By Josh Drobnyk
The Democratic presidential campaign ad war has seen more than $8.4 million pumped into Pennsylvania by the two candidates – more than $3.1 million this week alone.
But it has hardly been a fight. Neither candidate has mentioned the other once in the flood of television commercials airing in the state. The bickering between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama has been mostly on the stump and among staffers and surrogates manning the phones on regular conference calls with reporters.
That could be about to change. The campaigns have hit one another over the radio airwaves in the last day. Clinton’s campaign started the jabbing with a 60-second spot that calls out Obama for playing up not taking money from oil companies.
“No candidate does, they can’t,” the announcer says.
The ad goes on to blast Obama for voting for a 2005 energy bill that the announcer says was called a “piñata of perks and the best energy bill corporations could buy.”
Obama hit back today with a radio ad of its own that accuses Clinton of “misleading negative ads” at a time the economy is in shambles, families are struggling and gas prices are rising.
“Here's the truth: While she's played political games, it's Barack Obama who's taken on the oil companies, demanding higher gas mileage standards and a larger investment in alternative energy.”
And the zinger: “The Federal Election Commission reports that Clinton's taken more from Big Oil and other PACs and lobbyists than any other candidate, Democrat or Republican.”
With less than two weeks to go before Pennsylvania’s April 22 primary and polls showing a tightening race, the gloves are starting to come off.
• 
• 
• 
Comments
“The Federal Election Commission reports that Clinton's taken more from Big Oil and other PACs and lobbyists than any other candidate, Democrat or Republican.”
that's just blatantly false, Hillary ranks below 3 republicans and just above Obama http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp?Ind=E01
that's what I'd call a “misleading negative ad”
Posted by: sara | April 10, 2008 3:53 PM
It's a blatant lie, Sara, and the voters of Pennsylvania won't be swung by it. Obama is spending $5 million of his ill-gotten gains to deliver a "knockout" blow in Pa. If Hillary wins then he'll have a lot harder of a time keeping up that pace.
Posted by: Jeff | April 10, 2008 4:25 PM
The tough part is the honesty. Bill Clinton depended on Rev. Wright the day the Star report came out about the blue dress, but we all remember Whitewater, pork futures, Travelgate, stealing furniture from the White House when they left, lying under oath, the impeachment, lying to the public about Lewinski... it just keeps coming. Now it's lies about her helping with the Irish peace process, trips to Africa and then Bosnia. Where does it stop with these people? Do they think Americans are dumb?
Clinton says sniperfire:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FfWIjv13XX0
http://youtube.com/watch?v=x_Z5_LAfQ9Y
Chelsea agrees:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwIsjd3KPPo&feature=related
Posted by: johngotts | April 10, 2008 4:49 PM
Sara/Jeff....think again? Its always best to be well informed.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp?Ind=K02
Posted by: Marck | April 10, 2008 5:15 PM
Sara/Jeff....think again - Its always best to be well informed.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp?Ind=K02
Posted by: Marck | April 10, 2008 5:15 PM
Sara/Jeff....think again - Its always best to be well informed. http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp?Ind=K02
Hillary has taken the most money for PAC and Lobbyists and Oil
Posted by: Mark | April 10, 2008 5:17 PM
The number you link to is for _just_ the oil and gas industries - which is to say, including ordinary employees who happen to work for those companies.
If you do your research, you'll see that Clinton takes lots of money from industry Political Action Committees (PACs) and industry lobbyists, while Obama does not take any.
The Obama campaign is powered largely by individuals (i.e.) the American people, and that's who he's accountable to. Clinton, on the other hand, has a lot of industry favors to repay.
Posted by: fromnj | April 10, 2008 5:23 PM
"that's just blatantly false, Hillary ranks below 3 republicans and just"
Before starting any hatred (like your big idol) it would make sense to read what was written in the article. The article says clearly
"that Clinton's taken more from Big Oil and other PACs and lobbyists"
it's about "the Clinton's" (and not just about the former first lady!) so your link doesn't prove the article is wrong ...
Posted by: Andrew | April 10, 2008 5:28 PM
Mark,
It is good to be well informed, and in that vein, I'd like to point out that Hillary has not taken the most money from PACs, only 1% of her funds http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.asp?id=N00000019&cycle=2008
That includes PACs like Emily's List. Also, as you can see from my earlier link, she has not taken more money from Oil than "any other candidate." Yes, she has taken more from lobbyists -- or at least, as Obama supporters like to point out -- from people who work for lobbying firms. But that is not what the radio ad says, it says "Clinton's taken more from Big Oil and other PACs and lobbyists than any other candidate" which is false.
