der Spiegel, a German magazine. This is more from Andy McCarthy, who filled me in on this. Here is what McCain had to say about the Club Gitmo enemy combatants. Here's the question from Der Spiegel: "America has lost a lot of friends because President George W. Bush angered, indeed outraged, them. He allowed human rights to be violated at Guantanamo Bay, and he dismissed the joint effort to combat global warming. Under a President McCain, could we expect a change of course?" McCain's answer: "Yes. I would announce that we are not ever going to torture anyone held in American custody. I would announce that we were closing Guantanamo Bay and moving those prisoners to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and I would announce a commitment to addressing climate change and my dedication to a global agreement -- but it has to include India and China."
Folks, if you're wondering why so many of us on this side of the aisle are disappointed, it's because this answer is depressing. It's disappointing. We haven't violated human rights at Club Gitmo. We have not violated human rights. Senator McCain accepts the premise, not only, by the way, accepts the premise, he takes the opportunity to grandstand on torture. He intimates that President Bush has presided over a torture regime. This answer is somewhat akin to Jack Kemp's answer in the debate with Algore back in 1996. Kemp was Bob Dole's vice presidential running mate and Algore says, (paraphrasing) "By the way, Jack, I want to point out you're good on civil rights. You're not a racist like the rest of your party," and Jack said, "Thank you." I'm sitting there watching the television, "What the hell was that?" McCain's basically done the same thing here. Der Spiegel says, "The world hates your country, and the world hates your president, President Bush because of torture and human rights violations and global warming." McCain says, "Absolutely right, but I'm not going to do any of that, that Bush has done that people hate us for."
END TRANSCRIPT
Read the Background Material...
• Boston Globe: Barack Obama's Q&A - Charlie Savage
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/specials/CandidateQA/ObamaQA/
• Weekly Standard: Obama Unplugged. Lost without a Teleprompter- Dean Barnett
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/728ofzey.asp
• Der Spiegel: 'I Have a Long Record of Working Together with Our Allies'
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,druck-534459,00.html
• National Review: Obama on the Executive - John Derbyshire
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZGM5ZWZiZTk0MjJmZDZkMTAwYzU4ZWJjYzJjZDliODQ=
• National Review: The 9/11 Six: An Opportunity for Senator McCain - Andrew C. McCarthy
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YTE1YTlkMzU0NmUxMjk0OTkzODNhMTc5Mzg1MTRkYjM=
*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.
will do to him IF he is the 2008 Democratic nominee:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14599
TRANSCRIPT: Sen. Robert Menendez got it right about Obama's lack of electability
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 4, 2008 - 6:36am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14337
Obama showed in the Jan. 5 debate that he does NOT understand enemy attacks!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 7, 2008 - 4:32am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13992
Hillary's high negatives are an illusion compared to Obama or any other Democrat
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 28, 2007 - 4:49pm.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13894
ANALYSIS: Statements from Obama that show his lack of electability if nominated!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 14, 2007 - 10:46am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13782
Barack Obama will be swiftboated & will get eaten up alive if he is the nominee!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 1, 2007 - 3:49am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13433
ANALYSIS: Why I think that Obama would be a very weak general election candidate
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on September 24, 2007 - 9:01am.
The cost of Democrats losing this election is very high as I have credibly documented:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14527
The high cost of another Neocon winning this election is war and much more war!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 28, 2008 - 2:26pm.
Bush and the other side try to negatively define him as a candidate in the general election IF he is the nominee which this CNN transcript shows:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0802/11/sitroom.04.html
THE SITUATION ROOM
Can McCain Rally Conservatives?; Battle on the Potomac
Aired February 11, 2008 - 18:00 ET
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: "Let's talk about the -- something that President Bush doesn't want to be called -- the pundit-in-chief. He did a little of that yesterday. And he said this, among other things, about Barack Obama.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, COURTESY FOX NEWS)
GEORGE BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And the only foreign policy thing I remember he said was that he's going to attack Pakistan and embrace Ahmadinejad.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: All right, Jack, he was on Fox News Sunday yesterday.
What do you think about President Bush's political analysis?
JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: Well, two things. One, what he said is wrong. And, two, perhaps even more importantly, is the guy conducting the interview over there on the "F" word network never called him on it -- never challenged him on it, never said he didn't say he was going to embrace Ahmadinejad. He just let it go.
BLITZER: He said he'd have a direct dialogue with Ahmadinejad.
CAFFERTY: That's not embracing.
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: And he...
CAFFERTY: That's having a meeting with him. There's a whole difference.
TOOBIN: He didn't say he was going to attack Pakistan.
CAFFERTY: No.
TOOBIN: He said if he saw -- knew where Osama bin Laden was, he would try to kill him there. BLITZER: Which is exactly what Bush told me in two interviews over the past year or so, that if the U.S. had actionable intelligence on where Osama bin Laden was in Pakistan, he would authorize U.S. troops to go in there, as well.
