Obama Unpacks Closing One-Two Punch

Clinton, Iowa -- Barack Obama unveiled his closing act in the run-up to the January 3 caucuses and it's a heady mix of soaring promises, inspirational vision and a tightly targeted, one-two attack on his closest rivals, Hillary Clinton and John Edwards.

"This is a defining moment," the Illinois senator told an enthusiastic audience of 300 in the Washington Middle School gym in this eastern Iowa river town late Friday afternoon. "We cannot wait to fix our schools, we cannot wait to stop climate change, we cannot wait to get universal health care... and we cannot wait to bring this war in Iraq to an end."

While Obama sounded his now standard themes of "hope" and "change you can believe in," he simultaneously sharpened his direct attacks on Clinton and Edwards, reverting to a defiant tone bordering on anger.

Obama's newly focused closing argument comes as he, and the other major candidates, are frenetically leap-frogging across the state, making five, six or more stump appearances a day. All three top candidates are running dead heats in most polls.

"The real gamble, the risk, the real risk in this election is playing the same Washington game with the same players and expecting a different result," Obama said in a direct riposte to the Clinton campaign. Two weeks ago Bill Clinton warned a national TV audience that nominating Obama would be a "roll of the dice" on America's future.

Obama continued his thinly veiled assault on Hillary Clinton, sarcastically deriding her repeated campaign claim that her experience trumps his message of change. "We don't need someone to work the system better because the system doesn't work for us," Obama said to a swell of applause. "We don't need someone who says, ' I know how to work the game,' because the game plan isn't working."

Rival John Edwards also came under a withering attack from Obama. "Some people say, 'Well, Obama talks a good game, but he's not angry enough, he's too conciliatory,'" he said, referring to a new stump speech by Edwards claiming the powerful must be confronted and not conciliated. "I don't need lectures about how to bring about change because I've spent my life bringing about change," Obama said in response to his own rhetorical query. "I turned down the big jobs to do community organizing in Chicago. I turned down the big money law firms to be a civil rights lawyer. I took on the lobbyists in the state legislature in Illinois."

"We don't need more heat in Washington," he added. "We need more light."

In these final six days of the Iowa campaign none of the major candidates are mentioning each other by name but are instead speaking in near-transparent code about each other. They are finely honing their messages, straining to starkly underscore their differences with each other. John Edwards has ratcheted up his economic populism with a new stump speech denouncing what he called "the profiteers" dominating America. Clinton has been doubling-down on her experience card. And now Obama has stiffened his tone, claiming to be the only reliable agent of change.

But Obama also took pains to burnish his credentials as a potentially strong commander-in-chief. Former Air Force General Tony McPeak warmed up the crowd saying that Obama possessed all the key qualities of a top military leader: reliability, authenticity, good judgment and intelligence.

"We've been conducing a colossal experiment for the last six years to see if it matters very much if the guy in the White House isn't that smart," McPeak said to whoops of laughter.. "And," he said, "the results are in."

Check out the rest of HuffPost's Iowa coverage.

Comments

[gernger]

When the war started, Hillary was a senator, not the president. She did not send the troops in. She did not vote to go to war, she voted for the war powers act. It's not the same thing. After the war powers act was passed, Sadaam allowed the inspectors back in, and was making other concessions. In other words the war powers act worked. Only a mad man would have gone to war at that point. If Hillary would have been president, at that time, there wouldn't have been a war. It's absurd to think other wise.

[HumeSkeptic]

Just to enjoy seeing eggs on the faces of pundits, I would love to see Edwards win Iowa.

[HumeSkeptic]

Obama Unpacks Closing One-Two Punch
---------

Silly me. I thought we were having an election. This is just a fucking boxing match.

[happytrails]

Will you all stop writing this thing as a clinton/obama contest and start looking at the people who have the credentials you SAY you want? And who are probably MORE electable? And have more experience and credibility? Do DUE DILIGENCE on the other candidates. You may find what you are looking for in a candidate, especially electability. How I hope Iowa and NH put an end to clinton/obama for the rest of this sorry election cycle.

