November 19, 2007
Humanize Those Ads

Amid a batch of new Presidential ads released today is an interesting one from Hillary Clinton:

The key is the effort to make the proverbial cold fish seem more human, in this case by using a constituent casework story from Clinton's tenure in the Senate. Readers with a sharp political memory may recall some similar radio ads from Slade Gorton in 2000, emphasizing his localized work on behalf of communities and individual constituents. Let's just say Slade, like Hillary, wasn't known by the typical voter as being warm and fuzzy.

Such ads can be a great way to correct that with a target audience, and having played a modest role in organizing some of the radio ads for Gorton I can attest they're some of the easiest ads possible to make. They're also a reminder to Representatives and Senators (and their staffs!) in competitive seats of the importance of the sometimes mundane task of constituent services.

Posted by Eric Earling at November 19, 2007 08:08 PM | Email This
Comments
1. It's hard to believe H.Clinton is "for the kids" when she's just fine with them being torn apart and sucked into a garbage disposal (yes, that is what some of these abortion clinics use to "dispose" of the babies' remains) before ever seeing the light of day. Sorry if that offends anyone, but frankly it's true.

Posted by: Michele on November 19, 2007 09:22 PM
2. This seems so small ball to me. This woman is running to be the president of the most powerful nation on earth. How does this type of micromanaging really fit into the role of President?

This ad may prove her compassion but it also speaks of the lack of experience that she has. Is this the best she can point to in her political career? It is also revealing in that this little story is supposed to demonstrate how trustworthy she is (“People say that she can’t be trusted . . .”) really does’t prove that at all. It proves that she is aware of the liability and has little counter it.

The real truth is that she is probably one of the bigger, more brazen crooks (“lost” billing records, historic cattle futures “gains”, whitewater, Chinese military money, etc. etc.) in politics and all of the wrong footed ads to try and disprove it aren’t going to help.

Posted by: G Jiggy on November 19, 2007 09:34 PM
3. So, she got the hospital to eat the cost of the procedure.
What leverage did she have comes to mind. Perhaps the FBI files on the administrator, some fat research grants?? Or just the priveledge to remain open after she thrashes the system.

Posted by: PC on November 19, 2007 10:10 PM
4. Leading Pro-Abortion Group Launches Hillary Clinton Efforts This Week


***

The Liberal Conscience


...Then we come to a Liberal's view of reproductive healthcare. Liberals weep, gnash their teeth, and tear their clothing while recounting the days when blood ran deep. You know... from all of those back-alley abortions that used to be performed, which resulted in a gushing tsunami of blood. This was caused by all of those hemorrhaging uteruses.

It is remarkable that we have been allowed to keep our wire coat hangers. After all, guns must be banned, because guns kill people. Since wire coat hangers are not protected under the second amendment, one would think that these surgical instruments should be kept out of the hands of amateurs. Of course, there are cases today of emergency trauma, caused by safe surgical abortions performed in safe abortion clinics. I certainly do not want to make light of such tragedies; although, choice in reproductive healthcare advocates try very hard to do just that.

In my own town, an (unnamed) woman is suing after she lost 80% of her blood volume do to a botched abortion at Planned Parenthood. She said that the procedure was causing her excruciating pain, and that she begged the doctor to stop the abortion. They proceeded anyway, holding her down and telling her that they could not stop now. She later collapsed in the clinic's recover room, and nearly died. An emergency hysterectomy was required to save her life. When we argue for an absolute end to abortion, liberal advocates often counter that the world is already filled with unwanted, uncared-for, starving and abused children. They ask me... if abortions are taken away, who will have to care and pay for these children. Will I personally adopt a couple hundred of them, and if not then I should just shut up because I am a hypocrite. Yikes! This is a real conversation, which occurs all too often. ...

Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on November 20, 2007 12:10 AM
5. If Hillary really is the smartest woman in the world, she should have performed the bone marrow transplant herself.

Posted by: Doc-T on November 20, 2007 06:08 AM
6. Yes... I see this as a cozy deal the hospital and Hild-a-beast needed to bank for 2008. They get a better shot on more demo-public tax money in the future, and she bought herself a slick ad. I would bet the idea was sitting on a rolodex reminder in her campaign office.

