He’s up and awaaay…

Posted: Monday, June 25, 2007 11:53 AM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: Democrats

From NBC’s Domenico Montanaro

Obama is up in Iowa this week with the first TV ads of his campaign, the AP reports. They are biographical and try to highlight his sense of social justice and bill him as a consensus builder.

The first ad focuses on Obama’s decision to turn down lucrative offers from law firms after graduating from Harvard Law. Instead, he moved to Chicago to work as a civil rights attorney. The second focuses on his work in the Illinois state Senate. Both ads feature Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe and Republican Illinois state Sen. Kirk Dillard.

"Senator Obama worked on some of the deepest issues we had and was successful in a bipartisan way," Dillard says in the second ad.

"It was inspiring, absolutely inspiring to see someone as brilliant as Barack Obama, as successful, someone who could have written his ticket on Wall Street, take all of the talent and all of the learning and decide to devote it to the community and to make people's lives better," Tribe says in the commercial.

Obama has been polling near the top of the field in Iowa along with Clinton and Edwards. The ads are the latest push by the Obama camp to try to separate him from the pack. The ads follow a mass mailing which included a DVD biography of the senator.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

In contrast Cheney and Rumsfeld took their talents to large multinational defense contractors and used what they learned to bankrupt our country and to make people's lives shorter.

Russell in Maryland (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 12:18 PM)

Typical liberal response Russell. I can see 20 years down the road, something happens and President Bush will be blamed. What's the matter Russell, ashamed you didn't earn your share of the ameerican pie? Obama decided to pass on the almighty dollar and try to do work that was good for some people while John Edwards turned into an ambulance chaser and made his money the onld fashioned way: He got greedy with the damages sought in court.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 12:29 PM)

Senator Obama has consistently voted to FUND the war and has OPPOSED an immediate withdrawal of American troops
(his last "no" vote came with the vote outcome already decided)

Obama endorsed the Persian Gulf War of 1991

terry seattle wa (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 12:35 PM)

I've been dubious of Mr. Obama but this is moving me in his direction. (found in Public Citizen's web site).

Eleven senators, led by Senators Russ Feingold (D.-Wisc.) and Barack Obama (D.-Ill.), and all of the freshman Senate Democrats — Senators Brown, Cardin, Casey, Klobuchar, McCaskill, Tester, Webb and Whitehouse — as well as Sen. Bernie Sanders (I.- Vt.), sent a letter to leadership asking them to preserve the strong medicine for corrupt government in S.1, the Senate's landmark lobbying and ethics reform bill. The bill is on its way to conference.

The senators called on the leaders to maintain support in conference for all of the significant achievements of the bill, including:

A strong gift ban;
Restrictions on corporate jet flights;
Disclosure of bundling by lobbyists;
The revolving door language that is in the Senate's version of the bill;
Limits on privately funded travel;
Restrictions on lavish convention parties; and
Improvements in legislative transparency.

Sometime back the Senate soundly defeated an effort to move the minimum time between leaving the Senate and working for a lobbyist from 1 year to 3 years. The senators were frank in saying that after they leave office what they decide to do is up to them. I do not know how Clinton, Obama, McCain or other current Senate office holders who are running for President stood in that discussion and can find no details on it. I also do not know if the revolving door language in the current bill uses the 3 year term. (I'm having trouble with getting the senate bill site to display.)

However, I do not see Clinton's name associated with this and that means a lot to me.

Independent, Texas (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 12:46 PM)

If you were the parents of a 5 year old girl who watched in horror as a baby pool drain sucked out her innards, would you begrudge John Edwards for going after the drain manufacturer? Would you want money from that drain manufacturer who didn't include a requirement for screws to keep from dislodging endagering and possibly killing kids? No, I didn't think so. And I am certain the parents and the child would give up their millions won in the lawsuit if she could have her intestines back. John Edwards would, too.

Jo Ann Crouch, Fairfield, IA (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 12:55 PM)

Jerry, you actually had a kind word for a Democrat... that must be the sign that Obama is the right choice. A candidate who has some crossover appeal. I still wish Mark Warner would get in. He's one of the most popular governors ever in this particular red state (maybe the highest approval ratings since Thomas Jefferson).

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 12:59 PM)

Jerry said, "I can see 20 years down the road, something happens and President Bush will be blamed." Is this anything like how kool aide drinkers, 10 years after Clinton, can still somehow blame that President as the prime cause of all evil everywhere? You are correct in that Presidents who are no longer in office have seriously diminished power to affect events. But I would submit that the razor cuts both directions and maybe you should stop blaming Clinton for the failings of Bush.