CAFFERTY: But this was a deliberately misleading thing he said. You say he said he was going to attack Pakistan. That's not the same as we have actionable intelligence on the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden. This sounds like a preemptive strike -- you know, like Bush did in Iraq.
DANA BASH, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well...
BLITZER: They're gearing up, I think it's fair to say, Dana, what the Democrats call the Republican attack machine. And once the two candidates are settled -- the Democrat and the Republican -- it's going to get tight out -- it's going to get tough out there.
BASH: Exactly. Beyond all the facts, which everybody was talking about in terms of the raw politics here, this is a reminder, first of all, that George W. Bush -- whatever you want to say about him, he is very astute, very interested political observer and player. And he understands what -- you know, every Republican that you talk to, basically, that they say, which is that they are very concerned about a Barack Obama nomination on the Democratic side.
And so he is beginning to sort of put out those talking points that you're going to hear if, in fact, he is the nominee, particularly against a Republican nominee, if it is, in fact, John McCain, because they think the way that they can get Democrats -- any Democrats, but especially Barack Obama -- is on the issue of national security..."
Barack Obama needs to be made to answer this himself RIGHT NOW before any more primaries take place as far as I am concerned!
Jack Cafferty and others in the media will not be able to come to Obama's rescue every time he is attacked in the general election IF he is the nominee!
Bill and Hillary Clinton have already proven that they have the strength and toughness that it takes to fight back against enemy swiftboat attacks and they will not put up with any crap from the other side to negatively define them. This is exactly what happened to John Kerry in 2004 which helped to cost him that election:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13880
Hillary started a new rapid response website to fight back against enemy attacks
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 12, 2007 - 8:42am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/8655
Keith Olbermann comments on Bill Clinton's Fox News interview with my analysis!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on September 26, 2006 - 1:47am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/8841
ANALYSIS: A great Washington Post article about how the media affects Democrats!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on October 5, 2006 - 2:03pm.
Hillary's chief strategist has been paid at least $4.3 million to lead Hillary to where she is today.
His bright idea that caucuses weren't important, and allowed the up-start Obama to out-organize Hillary.
His bright idea to not knock Obama out last spring and summer when Hillary dominated the debates,and the polls.
His bright idea to have surrogates talk about Obama's youthful drug use, and make public Obama's first-grade desire to be president.
His bright idea not to understand the illegal immigrant-driver's license issue last September.
His bright idea to have Hillary vote for Kyl-Lieberman.
Mark Penn: 2008's version of Bob Shrum.
attacking the messenger Mark Penn BUT what about dealing with his message?
Please specifically answer these questions for me which I have not heard any answers to yet from any Obama supporters:
1) What is Obama going to do in the general election IF he is the nominee and when McCain plays around the clock 24/7 Obama saying "Probably the strongest experience I have in foreign relations is the fact that I spent four years living overseas when I was a child in Asia—Southeast Asia?"
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13948
Obama said strongest foreign relations experience was living overseas as a child
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 21, 2007 - 9:17am.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/11/20/clinton-hits-obama-on-foreign-relations-experience/
November 20, 2007
Clinton hits Obama on foreign relations experience
"On Monday, Obama told an Iowa audience, "Probably the strongest experience I have in foreign relations is the fact that I spent four years living overseas when I was a child in Asia—Southeast Asia."
According to the campaign, Obama was six years old when he moved to Indonesia in 1967, and stayed until he was 10.
Obama said his time there and the fact that his father is from Kenya gives him the knowledge "of how ordinary people in these other countries live..."
2) What is Obama going to do when McCain nails him on trying to have it both ways when it comes to a timetable for Iraq IF he is the nominee?
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14640
TRANSCRIPT: Obama tried to have it both ways on setting a timetable for Iraq!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 6, 2008 - 11:50pm.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14687
OBAMA & IRAQ PART 2: What The RNC is already saying about Obama & Iraq now!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 11, 2008 - 10:21am.
3) What is Obama going to do when McCain plays this quote from Obama around the clock 24/7 where he in just one paragraph made a firm promise on Meet The Press NOT to run for President this year and bragged about his own lack of experience back in November of 2004?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6430019/
Meet The Press Transcript for November 7, 2004
Guests: Karl Rove, senior advisor to the president; Senator-elect Barak Obama, D-Ill.; Maureen Dowd, columnist, New York Times; William Safire, columnist, New York Times
MR. RUSSERT: "Before you go, you know there's been enormous speculation about your political future. Will you serve your full six-year term as U.S. senator from Illinois?
SEN.-ELECT OBAMA: Absolutely. You know, a little--some of this hype's been a little overblown. It's flattering, but I have to remind people that I haven't been sworn in yet. I don't know where the rest rooms are in the Senate. I'm going to have to figure out how to work the phones, answer constituent mail. I expect to be in the Senate for quite some time, and hopefully I'll build up my seniority from my current position, which I believe is 99th out of 100.
MR. RUSSERT: Barack Obama, we thank you for sharing your views.
