Does Hillary Think Obama's Soft On Sex Crimes?
So, if you were waiting for the presidential contest to get dirty, we just hit that mark. Perhaps a little early. Hillary Clinton had a killer attack on Obama during tonight's South Carolina debate. She all but insinuated tonight that Barack's going to open up the nursery early for every malfeasant and hoodlum in America. Erieblue posts the transcript and a dead-on view.
CLINTON: Just a minute. In the Illinois state senate, Senator Obama voted 130 times present. That's not yes, that's not no. That's maybe. And on issue after issue that really were hard to explain or understand, you know, voted present on keeping sex shops away from schools, voted present on limiting the rights of victims of sexual abuse, voted present time and time again. And anytime anyone raises that, there's always some kind of explanation like you just heard about the 30 percent. It's just very difficult to get a straight answer, and that's what we are probing for.
...
Does anyone in the Clinton campaign think that if Hillary uttered the words "sexual abuse" and "sex shops" that this would not be the big story of the debate? Anyone?
Here's what I think it means. First, the Clinton camp is scared of the national numbers tightening up for Feb. 5, and they are doing everything they can to dirty up Obama. The fact that she did this on national TV, live, in a debate, to his face, suggests more than the usual level of concern.
Yea, Hillary knew what she was doing with this one. Unfortunately for Hillary, Obama explained the issue away pretty well.
OBAMA: I feel pretty bad, I do. I feel pretty bad. But let's just respond to the example that was just thrown out. The bill with respect to privacy for victims of sexual abuse is a bill I had actually sponsored, Hillary. I actually sponsored the bill. It got through the senate. (APPLAUSE)
That was on the back of 12 other provisions that I was able to pass inthe state legislature. Nobody has worked harder than me in the Illinois state legislature to make sure that victims of sexual abuse were dealt with, partly because I've had family members who were victims of sexual abuse and I've got two daughters who I want to protect. What happened on that particular provision was that after I had sponsored it and helped to get it passed, it turned out that there was a legal provision in it that was problematic and needed to be fixed so that it wouldn't be struck down.
Slimy move from Team Clinton.
might be a problem signaling failure to do one's homework or failure to take a stand. But Clinton totally distracted attention from this subject by dragging in the "soft on sex crimes" angle. The effect was to let Obama avoid the whole issue by explaining the one vote. It sure sounds as though CLinton was more interested in vaguely associating Obama with sex crimes than in actually comparing the number of times he voted "present" to the record of other legislators, and in pointing out the times, if any, when his vote made the difference between the legislation passing or failing. If she really wanted to explore his record of voting "present," why didn't she make the comparisons and point out where he failed the Democrats?
The exchange left me with no new information--only a bad taste at Clinton's disingenuousness.
Cowalker- you make a very good point in that Clinton could have made a very important score on Obama's failure to take a stand (that I heard) without resorting to the salaciousness (that everyone else apparently heard) of the sex crime bills attached to two of the alleged 130 "present" votes. I do remain disturbed, however, that Obama failed to "do his homework" or "failed to take a stand" on these two specific rather important issues. More likely, I would like to think that he was honest in his assessment that he truly did believe that there was a problem with a court striking down at least one of the bills, which takes me back to his failure either to fix or vote on his own bill that was so important for the protection of his two daughters (his words) and all other women in the state of Illinois.
I guess I am just disappointed in Obama in that he seems to be making a lot of rookie mistakes that do not bode well for a stint as president. It is refreshing on the one hand, but of concern to many of us of Obama's age and older that lived through the devastating affects of the celebrated "party of ideas" during the Reagan Era assault on unions and the middle class (ala "trickle down economics") and the disasterous naivety of a smart and good man such as Jimmy Carter. I believe that Obama is exceedingly intelligent and has a good heart. Maybe I am jaded in my 45 years and sadly, no longer have the arrogance of youth that our "young Jerid" has. I just am not confident in Obama's ability to turn back the clock on these last 8 years with his plan of bipartisanship and hope.