John Doe, The Peanut Gallery (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 1:19 PM)

Thank you jerry for the compliment! I am proud to be called a liberal! Also I have my share of the American pie but I wouldn't feel ashamed if I didn't. I don't judge my worth worth based on money -- do you? And if you read closely (or even cursorily) what I wrote you would see that I was not judging Cheney and Rumsfeld because they made a lot of money but rather based on the effect on the country and other people's lives.

Russell in Maryland (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 1:45 PM)

the american pie is full of maggots, you don't earn a piece of the pie anymore, you are either born with it or you find a way to steal it from someone else, all hard work will get you is a bad back

MK,MO (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 2:01 PM)

I think anybody who thinks that Cheney and Rumsfeld had any effect on the country has way too much time on their hands. As hard to believe Independent, I do support that bill you mentioned and even more so, the people that are endorsing it, about time the liberals got smart, their 14% approval rating notwithstanding. face it Indy, Hillary would NEVER be involved with anything that involves honesty. Clinton did more damage to this country then Bush ever could of. he is the main reason we have this debate today. If he had been paying as much attention to the problems with Bin laden as he did Monica, we wouldn't be in this today. There is just too much audio of him saying he had Bin laden in his cross hairs and he was concerned about the damage to his legacy, which Monica already brought him down in that regards. And as for me praising a liberal, when they do something right, like the bill mentioned above, then they will receive my high five. But people like Russell, who add to the reasons why liberals cannot run goverment with some of his incredibly stupid words, i guess every nut does have 2 sides.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 2:02 PM)

Jo Ann - Jerry and his pals will never grasp that not all lawyers who make money do so out of greed. They also miss out on the fact that juries - groups of men and women made up of average Americans - are the ones who award the high damages.

My aunt was the victor in a multi-million dollar lawsuit. A county snowplow pulled out in front of her on the highway. She was in a coma for months, spent over a year in various rehabilitation centers learning to walk, talk and eat again, followed by several years of occupational and physical therapy. She was unable to care for her two sons, and unable to have any more children because of her disabilities. She could not talk normally, nor could she walk normally. Some people begrudged her the damages she was awarded. But what dollar value do you put on your ability to walk and talk? How much is missing out on years of your children's lives worth? What's the price tag on having your entire life ripped apart and having to build it up almost from scratch? Whatever the jury gave her, it was not enough.

Carrie, NW Iowa (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 2:13 PM)

So Clinton didn't pay enough attention to Bin Laden because he was distracted by Monica? Who harped on Monica and thereby distracted the President from the important business of government again? And I've stopped justifying the "Clinton had Bin Laden in his cross hairs" argumnet a long time ago. If you believe that, you're just another part line shock troop who is too myopic to see past your hatred of your fellow countrymen to realize the truth.

John Doe, The Peanut Gallery (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 2:13 PM)

Paul, I liked Mark Warner. I was crushed when he quit the race. You know what I liked him about him? I could listen to him without feeling my blood pressure go up. He took the emotion out every issue, and I mean that in a good way. He would discuss the facts as they are known and then suggest practical solutions. I'd like to see him join the new administration in '09. He's one of those competent people who could help us fix what the Bush administration has broken.

Amy B Portland, ME (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 2:16 PM)

Jerry, here are some more stupid words to get you off. I am also a proud card carrying member of the ACLU who believes I am more of a patriot for supporting the constitution and the rule of law than any of the faux patriots who think patriotism comes out of the barrel of a gun and dictatorial rule.

Russell in Maryland (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 2:21 PM)

jerry you are Nuts on ALL sides. PLease SHUT UP!

H P Boston (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 2:32 PM)

People, people...too many BIG words for jerry to understand. He is on KOOL-AID break.

H P Boston (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 2:35 PM)

Jerry, you're a fool and don't even know it.

F StLouis (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 2:35 PM)

The American Communist Lawyers Union? You're reaching Russell. Dictatorial rule? That is stretching the Liberal line a little too far left. Still waiting for proof on that one. I'm sure when the Islamofacists takeover the world and the ACLU stands in the street protesting Islamic law being forced on us and as they are mowed down by machine gun fire,I'm sure they will be thinking about the freedoms we had and the fight to preserve them.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 2:41 PM)

"I think anybody who thinks that Cheney and Rumsfeld had any effect on the country has way too much time on their hands."