SEN.-ELECT OBAMA: Thank you so much..."
Obama again very firmly promised NOT to run for President again in January of 2006 on Meet The Press:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/10648
TRANSCRIPT: Obama Promised one year ago Today NOT to run for President in 2008!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 22, 2007 - 2:23pm.
4) Do you honestly think that Obama's free ride in so much of the media (which is a proven fact) will continue IF he is the nominee and if he does not have specific answers to these kind of tough questions that the nominee will have to answer?
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14665
MEDIA STUDY: Media Boost Obama, Bash “Billary” and "NBC Is Toughest on Hillary"
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 9, 2008 - 1:01am.
http://www.cmpa.com/election%20news%202_1_08.htm
CENTER FOR MEDIA AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS
2100 L Street, N.W. * Suite 300 * Washington, D.C. 20037 * 202-223-2942
February 1, 2008
Contact: Donald Rieck
MEDIA BOOST OBAMA, BASH “BILLARY”
NBC Is Toughest on Hillary; FOX Has Heaviest Coverage
What I have mentioned so far in this comment is just the tip of the iceberg of what will come back to hurt Obama in the general election IF he is the nominee:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14603
DOCUMENTATION: Issues that will come back to hurt Obama IF he is nominated!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 4, 2008 - 9:07am.
These 4 questions are unanswerable with any credibility in my opinion. If you disagree with me, then I would like to know what your SPECIFIC answers to them are!
I use my real name on this blog on purpose because I am proud to stand behind what I write. If Obama is the nominee and if he cannot answer these questions with any kind of credibility, then there is not much I can see that can be done for him. I will definitely NOT put my credibility on the line trying to defend what cannot be reasonably defended!
McCain will crush Obama like an egg shell in my opinion If he is the nominee when he asks Obama these kind of tough questions which many Democrats and which most of the media have not asked him yet (I have not heard them asked yet)!
Hillary on the other hand will be able to answer these kind of tough questions and is far less vulnerable than Obama because she has already been fully vetted and tested:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13992
Hillary's high negatives are an illusion compared to Obama or any other Democrat
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 28, 2007 - 4:49pm.
these kind of attacks from Limbaugh and company to negatively define him as a candidate which will definitely come IF he is the nominee. This is the same kind of stuff that helped to defeat John Kerry back in 2004!
I have credibly and very thoroughly documented that Barack Obama has shown no understanding of this concept yet:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/14337
Obama showed in the Jan. 5 debate that he does NOT understand enemy attacks!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on January 7, 2008 - 4:32am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13894
ANALYSIS: Statements from Obama that show his lack of electability if nominated!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 14, 2007 - 10:46am.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/13782
Barack Obama will be swiftboated & will get eaten up alive if he is the nominee!
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on November 1, 2007 - 3:49am.
If you disagree with my claim that Obama cannot handle these kind of attacks, then please tell me SPECIFICALLY where I am wrong!
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_021308/content/01125111.guest.html
Obama Is Unfit to Lead the Military
February 13, 2008
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Susan, Louisville, Kentucky. Nice to have you on the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. How are you?
RUSH: Fine. Thank you very much.
CALLER: Okay. Wonderful. I have to share some history that you and I have in your child rearing with my children and other children in our neighborhood. My husband is an infantry officer in the Marine Corps, and a couple years ago while almost everybody on our block was deployed -- we live in company grade housing in Camp Lejeune, North Carolina -- you were the only male influence in a variety of young men's lives, of our toddler's sons. There's a group of wives that used to sit out in our front yard, turn on Rush Limbaugh, and we'd joke that our husbands were gone but all we had was Rush, so I just want to let you know what a role you played.
RUSH: Well, I'm flattered by that. I feel very confident. I'm very hopeful that your kids have a great future.
CALLER: Well, thank you, Rush. Well, Obama talking about change, and he said his head is not in the clouds. I'm concerned it's in a cloud of smoke. And if you could do me a favor and a variety of military wives out there, I'm wondering if you could touch a little bit on what Obama would do to the military if he is in fact voted into office.

RUSH: Well, I think it's actually relatively easy to answer the question just based on Obama's speeches of late. I think the US military, under the commander-in-chief Barack Obama will march into the future united, armed, with the hopes of the free world at their backs. They will march forward into the future in harmony and with love and dreams for peace.
CALLER: Well, we're concerned because we think -- my husband and I and a group of our friends who are all educated and who are all professionals in the military -- we're concerned that when another attack does happen, and if Obama is elected, oh, it will, we're concerned that we will apologize, give the terrorists a hug, and sing Kumbaya.
RUSH: Well, if I may be serious, I was giving you a typical Obama answer at first. Look, your question is very serious. Obama has already said that he's going to meet with the world's tyrants. Obama has already said that he might invade Pakistan. There is an excellent piece today, and I'm going to link to this. Do you go to my website by any chance?
CALLER: Yes, I do.
