In discussions on a recent NewsGang podcast, I held out that the Clinton campaign was not playing as 'negative' as some of the other NewsGanglings were proposing and that the appropriate Obama response is "strength through statesmanship". While I'm holding my ground on my second statement, the Clinton justification of her staff's comments and continued attacks by surrogates (text and audio) after Power's resignation have convinced me that Steve and the Ganglings are more on target than I am in recognizing negativity.
But what I'm really missing and am therefore amazed by is how calling someone "a monster" is a "hit below the belt".
Childish maybe, but get a grip. I was called worse in 4th grade. If she can't take that what happens when someone calls her partisan
or calculating.
The Clinton crowd wants to hold Obama and his team to a higher standard than their own. I say "Why not?". It doesn't seem like a particularly high a hurdle. And pointing out their differences from the high ground is a sign of Obama's integrity, not weakness.
And did I miss it or did the Clinton crowd forget to deny that she's a monster?