Video: Hillary attack ad attacks … Eliot Spitzer?

posted at 1:50 pm on May 12, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

The Weasel Zippers wonder whether we really want the competence level Hillary Clinton brings to the 3 AM phone calls. Take a look at the ad that appears at the 7-second mark of this new campaign commercial, with the headline “Obama attacks Clinton’s gas tax plan”:

What newspaper clipping did Team Hillary use for this headline? It’s not anything to do with gas taxes, Barack Obama, or even Hillary Clinton:

If one looks closely at the first and third columns, one can easily make out “Troopergate” in the text. The story appears lifted from this Daily News article from December, in which the former governor had stonewalled on whether he had hired a private attorney to defend himself against any potential criminal charges for his use of state troopers to spy on political opponents. That story got rendered moot when Eliot resigned during a sex scandal involving prostitution a few months later.

It’s worth noting that Spitzer had supported Hillary Clinton before his exit.

Why would the campaign’s ad company go out of their way to use this clipping? It looks like a deliberate attempt to sabotage the ad, making Hillary and her entire team look like a bunch of incompetents. No one in their right mind would have added a reminder of Spitzer deliberately, and it’s almost impossible for this to have happened accidentally. It looks like Hillary’s own team wants her out of Obama’s way sooner than later.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Who checks these clippings anyhow?

Still, though, pretty bad. I think the lady in the pantsuit has sung.

OneGyT on May 12, 2008 at 1:56 PM

By the way, the NY Times now says Obama was born a Muslim. “President Apostate?”

As the son of the Muslim father, Senator Obama was born a Muslim under Muslim law as it is universally understood. It makes no difference that, as Senator Obama has written, his father said he renounced his religion. Likewise, under Muslim law based on the Koran his mother’s Christian background is irrelevant.

Of course, as most Americans understand it, Senator Obama is not a Muslim. He chose to become a Christian, and indeed has written convincingly to explain how he arrived at his choice and how important his Christian faith is to him.

His conversion, however, was a crime in Muslim eyes; it is “irtidad” or “ridda,” usually translated from the Arabic as “apostasy,” but with connotations of rebellion and treason. Indeed, it is the worst of all crimes that a Muslim can commit, worse than murder (which the victim’s family may choose to forgive).

amerpundit on May 12, 2008 at 2:01 PM

Just a simple clerical error. They meant to refer to this Troopergate!

RushBaby on May 12, 2008 at 2:01 PM

At first glance, I would tend to doubt anything Machiavellian here: they probably thought that on YouTube the resolution is low enough that nobody could read the text, so they invented a newspaper article that’s as authentic as the “local residents” who are “spontaneously” interviewed in the video.

Ed Driscoll on May 12, 2008 at 2:02 PM

Hilly knows that the people who would vote for her wouldn’t look or see deeply into this connection. If they were told about it, there would be the same old mantra: mean-spirited attacks from the VRWConspiracy that take things out of context and ‘complicate’ HRC’s message!

Christine on May 12, 2008 at 2:11 PM

I’m guessing they re-used text from a prior ad, and only changed the headline. But who would have bought an ad attacking Spitzer? Did Sen. Clinton hire a Republican firm to make this ad?

daryl_herbert on May 12, 2008 at 2:15 PM

Most of Hillary’s constituency can’t read anyway, so what’s the harm?

Cicero43 on May 12, 2008 at 2:40 PM

Ah! More of that respecting the electorate’s intelligence that is the hallmark of the Clinton campaign. It’s not like these people are unfamiliar with the idea of using state troopers to do illegal things for governors! I guess they just thought we are too damned stupid to read!

highhopes on May 12, 2008 at 2:45 PM

Well, we all know Hillary had something to the Spitzer thing. She all but admitted a hand in this video previously on HotAir.

Wineaholic on May 12, 2008 at 2:56 PM

Morrissey, are you high? Who the hell can even read that type on a screen? It’s barely legible even after you enlarged it. What a waste of bandwidth…who’s approving this content? Where’s the boss???

DanKenton on May 12, 2008 at 4:02 PM

I would have her doing shot and beers in front of a gas pump. That’s the Hillary I’ve learned to love.

“She’s a cold hearted woman, in political partnership with a two-timin’ man”.

Hening on May 12, 2008 at 4:28 PM

You are reading WAY too much into this, much less some conspiratorial effort to undercut Hillary with Lorem Ipset-esque copy that is unreadable and about a “-gate” that no one remembers anyway.

wordwarp on May 12, 2008 at 4:58 PM

Who checks these clippings anyhow?

Still, though, pretty bad. I think the lady in the pantsuit has sung.

OneGyT on May 12, 2008 at 1:56 PM

They thought the same thing.

My take: The ad company was just lazy. The thought. People look at bold text and people look at vid clips. No one reads the fine print. I’m surprized they didn’t just use that Latin text generator thing.

- The Cat

MirCat on May 12, 2008 at 8:12 PM