RUSH: You do?
CALLER: Yes.
RUSH: All right. By the way, is your husband still deployed or is he home?
CALLER: He is actually home. We are stationed here in Kentucky now.
RUSH: Stationed in Kentucky. Okay. There's a piece by Leon Wieseltier today in the New Republic that just excoriates -- and Wieseltier actually is liberal -- excoriates Obama on the very thing you're talking about. Wieseltier's point, and I didn't print it out because it's not something that you can excerpt. I'd have to read the whole thing to you. But I'll summarize it for you here. It basically talks about the hot spots around the world where we are seriously threatened, from China to North Korea to Iraq to Iran to Pakistan, to the Soviet Union, to China. He says China holds the fate of our economy in its hands because of all the dollars, all of the US debt that they own. And that whatever China wants in the world, they get. If they don't want to be part of Kyoto, the UN says, fine, fine, fine, you don't have to be part of Kyoto, because everybody is scared to death that the ChiComs, they're not going to take it. You cross them, ask the Falun Gong, ask the Mongolians, ask any number of people. You stand in front of one of their tanks, ask what happens. They're not going to put up with any of this.
His whole point is, there is nobody less qualified seeking the office to deal with all of this than Barack Obama. It's detectable by listening to him talk about these circumstances and these situations around the world. This goes beyond what will happen to the military and how he will use it. This goes even beyond that. This goes to the very nature of what his foreign policy would be. It's based, really, on the fact that Wieseltier believes that naïveté is just profound in Obama. He actually believes that he can go meet with the tyrants and thugs of the world and by the very power and force of his personality and the desire for Kumbaya and everybody to hold hands, he can talk the bad guys into being good guys working for a common purpose with the hopes and dreams of the world at their back. Wieseltier says the world's a far more dangerous place and we're at much greater risk in the world today than we were yesterday, the day before, and Obama is just singularly unqualified to deal with it. We will link to this at RushLimbaugh.com so that you can check it out. Now, Susan, hang on. Don't go away.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Susan in Louisville, back to you. I wanted to do something for you. You're so nice with what you said in the beginning of your call, and your husband has served the country, and you were left with three kids and so forth with only me to help raise them, and that's actually a good thing. But I want to do two things for you.
CALLER: Thank you, Rush.
RUSH: The first thing I want, I want to send you whole bunch of flowers. I mean, tomorrow is Valentine's Day, I know your husband is probably going to do something, but I want to send you some flowers --
CALLER: Thank you so much, Rush.
RUSH: -- from ProFlowers, and I'm also going to do this. Is that a young crumb cruncher in the background?
CALLER: Oh, Rush, I'm pushing them full of M&Ms and said, "I'm on a very important phone call."
RUSH: Oh, okay. Pushing them full of M&Ms. Good.
CALLER: Yeah.
RUSH: Next thing I'm gonna do, and this won't take very long. I want to give you and your husband aSelect Comfort Sleep Number Bed.
CALLER: Oh, my God, Rush. Let me give you a little history on that. We just signed up for LifeLock because of you, and that was my New Year's resolution, it's one that I kept, and I was starting to save little bit by little bit to get one of those Sleep Number Beds, because I know they are so highly recommended.
RUSH: Well, I knew that. See, I sense these things. My instincts, I never doubt them. Look, we'll put you on hold, and we'll make all this happen down the road. But you're going to absolutely love the bed. You were very sweet, and I don't think the country does enough for families like you.
CALLER: Well, thank you, Rush, and you make my life better daily. My husband works half days every day, six to six, and I listen to you diligently every day.
RUSH: Well, thanks very much, and you give him all of our best, will you do that?
CALLER: Okay.
RUSH: Okay, thank you very much, Susan.
END TRANSCRIPT
Read the Background Material...
• Salon.com: McCain Targets Obama - Alex Koppelman
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/02/12/mccain_speech/index.html
• The New Republic: Washington Diarist
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=76832a5a-4c74-41f1-98b7-82f6b74638b8
*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.
--------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_021308/content/01125107.guest.html
Rush Endorses Obama Because He Is Anything You Want Him to Be
February 13, 2008
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: I'm thinking of endorsing Obama. Well, everybody's asking me about my endorsement. I want to give you a reason why I'm thinking of endorsing Obama. Listen to this. (playing of Barack Obama spoof)

Barack Obama, ladies and gentlemen, is a blank canvas upon which anybody can project their fantasies, or their desires. You look at Democrats in the audience, and they're swooning. He's saying nothing. He's saying nothing better than anybody in my lifetime ever has. The reason he says nothing so well is because everybody thinks that he's saying what they want. So they're able to project onto Obama their fantasies. If they believe in allowing somebody to marry a dog, they think Obama will support it. Therefore, I would like today to announce a tentative decision, I'm stilling thinking about it, to endorse Barack Obama, since everybody is asking who am I going to endorse, and here's why. Barack Obama is pro-life. Barack Obama is a Constitutionalist. Barack Obama believes in limited government. Barack Obama is in favor of health care savings plans. Barack Obama loves free markets and wants to protect them. Barack Obama is strong on national defense. Barack Obama is a tax cutter extraordinaire. Barack Obama makes my leg tingle when I hear him speak. Barack Obama will end the designated hitter rule. Barack Obama will establish a college football playoff once and for all so we will genuinely have a champion. Barack Obama will get to the bottom of Spygate. Barack Obama will offer free beer Fridays. Whatever you want Obama to be, folks, he's a blank slate, he's an empty canvas, and this is the nature of his appeal. Whatever people fantasize about, whatever they want, they are confident Obama supports it, too.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Jared in Spokane, Washington, you're first today. Nice to have you here.