Posted by: sara | April 10, 2008 5:44 PM
Mark and Jersey girl, I'm sorry but you guys are just wrong. Obama has accepted money from executives in those oil companies not just rank and file workers. Who do you think Hillary is taking her oil money from? It's always executives, their wives and oil/gas lawyers. You DO realize that it's been illegal for a corporation to donate directly to a presidential campaign since 1907, right? It's always best to be well-informed.
Posted by: Jeff | April 10, 2008 6:39 PM
written above;
regarding the long history of clinton dishonesty........
"do they (the clintons) think we are stupid ?"
the answer is YES - the clintons think the voting public IS stupid - they believe we have no long-term memories and those few who do will be swayed purely by pandering promises that cannot possibly be kept (such as HIL-LIAR-Y's health care plan) or that you will believe their other great lies (that the ends justifies the means OR that you should vote for her just because she is a woman)
note how gullible sara and jeff are for example
if sara and jeff get their way, it will be hillary vs. mccain and we know how hillary will campaign (as shown vs. obama) - that will mean that there will be 100% certainty that no matter who wins the presidency, 1/2 or the United States will hate the winner AND that we will continue to visit the partisanship of the 1990's over and over and over (do you honestly think bill the sexually harrassing braggart will behave himself? - and hillary has deliberately NOT defined her potential roles for bill if she were to win)
furthermore if hillary manages to win, the unsettled issue of the 90's will haunt us even more while we have a leader who knows NOTHING about healthcare and NOTHING about military operations
anyone with any sense would know that hillary cannot keep any of her promises about healthcare and if she believes in her own plan, she would have to be an idiot (BUT SHE ISN'T AN IDIOT - SHE KNOWS IT IS A CROCK - SHE IS COUNTING ON PENNSYLVANIANS BEING TOO STUPID TO KNOW BETTER)
anyone with any sense AT ALL knows that hillary's bosnia/sniper fire remarks reveal not only a complete lack of character but also an amazing lack of competence about all things military
yet the Clintons are counting on those who are stupid enough to forget all of the above (and the writer above left out the pardons of clinton supporters who were criminals - which was truly despicable) and vote for hil-LIAR-y based on stupid ideas such as gender alone (like elton john, rosanne, rosie, geraldine ferrarro etc.) apparently because they think woman are vulnerable to such sexist arguments or altogether vulnerable to nonsensical promises due to their gullibility
(are they right ? I don't think so but Hil-LIAR-y does - I would vote for a competent female for president - and I am smart enough to know hillary isn't a competent candidate - she just runs a campaign staffed by very good liars - like herself - that think we are too stupid to notice)
if you love your country, there is NO good reason to vote for Hil-LIAR-y - NONE
the clinton plan is simple - you try to win a popularity contest in about 12 key states by winning some opinion poll in those places on election day - to win this contest, they will do anything and are counting on us being too stupid to remember important things, too selfishly stupid to put our country ahead of our individual selfish needs (or gender-based biases), too stupid to know that the clintons always take credit for that which they did not do and deny blame that which they clearly deserve to be blamed
their plan is to hope for a 51% or more percentage of voters being STUPID on April 22nd in Pennsylvania and hope for the same in a dozen other states next November
their goal is their own power for the sake of themselves and their cronies and on those grounds they are much MUCH more like Cheney than Mccain, Bloomberg, Obama, Nader or Ron Paul - the clintons will do whatever it takes to win so the whitehouse can once again be their own personal playground and place it up for sell again
and they are counting on the stupid american voter to give them back their playground
only one question left - ARE PENNSYLVANIANS REALLY AS STUPID AS HIL-LIAR-Y THINKS THEY ARE ???
Posted by: the clinton plan | April 10, 2008 7:21 PM
I LOVE all these opinionators screaming LIES.
www.fec.gov - the OFFICIAL reports for which a candidate goes to jail for lying shows clearly:
Campaign Cycle to Date:
Contributions from ALL Political Committees (other than party):
Hillary - $1,192.338.00
McCain - $701,343.00
Obama - $8190.00
The FACTS never seem to favor Clinton.
Posted by: Earl | April 10, 2008 10:33 PM
The voters in PA should decide for themselves without being swayed by people from other states, and other countries or where ever. This is your primary not a general election.
Posted by: Vivi | April 11, 2008 10:45 AM
Hillary gets caught in another lie, this time on NAFTA
At her recent campaign stop in Pennsylvannia, Hillary insisted that, "I did speak out and oppose NAFTA". I raised a big yellow flag and said, "I don't think this will work."
According to documents released by the National Archives, Hillary in 1993 attended at least 5 meetings that were used to win approval of NAFTA by Congress and these documents detailed her role in promoting NAFTA while she was first lady.
Teamsters union President James P. Hoffa told The Associated Press recently that, "No one who was around in the time of NAFTA remembers her" opposing the agreement.
Posted by: E Nelson | April 15, 2008 2:41 AM