Hillary invective, part 2

A couple things to add: One, Mr. Ian is correct about Factcheck saying that the blacker ad couldn't be proven as sinister. I still have my doubts, and so do these guys.

While things look different on many TVs, they don't look this dramatically different. Nothing that you see in a final advertisement is accidental. These things are looked at (or should be looked at if they are doing their jobs) second by second. Even more unforgiving is the stretching of the footage. It is possibly the result of laziness on the part of the editor, but it would have been easier to actually not stretch it, and just crop it.

Nothing in advertising is accidental. It is over-thought and then subjected to second thoughts and second guessing then over-thought and re-looked at again. I've been doing this ten years. It is my professional opinion that the film was made darker, and it has obviously been stretched. I will not comment on their reasons, as I can't offer an informed case for that.

But I don't know enough about this sort of image-reworking to say anything definitively, other than that given the rest of Team Clinton's campaign tactics, I wouldn't be surprised.

I would, however, like to address two of Mrs. Clinton's campaign themes: First, the 35 years of experience thingamajig. We are apparently counting every day she's been out of law school, including when she worked on the Wal-Mart board, served for like one year with the Children's Defense Fund, was racking up the dough in cattle futures, was making a ton of money on land deals, was First Lady of Arkansas, was First Lady of the U.S., and her current spot in the U.S. Senate. By her calculations then, we should start counting Obama's "experience" when he got out of law school too: Since he graduated as editor of the freaking Harvard Law Review in 1990, that gives him 18 years experience. Does that make Obama naive, or just not fucking old? You be the judge.

In any event, let's see what Hillary's experience delivered: A vote for the Iraq War. The biggest policy decision of the last decade, and she blew it. And not only did she blow it, but she then defended her decision. Then she complained about how the war was managed. Then she said she didn't want to enact a time line for withdrawal. Then she did. And so on.

She's running on experience, and Obama gave a speech. Guess what. Obama got it right.

Now to the "ready on Day One" meme: I think a fair test of your management skills might be how you run a national campaign. Hillary started this thing with every institutional advantage possible: the backing of party leaders; money; universal name recognition; a spouse revered by the party faithful. More importantly, this experienced leader has been through two presidential campaigns before. And what did she do with all that? Hired Mark Penn and Howard Wolfson, and watched her campaign start the death spiral. Sure, she's doing better now - but only doing so by attacking her Democratic opponent through the aforementioned outright lies and scaremongering (see NAFTA; 3 a.m.; "He's not a Muslim as far as I know").

Obama could and should have handled those attacks better, but let's step back and look at his management skills so far. Barely on the public stage for four years, with limited name recognition outside of political junkies and Illinois residents, he's taken on, and is beating, the most powerful Democratic machine of our generation. He's raising more money than her. He's won more contests. He's won more votes. He's won more pledged delegates, and will have more pledged delegates at the convention. He's out-planned her. He's brought more new voters to the polls than she could ever hope to do.

Quite simply, he's beating her at her own game. So who's ready on Day One? Just wondering.

To quote none other than Jann Wenner:

On the matter of experience and capability, he has run an impressive, nearly flawless campaign â?? one that whupped America's most hard-boiled political infighters. Indeed, Obama was far more prepared to run a presidential campaign â?? from Day One â?? than Senator Clinton. And at no point did he go negative with personal attacks or character assassination; as much as they might have been justified, they didn't even seem tempting to him.

Obama has emerged by displaying precisely the kind of character and judgment we need in a president: renouncing the politics of fear, speaking frankly on the most pressing issues facing the country and sticking to his principles. He recognizes that running for president is an opportunity to inspire an entire nation.

Oh, and Billy, P.S.: Obama won Texas.

UPDATE: Obama just picked up 8 more delegates from California after they finish tabulating and whatnot. So, Clinton basically has 1 less delegate than she had Monday, when she supposedly turned this race around or whatever.


We welcome readers to submit letters regarding articles and content in Orlando Weekly. Letters should be a minimum of 150 words, refer to content that has appeared on Orlando Weekly, and must include the writer's full name, address, and phone number for verification purposes. No attachments will be considered. Writers of letters selected for publication will be notified via email. Letters may be edited and shortened for space.

Email us at [email protected].

Support Local Journalism.
Join the Orlando Weekly Press Club

Local journalism is information. Information is power. And we believe everyone deserves access to accurate independent coverage of their community and state. Our readers helped us continue this coverage in 2020, and we are so grateful for the support.

Help us keep this coverage going in 2021. Whether it's a one-time acknowledgement of this article or an ongoing membership pledge, your support goes to local-based reporting from our small but mighty team.

Join the Orlando Weekly Press Club for as little as $5 a month.