[Madashhellintexas]

January 1, 2008 is World Day of Peace:

Lord, make me an instrument of your peace:
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
Where there is discord, harmony;
Where there is injury, pardon;
Where there is error, truth;
Where there is doubt, faith;
Where there is despair, hope;
Where there is darkness, light;
Where there is sadness, joy.

[RealOpinion08]

Way to close the show Obama..
Hillary doesnt exist if Bill Clinton doesnt. Face it Obama is self made and Hillary aint...Simple
Obama08

[johnnygoodwud]

folks, almost every iowa poll shows that nearly 46% of the people polled prefer a new direction, to 'experience' which get 26%. want to read all about hillary's supposed 'experience', read what chris dodd said today. he hit in on the head, 'she merely sat on the sidelines, and that is NOT experience'.

[boonjava]

This comment list reeks of campaign plants.

May the best man/woman win, and then win the white house.

[xargaw]

From the comments above, it appears there are those that see any analysis of Hillary as a smear. What this campaign needs most of all is analysis and examination of the candidates. Frankly, being "first lady" is not the same thing as being a leader. She may have been an observer, a consultant and a confidant, but "leader" NO. All she seemed to have learned is triangulation, avoidance and poor judgment in order to be viewed tough as a man. Not much different than "W". We need someone with some brains, a broad and respectful world view and good judgement. Obama seems to have this kind of mindset. Edwards has good progressive ideas. Either man trump Hillary's corporate poll driven "can't be trusted" speak. We don't need a President that has to prove they are tough, but a President that will lead and be a partner on the world stage.

[Stevelagain]

Hillary will be the nominee. It matters little that this woman who flunked her first law boards was on all those boards in Ark when her husband was govenor, essentially influence peddling. It matters little that she lied to the nation about her part in Travelgate. Or that her family was selling pardons. Or that she lied to the nation about Monica (we now know she DID know and kicked monica out of the whitehouse before it all went public). It matters little that she violated laws that could send her to prison and did things like hiding the billing records inside the whitehouse so the special prosecutor could not get at them until after the statues of limitations ran out on her crime.

For 16 years the left has stood up the Clintons, covered for their lies and crimes and told us that "character is not important" in a president.

But clearly character is important or the left wouldn't lie for them and cover up their terrible character. and after all that, now it's too late to force Hillary and Bill down off the pedestal they didn't deserve...but that you cemented under their feet. Now you can't tear her down and put someone more honest in her place, as the leader of the democrat party.

Now you are going to have to try and support a corrupt and dishonest Clinton administration for 8 more years and pray they don't do something so horrible that even a democrat congress will impeach.

Iowa doesn't matter, Hillary has this thing wrapped up.

[JohnSmart]

It is clear to me that it is impossible for Clinton to get a fair shake on the huffpost. Bashing clinton is a compulsion for Huffers. Like gambling.
Obama is - in fact - a "roll of the dice". In his short career he has done almost nothing to prove any sort of worthiness for the White house. We simply do not know what kind of man he is. He has not allowed it. He voted present 140 times in the state senate. His much touted "community organizing" is never examined. In the U.S. senate he spent one year - missing 50% of his votes - and dove into the presidential race.
He keeps chanting "change" and says nothing about what that means. He relentlessly goes negative on Clinton and finds a way to dress his attack campaigning as "new" or "fresh". It is neither. Screaming that you are "new" is the oldest campaign tactic there is.
Frankly, it is clinton who has been restrained. Obama's campaign is distant and arrogant. He believes he is the agent of "change" - but can't be bothered to tell us what that "change" is. He has done nothing to end the war. He made a speech as a state senator opposing it. So did about 100 other state senators in America. Are they all qualified to be President? Strangely - he gets a pass on the fact that his stance on the war is now THE SAME as clinton's. He's hardly a liberal.
And the huffpost goes on adoring him. mindlessly.

[nycwahoodem]

who woulda thunk it? HuffPo has somewhere around 6 different pro-Obama stories and 2 negative Hillary stories. Shock and awe I tell you. Shock and awe.

Just declare already and stop being wusses.