Those are "incredibly stupid words", predictably spoken by one of the dwindling masses who still support bush and them. Do these people not understand what Cheney and Rumsfeld have done, and what Cheney continues to do everyday, or is it acceptable to them? Everyday in these posts, at least one person continues to spout the same tired mantra, while mostly ignoring the subject matter of the conversation. What Cheney does today is not important, what Clinton did ten years ago is important. Same old same old, ad nauseum. Ignorance or complicity, tolerance or oblivion, the result is the same. Karl Rove calls it "perception management". Those who still adhere to critical thinking call it what it really is - propaganda.

I agree with others on this and other threads who have stated that Cheney has no intention of voluntarily relinquishing power. Just how far he will go remains to be seen. Call me paranoid if you want, but we are seeing things from Cheney of which most people would never have dreamed.

Scott in South Texas (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 2:55 PM)

Hmmm, that biographical approach, with an emphasis on selflessness and bipartisanship, could be effective. Not that his campaign would care what I think, lol, but they're making a good move. The thing Obama needs to overcome is his lacking experience. We've had enough incompetence - he has to show he's ready to run the executive branch well. He needs to be seen talking with more serious people, some of whom may translate into political appointments. The disclosure of his advice-getting from Colin Powell is exactly the kind of thing his campaign ought to be doing.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 3:35 PM)

Jerry, after 9/11 one of President Bushes main objectives was to get Bin Laden. Why is Bin Laden still on the loose and what happened to Bushes determination to get him?

Charles, Evanston IL (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 3:56 PM)

Paul - It's kind of tough to overcome a lack of experience, given that the only legitimate way to do so is to get more experience. I hardly think getting advice from Colin Powell increases his level of competence or experience for the presidency.

Carrie, NW Iowa (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 3:57 PM)

Reading what Jerry has been spewing today, I am reminded of the end of the movie, The American President. That script writer said it better than I could:
"America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You've got to want it bad, because it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say, "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil who is standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. You want to claim this land as the 'land of the free'? Then the symbol of your country cannot just be a flag. The symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Now show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then you can stand up and sing about the 'land of the free.'"

Carrie, NW Iowa (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 4:03 PM)

I don't know, Carrie. Powell was CJCS and SecState. And while his credibility took a hit with the UN presentation on Iraq, he seems to have come out of it alright because he more or less acknowledged what few others in this administration would - that what they did bothered his conscience. My guess is he's still widely respected by independents. I think its a good name for Obama to be throwing around, and the fact that he's a Republican helps, too. Remember, one of the many Bush failings is only seeking advice from people who already think as you do. Here, Obama reached out and accepted an offer from the other party. I think voters are hungry for more of that.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 4:12 PM)

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 2:02 PM)

Actually Jerry, it doesn't surprise me that you would support this bill. Remember, you and I totally agree on the Immigration issue.

If I could just convince you to avoid using slurs and inflammatory statements, you might find that others on this blog would treat your comments with greater consideration and would respond with reasoned feedback as well even if they disagree with you.

We've had this discussion before so I figure that since you're still flinging the language ("Hillary would NEVER be involved with anything that involves honesty") you must enjoy the flaming.

BTW - since I'm not and never professed to being a Clinton supporter, I'm not certain why you included that mini-rant in your response. I included her name on the original posting as a point of information - I don't know where she stands on this issue. Period.

We've already, in other threads, discussed your misapprehension of Mr. Clinton's pursuit of Bin Ladin but you still throw out these bits of misinformation. Sigh.

Independent, Texas (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 4:35 PM)

This endorsement from his Harvard law professor, Lawrence Tribe, one of the nation’s leading constitutional law scholars, is impressive. I keep this quote of Tribe on Obama on my bulletin board: “He was all around the most amazing student that I can remember having in 37 years and thousands of students. ... When I look at my kids and grandkids and ask what makes me hopeful about the future — one thing is Barack Obama.”

Emilie, Seattle, WA (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 5:24 PM)

The republicant party is so scared of Obama that they are sending e-mails pretending that they are personal, saying how he is Muslim and is planning on taking over the country for Muslims and that he has been hiding that he is a trained terrorist.

Oooo...I am so scared. Obama the boogy man.

Only republicants scare me anymore. Hate, hate, smear and spin, the republicant way.