CALLER: Hey, thank you, Rush, thanks very much. As I told your screener, I am a conservative in Washington State -- in eastern Washington, a more conservative part of the state -- and even I am considering voting for Obama just because of the way he communicates; understanding, I know, that a lot of what he says doesn't have a lot of substance to it. But the reason why --
RUSH: Do you realize what you just said?
CALLER: -- is I think he is a -- he is a great communicator like -- like Reagan was, and he's inspirational.
RUSH: Do you...?
CALLER: I remember growing up as a kid in the eighties, and the thing that Reagan did for me, is he made me feel good again, feel good about the country; and I think that's what Obama does. I don't necessarily agree with his politics. I don't like what he says. I think he's kind of a socialist. But I agree with the way he inspires people.
RUSH: Are you listening to yourself here?
CALLER: (laughs)
RUSH: You're a conservative Republican in the state of Washington.
CALLER: Yes.
RUSH: You want to feel good. You expect a presidential candidate to do it. Even if he's a socialist you're going to vote for him. You know that his policies are way over there on the left.
CALLER: Yeah.
RUSH: You admit that his speech doesn't contain much substance, but it is inspiring like Reagan inspired you. And you're thinking of voting for him even though you know he's a socialist lib.
CALLER: Because the alternative is John McCain, who you know works with liberals more than any so-called Republican out there. And what's the difference if I have John McCain working with liberals, and a liberal as a president? There's not a whole lot of difference there.
RUSH: If the liberal inspires you.
CALLER: So if I can get someone who's a good person deep down, if I get someone who's a good person as president --
RUSH: I tell you what, we're in trouble.
CALLER: -- that for me is more important.
RUSH: All I can say is we're in trouble. Okay. So you've decided here. McCain is going to work with the liberals. Obama is a liberal. So it's a wash.
CALLER: So what's the difference?
RUSH: So it's a wash.
CALLER: Yeah.
RUSH: And so you are a going to vote for the liberal who inspires you? And that's Obama.
CALLER: It may come down to that. Yes.
RUSH: We're in trouble.
CALLER: I agree.
RUSH: We are in trouble. There's no... We're in trouble. You need to really hear what you just said. Besides that, you know, Reagan... How old are you? You sound relatively youthful, how old are you?
CALLER: I am 33.
RUSH: Thirty-three. Thirty-three. Thirty-three. You were...(sigh) You were teenage years or even younger than that when Reagan was around.
CALLER: Right.
RUSH: And yet he inspired you?
CALLER: He inspired me, and as I studied him in high school and in growing up further --
RUSH: Yeah. Yeah.
CALLER: -- I agreed with him. I agreed with his stance on communism.
RUSH: Well, he was full of substance, though.
CALLER: I agreed with his stands on social issues.
RUSH: The thing is, he was full of substance.
CALLER: Oh, I agree.
RUSH: He was full of substance.
CALLER: But he also inspired people, and he inspired people to believe in themselves and believe in their country and believe in conservatism.
RUSH: Yeah, but Obama is not inspiring people to believe in themselves. He's inspiring them to believe in him. He is messianic. He's making people feel good about themselves, but they're not personally inspired. They are personally "hopeful," and Obama is who they're inspired of, not themselves. It's a significant distinction.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: RUSH: All right, folks, before we get to the Obama speech sound bites, a quick question. How many of you spent some time, as I suggested, processing the last call that we just heard on this program? If you did, let me ask you a question. How do you know that it was a plant? Because it was. That call was so obviously a plant. Am I the only one? Probably so. That's why I'm host. (interruption) No, that's not it, Snerdley, that's not it. Snerdley's close. It's not the fact that he wasn't old enough to know anything about Reagan. When I asked him about the age thing, he said he learned a lot and was inspired by Reagan in what? High School. My friends, name for me a high school anywhere in this country that, A, teaches anything about Reagan, B, teaches anything good about Reagan. That call had to be a plant. Reagan is simply not celebrated and heralded in American high schools, especially in the state of Washington. I know Spokane is a conservative place, but the public school system is the public school system. All right, now we go to Obama and his acceptance -- well, whatever it was, his speech last night in Madison, Wisconsin. We have four bites. Here's number one.