Posted by: keb on November 20, 2007 06:25 AM
7. I like your comparison Eric; however, the Clinton ad seems better fitted for US Senate, City Council or State legislature than an ad for President.

Is Clinton trying to adopt the comparable alpha male (warm and fuzzy for Clinton) concept Gore tried? Since Clinton is already an alpha male personality, shouldn't Gore and Clinton try to do a mind meld? But then I forgot, Gore wasn't/isn't very warm and fuzzy either.

Posted by: swatter on November 20, 2007 07:04 AM
8. First, lets be clear that Al Gore invented the bone marrow transplant procedure, give credit where it is do.

With that out of the way, BFD! She abused teh public subsidized health care system so that she could fake a message about being compasionate.

Give me a break

Posted by: YoHillary! on November 20, 2007 10:10 AM
9. Let's see, Hillary's qualifications for being president are that she: (1) Was a staff assistant counsel (or something like that) for watergate (let's see, so she has Thompson's experience - how is that relevant today), (2) She was Arkansas first lady (I am sure there were plenty of decisions to make there), (3) She worked in a law firm with questionable land deals (so what, 90% of the politicians are lawyers), (4) she was first lady for 8 years (if she was so closely in tune with what Bill was doing, how is it she knew nothing of his shenanigans with Monica), and (5) she has been a U.S. Senator for what 8 years, or so. Any of the former presidents Press Secretaries have as much experience as Hillary. So she can micromanage meetings well? This is a good thing how? Does it mean she will be able to have even more meetings because she is so efficient with them?

I just don't see, other than the last name, why the Democrats are so enamored with her. She does have less experience than Obama, no matter what her campaign staff's talking points of the day are. Her experience is miniscue to Biden or Dodd's, and she hasn't run a state like Romney, Huckabee, or Richardson, or a major city like Guiliani. One would have to go a long way back to find someone who was elected president with such flimsy experience.

Posted by: tc on November 20, 2007 02:01 PM
10. tc, she was the co-president when B Clinton was in office--he said so. (2 for 1!) Remember? "-)

Posted by: Michele on November 20, 2007 04:44 PM
11. She is unscrupulous candidate (Clintonian took several pages of their playbood from Nixonian). No doubt she and her campaign will say anything to get elected even if the truth gets in the way. If she were elected, Bill will not have nearly as much say in her administration as she had in his. Also, there is alot more trepidation in the world than during the Clinton regime in the 90's.

However, she will have a difficult time responding to Pres. Bush's comment that called her the candidate with the most public exposure experience. If she acknowledges Bush's comments, her opposition will jump all over it, like she will really keep Bush's foreign policies intact. Doubtful if there will be any reference to that comment - that one is too difficult to spin.

Posted by: KS on November 20, 2007 08:44 PM
12. She is an unscrupulous candidate (Clintonian took several pages of their playbook from Nixonian). No doubt she and her campaign will say anything to get elected even if the truth gets in the way. If she were elected, Bill will not have nearly as much say in her administration as she had in his. Also, there is alot more trepidation in the world than during the Clinton regime in the 90's.

However, she will have a difficult time responding to Pres. Bush's comment that called her the candidate with the most public exposure experience. If she acknowledges Bush's comments, her opposition will jump all over it, like she will really keep Bush's foreign policies intact. Doubtful if there will be any reference to that comment - that one is too difficult to spin.

Posted by: KS on November 20, 2007 08:44 PM
13. Michelle,
If she was president for 8 years, then she is ineligible per the Constitution to run again.

Posted by: tc on November 21, 2007 07:25 AM
14. Eric:

I think the commercial is great!

I would like to see a follow on segment where she donates the furniture she removed from the White House to some deserving family.

Ken
Dallas

Posted by: Ken on November 21, 2007 09:08 AM
15. What was that number again?

Posted by: George on November 21, 2007 04:48 PM
16. Slade lost.

Posted by: DJ on November 23, 2007 10:16 PM
17. Very interesting... as always! Cheers from -Switzerland-.

Posted by: Dog training on November 25, 2007 08:51 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?