Gigi, Avalon, California (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 8:20 PM)

This is sounding more and more like a Michael Moore Movie LOL. Reading H P is like reading a comic book sometimes, he can talk all he wants to about what a big bad girl Hillary is and how she is going to teach us all the way home. Problem is, Hillary doesn't know where home is. Indy, as far as my tough talk, I'm no different then any liberal, having listened to all the crap they talk about President Bush and Vice President Cheney, coming out with more and more silliness every day. Air America comes out with all the Michael Moore silliness everyday, no wonder they are bankrupt in more ways then one. And none of it worth being an impeachable offence. You remember the liberals already had a president who LIED to a grand jury and all he got was a slap on the wrist, compared to Scooter Libby who lied and got a prison term. Now you people want to elect his wife, all the crap she has pulled over the past few years. So, unless you have undeniable proof and was in the room when all this happened and can prove it in a court of law, i suggest you go up another avenue. I can go after the Clintons as much as you can go after the current president and more. The only difference between the Clinton's is one is a man(supposedly) and one is a woman (supposedly). Everything else, they follow the same game plan. Remember, Clintons problems were proved in a court of law, let's see if the president's and vice president's problems can get there the same way.

jerry/corpus christi texas (Sent Monday, June 25, 2007 9:17 PM)

Paul - Again, how does that solve the problem of Obama's lack of experience? It doesn't. He can associate with whomever he chooses, but it doesn't change the fact that he is still a first-term Senator who is dealing with issues such as national security for the first time. A lot of people wondered if Bush was experienced enough, and they figured it would be okay because he would surround himself with daddy's pals. Look how well that has turned out.

Carrie, NW Iowa (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 9:01 AM)

Jerry is just a forerunner. This is what you can expect to see from new groups of swiftboaters who will go after anybody who does not worship the death and destruction put forth by the extreme right.

WDRussell (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 9:10 AM)

jerry you are babbling...but I do like it that a court of law is where the bush and dick should be.
You do know that you said that.
I am a SHE jerry, and thanks for the comic comment, I do try to laugh so that I do not go STARK RAVING MAD
when people like you spew garbage.

H P Boston (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 9:23 AM)

Carrie, the presidency is an executive position. One of the big keys to any presidency is the people he or she brings in to work lower though still key positions. Any president's inexperience can be tempered by the experience of those brought in, particulary the chief of staff and cabinet level officials. Obama as a Washington newcomer would be wise to demonstrate connections to a wide range of expertise, which would indicate his ability to bring in some of these individuals. Remember how badly Bill Clinton floundered for about 18 months, before replacing his first chief of staff with Leon Panetta? Panetta not only did a lot to organize and focus Clinton, he also helped compensate for Clinton's inexperience with inner-Beltway workings. Additionally Obama needs to show an ability to seek counsel from those who have been there, done that. I'd rather have him talking with Powell about foreign affairs than the Saudi ambassador, who H.W. Bush set up as W's global tutor in the late 1990s.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 9:27 AM)

Jerry - there you go - the old "Clinton did it too" boo hoo defense.

You are way too smart for that drivel. I KNOW that you can mount a better position.

Again - If you stop attacking the people who hold the position and start addressing the position directly, you will make better use of your argument. That is, if the purpose of your argument is to persuade others to your point of view.

If the purpose of your argument is to generate hostility, you are succeeding.

Dammit - I WANT for you, because I know you are capable of it, to provide reasoned support for your position. I found that when you are discussing the immigration issue. Otherwise, this message board is too incestuous.

One of these days you are going to realize that I am being very supportive of you as I am of anyone who shows there is the skill possibility of rational discourse.

Just for one week - try what I've suggested and see if you don't get good feedback. By that I mean good discussion. We and others may not ever agree with your positions but I guarandamtee you we will respect it if presented well.

You reap what you sow.

Independent, Texas (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 9:32 AM)

Carrie NW Iowa (9:01 6/26) My concern over Mr. Obama has always been the seasoning needed by multiple terms and longer time in service.

That being said, not every candidate will be experienced in every area of concern. Therefore, staffing and relying on others who are experienced in those areas is necessary and the way to address the "holes" in the background.

The key is to examine who that candidate is using in this way not the fact that s/he is using those sources.

I still have grave reservations about Obama. '

1) Although I love the words he uses, there appears to be a certain naivete that concerns me and

2) (this is where his experience really comes into play for me) I don't think he has any idea how tough the role of policy bully pulpit is. He is a collaborator. A very good thing in a Senator. He needs to be a salesman and persuader as a President. That is where I've not seen relevant experience that would make me want to support him.