OBAMA: I should not be here today. I was not born into money or status. I was born to a teenaged mom in Hawaii. My father left us when I was two. But my family gave me love, they gave me an education, and most of all, they gave me hope. Hope that in America, no dream is beyond our grasp if we reach for it and fight for it and work for it. Understand this. Hope is not blind optimism. Hope is not ignorance of the barriers and the challenges that stand between you and your dreams. I know how hard it will be to change America.
RUSH: I hope you do, because hope never got anything done. I don't want to go through my hope riff. That's number one. Here's number two, Obama last night in Madison, Wisconsin.

OBAMA: We'll invest in you, you invest in your country, together America will move forward, that's what we dream of. That is our calling in this campaign. That's our calling, to reaffirm that fundamental belief, I am my brother's keeper; I am my sister's keeper; that belief that makes us one people and one nation. It's time to stand up and reach for what's possible, because together people who love their country can change it.
RUSH: See, Snerdley, I mean you're the guy that supports all this. I'll tell you, this is so syrupy I feel like I'm going to need to take some medication to keep my blood sugar down. I think I'm going to get an insulin attack here. Here's the third sound bite of four from Obama last night in Madison.
OBAMA: Now, when I start talking like this, I have to say some people will tell you that I've got my head in the clouds; that I'm still offering false hopes; that I need a reality check; that I'm a hopemonger. But, you know, it's true, my own story tells me that in the United States of America, there's never been anything false about hope, at least not if you're willing to work for it; not if you're willing to struggle for it; not if you're willing to fight for it.
RUSH: And here is number four.
OBAMA: When we instead join arm in arm and decide we are going to remake this country block by block, precinct by precinct, county by county, county -- state by state. That's what hope is. There's a moment in the life of every generation when that spirit has to come through if we are to make our mark on history. And this is our moment. This is our time.
RUSH: When we instead join arm in arm and decide we're going to remake this country block by block, precinct by precinct, county by county, state by state, that's what hope is. Nope. What he's describing there is action. But I don't want to get into my hope riff. Now, there's no question that this kind of stuff, to the right audience, can lift 'em up. It is, in its own way, inspiring. It's telling the hopeless that there is hope in hope. (laughing) Look, here's my point about this. There was nothing substantive; there was nothing about policy here; there was nothing about what he was going to do in the future. It was all psychological, the Oprahization of a presidential campaign. But here's the real point. If you watched that whole speech last night, you know why he's winning and why Hillary is losing. If you agree with Barack Obama, if you are John McCain, and you agree with Barack Obama, you will lose. The thing that McCain needs to understand -- this hit me last night after watching this speech -- if he agrees on a lot of issues with Obama, as McCain tends to agree with liberals a lot, he loses. Because Obama's going to have this technique and this appeal wrapped up.
You cannot take a part of this and appropriate it as your own in your campaign. This is Obama. He owns this, whatever it is. He has a patent on saying nothing, but he owns it and it's his, and you can't appropriate it. Senator McCain can only beat this back by embracing conservatism. You can't out-speech Barack Obama. Just isn't going to happen, especially when he has a TelePromTer. You're not going to be able to out-charisma Obama. And you're not going to be able to out-sex-appeal Obama. Ideas are going to be the only way to stop this guy, because his ideas he's trying to hide. Like all liberals, he's trying to get away with not having to be public about what his ideas are; they are socialist, slash, liberal. Ideas are not embracing him halfway, say, oh, we love Obama. I think Hillary said this, I'm not sure, I've been hearing so many things, but I think Hillary said that Obama has not had one negative ad run against him in this campaign, because they're scared to. McCain's media guy, Mark McKinnon, said, "Oh, we're not going to do that." Well, if you're not going to do that means he hasn't been tested, you're going to need to beat this guy with ideas.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: So we just play these four audio sound bites of Obama, and you just heard them, and basically he's about "hope" and "the future." And, of course, everybody said, "Well, who's possibly against the future?" Well, I'm not necessarily against the future, but somebody's gotta be for right now, and I am for right now. If you don't pay attention to right now, then the future could be bad. We're all for the future. I'm not necessarily against the future, but somebody gotta stand up for right now, and I am the man to stand up for right now. I want to grab a quick phone call because it sets up what's coming.
RUSH: This is Jack in Boston. Great to have you here. Welcome to the program, sir.
CALLER: Yeah. Rush, I never would have thought that it would actually come through but you remember the 1979 or 1980 movie Being There with Peter Sellers?
RUSH: Oh, yeah.

CALLER: There was a character, Chauncey Gardiner. Now, the way people reacted to Chauncey Gardiner is the same way people react to Barack Obama. He didn't say anything! He just talked about planting the seeds and it will grow to the future and good, and at the end of the movie I think he like walked on water.
RUSH: Walked on water.
CALLER: They believed anything he did.
RUSH: Right.
CALLER: It was a very, very funny movie. People should see it.