Independent, Texas (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 9:40 AM)

Independent, good post. I am starting to see signs Obama can be persuasive. I'm also seeing indicators of him growing as a candidate, which is important from the perspective that I'm looking for individuals who can grow to meet the challenge at hand. I'm definitely leaning his way at present, given who's in the race from both parties.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 11:06 AM)

Lighter note: every time I come to this item to check for more of the blogger's sparkling comments, I'm struck by the pictures on the item.

Don't you think that McCain looks like a cabbage patch doll? Don't you think that Romney really really looks like Fred Willard?

Independent, Texas (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 1:43 PM)

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 11:06 AM)

Thanks Paul. I'm not an Obama supporter yet. Another thing that concerns me isn't his fault. His campaign and his supporters tend to be portraying him with a halo. That just leads to misery. Once determined to be an angel, any misstep becomes magnified than others who are presented with less focus on "lack of sin".

Although he does "speak good words", the real focus of his campaign, seems to me, to be - he's a good guy.

oh boy, the RNC will tear him to shreds.

Independent, Texas (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 1:47 PM)

The halo thing is a valid point. Clinton has already used it against him. I've noted a couple times here that his campaign shouldn't get hung up on being a "different" kind of candidate all the time. When in a fight, you have to fight. Which brings me to your second point about the RNC tearing up Obama to shreds. Remember before they get to him, he would have to have survived the knock down, drag out with Clinton. If he can do that, I suspect he'll be alright for the general election. The negative stuff is coming against whoever the Democrats nominate. It all comes down to 1) how credible the negative attacks sound and 2) how energized the Republicans will be. In both cases, the Democrats advantage from having Obama rather than Clinton as the nominee. Just my two cents. Of course that's assuming there isn't too much in Obama's past, just waiting to be uncovered by some journalist or campaign op researcher.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 2:08 PM)

Paul - To some extent, it also takes experience to know with whom to surround yourself. I know several people who voted for Bush in 2000 because he had Dick on the ticket. Again, how well has that worked for him?

I disagree that any inexperience at the executive level can be tempered by surrounding yourself with intelligent, experienced subordinates. Collin Powell is intelligent and experienced, but did Bush listen to him? No. I think you oversimplify the issue.

Carrie, NW Iowa (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 2:12 PM)

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 2:08 PM)

I so agree. As I mentioned many times before, Sen Clinton may have all the credentials and, in fact, I think she would be a very able administrator. However, I have grave concerns about her winning the general election if she is given the D-nomination.

The RNC machine will just be unbearable and I don't even want to go through that. It won't stop if she is elected, either. I shudder to think all the awful behavior by her opponents in Congress and in the so-called media that would be in our future.

Carrie, NW Iowa (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 2:12 PM)

You addressed your post to Paul so please forgive me for butting in. I do agree with your position that, in effect, you "have to know what you don't know" and how to find the right people that "do know".

I just wanted to say that "Dick" has worked beautifully for Bush. If not for Mr. Cheney, Bush would not have been able to accomplish any of the dismantling of the constitution that evidently is required by his definition of the Unitary Executive. Colin Powell has said that his boss was Cheney - did you hear him in his 60 minutes interview say that? I don't think that Cheney ever allowed Mr. Powell to talk directly and in private with Mr. Bush. (No evidence to offer, just what I've deduced.) Mr. Bush listens to no one but Cheney.

Independent, Texas (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 2:43 PM)

Carrie, I'm not even sure what the lines of argument are here. Are you saying because Bush didn't listen to Powell before invading Iraq that Obama shouldn't get advice from the man now? Yes, you can say I am oversimplifying the issue. But who doesn't oversimplify every issue in their short messages on this board? I don't mean to imply Obama is perfect because he talked with Powell, but you have a candidate with no foreign policy experience drawing advice from a former secretary of state, and reaching across the aisle to do it - how is that not a good thing? Its really no different than the Warren Buffet name being dropped by the Clinton campaign. That's a good move by her... or are you bothered by that one?

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 3:11 PM)

Paul - The point I was making about Powell is that simply surrounding yourself with intelligent and experienced people is no guarantee that it will improve your administration. You have to know who to listen to and when to listen to them. And that is something that comes with experience.

Carrie, NW Iowa (Sent Tuesday, June 26, 2007 3:36 PM)

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=234651