RUSH: Being There. That's an excellent, excellent suggestion, because that does nail it. Chauncey Gardiner. He's a streetwalker.
CALLER: Yeah, he was a servant. All he saw was what --
RUSH: Servant.
CALLER: -- he watched television; he didn't know anything.
RUSH: He got fired. In fact, he was fascinated with the television remote control.
CALLER: Yeah. What happened was, he was a servant to these wealthy people who passed away, and he never was out of the house, and he comes out -- and all he knows is what he's seen on television, and he says these platitudes that don't mean anything, and everybody thinks he's like a genius and they follow him and he becomes the president of the United States.
RUSH: Yeah, just like --
CALLER: Exactly.
RUSH: -- messianic.
CALLER: Yeah. The movie was hysterical.
RUSH: Other wealthy people bring him into their homes for the wisdom and the guidance that he's offering. That's an excellent --
CALLER: Absolutely.
RUSH: -- excellent suggestion, Jack. Go out and rent it, buy it, whatever: Being There with Peter Sellers. We've also decided, folks, it's time; since it looks like Obama -- Hillary got her clock cleaned. There's just no way other than that to describe it. It's not over. Those legs are still not protruding from underneath the house; and there's still a couple formulas whereby she can win, but let me just go through this with you. Here's what it's going to take. For her to overcome Obama for the pledged delegate lead, she's going to have win 55% of the remaining delegates. Assuming next week goes Obama's way in Wisconsin and Hawaii, that percentage will then rise to 57% of the delegates that she'll have to win. If you toss in a likely Obama win in Vermont, Wyoming, Mississippi, Oregon, Montana, South Dakota, then the percentage of pledged delegates she will need after those primaries will top 60% of the remaining delegates available. The question, how does she do that? How does she do it? I'm telling you. Did you hear what Fast Eddie Rendell, the governor of Pennsylvania, said? He went out there proving once again the real racism exists on the left in this country, he went out there -- and he's a big Clinton supporter. He effectively said (paraphrased), "Well, when you get down to brass tacks, there aren't a lot of white people in this country are going to vote for the black guy." Fast Eddie Rendell, governor of Pennsylvania. It's actually Eddie "Don't Call Me Fast Eddie" Fast Eddie Rendell. So he's out there.
They're going to make a play for these delegates, unseated delegates in Michigan and Florida, super delegates. I've got some thoughts on Chelsea coming up, too, because she's out there trying to horn in on those super delegates and get them to vote for her mom. And like I told you yesterday: if they have to, they will cause a riot. Where is the Democrat convention? Is it in Denver? They're going to cause a riot, if they have to, in order to win this nomination. They're not going to let this thing slip away. So you cannot say this is over for a long, long time. But now that Obama has a 100-delegate lead -- 102, I think, according to CBS -- he's a player. He's there, and he's for the future. I'm for the right now. For the right now, he has a theme song on this program.

(playing Candy Man by Sammy Davis, Jr.)
RUSH: By the way, folks, the vocal portrayal here by Sammy Davis, Jr., who's black. So don't say anything to me.
(playing Candy Man by Sammy Davis, Jr.)
RUSH: Sammy Davis, Jr., ladies and gentlemen, here on the EIB Network. That's our Barack Obama theme song for right now. Who knows what the future will hold? By the way, Mr. Fast Eddie Rendell, what he was really doing... When Fast Eddie goes out there and says (paraphrased), "I don't think white people are going to vote for black people," he's telling white people not to vote for black people. That's the message from the governor of Pennsylvania, Fast Eddie Rendell. Of course, the Clintons don't get called on this. This is, again, the playing of the race card. They're trying to start an Uncivil War, or revive it. This time you're not using the Schlick Meister, Bill Clinton. They're using Fast Eddie Rendell -- who used to, by the way, in the old Veterans Stadium throw snowballs from his seat in the upper deck on the visiting players, particularly the Dallas Cowboys.
END TRANSCRIPT
Read the Background Material...
• American Thinker: The Obama Cult of Nonthreatening Personality
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/02/the_obama_cult_of_nonthreateni.html
• AP: Obama's Support Broad in VA, MD
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080213/D8UP7MH00.html
• FOX: Exit Polling Explains Obama Sweep in Virginia
http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/02/12/exit-polling-explains-obama-sweep-in-virginia-mccain-grappling-with-conservatives-doubt/
• NewsBusters: Matthews: Obama Speech Caused 'Thrill Going Up My Leg'
http://newsbusters.org/stories/matthews-obama-speech-caused-thrill-going-my-leg.html?q=blogs/brad-wilmouth/2008/02/13/matthews-obama-speech-caused-thrill-going-my-leg
• Wall Street Journal: Obama's Wiretap Votes
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120286974171964257.html?mod=opinion_main_review_and_outlooks
• HotAir: Obama: Elect me and I'll lose the War AND Raise Your Taxes!
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/02/12/obama-elect-me-and-ill-lose-the-war-and-raise-your-taxes/
• Weekly Standard: Obama Unplugged; Lost Without a Teleprompter - Dean Barnett
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/728ofzey.asp
• AP: Rendell: Race Factor Could Hurt Obama
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gIjYa42R0UUEGs0_AyNg506-z8FgD8UP1VUG0
Obama Ad: The Future (1:03)
*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.
And it was when General Wesley Clark himself was a candidate. All of these "experts" all said he wasn't tested, wasn't ready, didn't have any "elected" experience, etc. etc. etc. I find it very ironic that the very same arguments used against General Clark are now being used by his supporters to justify a Hillary defeat. The voters aren't listening to this garbage this year period. That is why Hillary is getting her butt kicked all over the map. I have been saying all along that supporting Hillary was a risky proposition. I have never been convinced that she was the inevitable nominee and the favorite to be the next President. We are tired of the Bush-Clinton feud. We have been dealing with these two families for the last 20 years and it is time to turn the page. This is America and two families should never be allowed to dominate our political discussions like these two have been allowed. Dynasties are inherently dangerous to any Democracy and that is what we all stand for, right? So tell me, again, why I should support Hillary? because these arguments didn't hold water for me in 2003-2004 why should they now???
The General's lengthy resume, with the right experience and tested leadership, illustrate how he was the best candidate in 2004, but the people who were making those claims against him hadn't bothered to research his background.
Proud to be an American.

Well for now I have gotten past this dynasty thing. I was one of the first to voice exactly how I felt when our General Wes Clark gave his endorsement to Hillary. I actually thought the man had lost his mind. (But I figured that he knows her better personally then anyone, myself included. And this was after taking a longer look at Obama and some of the others. By the time they got to my state all the others had dropped out. But then I also realized just what kind of damage that Bush Jr has done to our country and around the world. And I'm sorry. But Obama just doesn't fit the bill for me. He may one day make a fine President. But not now. We don't have the time to let the training wheels fall off.
If Wes had actually gone off to win the nomination in 2004.
We would have a lot different outcome. He would have been sitting in the Oval Office now and we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Thats just my 2 cents.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0802/12/acd.02.html
ANDERSON COOPER 360 DEGREES
Obama and McCain Sweep Potomac Primaries; What are Superdelegates?
Aired February 12, 2008 - 23:00 ET
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: "Before we go to Amy, I want to play a little sound from Senator Obama tonight. During his speech he talked directly about what he would speak to against John McCain. Let's listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OBAMA: If we had chosen a different path, the right path, we could have finished the job in Afghanistan. And put more resources into the fight against Bin Laden. Instead of spending hundreds of billions of dollars in Baghdad, we could have put that money into our schools, and our hospitals, rebuilding our roads and our bridges. That's what the American people need us to do right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Amy Holmes, as a conservative, you hear that and think what?
AMY HOLMES, CNN ANALYST: I think of a Democrat who's trying to win the Democratic votes in a Democratic primary. And something that John McCain said in his victory speech was he was starting to draw the sharp contrast, or distinction, I should say, between himself and Barack Obama. He said he's not running to save his country which is in contrast to Barack Obama's sort of Messianic message that he's giving.
He said he's running because his country saved him. He was trying to touch a note of humble patriotism in contrast to Barack Obama's sort of loftier, uplifting theme.
COOPER: John King, you hear Barack Obama's speech and you think what?
JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I think the Republicans will run a campaign that this is a liberal who does not understand the world and does not understand if the United States leaves Iraq or Afghanistan now, whether you think it was a good idea to go in or not, that America loses. That's a naive position. You see the Republican national committee already tonight put out a statement, put the chairman out on video saying, Barack Obama does not have the experience to be commander in chief.
COOPER: We heard that from President Bush on Sunday who said in an interview that Barack Obama wants to embrace Ahmadinejad, which is nothing that Barack Obama has said.
KING: That's the contrast they will make. They will essentially say he's a nice guy. He's too inexperienced. He was in the Illinois Senate just a few years ago. There are 100,000-plus troops in Iraq; 50,000 or so in Afghanistan. That this guy is not ready; that will be McCain's message..."

http://www.gop.com/news/NewsRead.aspx?Guid=c5cffa70-2a36-4ddd-9d2d-6d61fe5544a4
Monday, February 11, 2008
RNC Chairman Duncan: Barack Obama Not Ready to be Commander in Chief
WASHINGTON – RNC Chairman Robert M. “Mike” Duncan released the following statement tonight:
“Barack Obama’s primary win in the Chesapeake Bay area today won’t carry much weight if he gains his Party’s nomination. That’s because voters in Virginia, Maryland, and here in our nation’s capital want a different type of ‘change’ than Barack Obama is advocating. His proposals to choke off funding for our nation’s soldiers and eliminate tax relief that he claims hard-working families ‘didn’t need’ are out of touch with voters nationwide. Obama does not have the experience to serve our nation as Commander in Chief.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWYdlu8iZUw (0:30)