Clinton back on attack

Washington Post:

Aides to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) accused Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) yesterday of plagiarizing portions of a recent speech and continued to question his vows to reform the campaign finance system as Clinton sought to drive home the idea that her Democratic rival's presidential bid is built on style more than substance.

The two-pronged attack came as Clinton attempts to slow Obama's momentum in today's contests in Wisconsin, which neighbors his home state of Illinois, and in Hawaii, where he was born.

The race in Wisconsin, where Clinton dug in over the weekend in an effort to break a string of eight straight primary and caucus defeats, has turned increasingly negative. Just days ago, Clinton aides accused Obama of breaking his pledge to accept public financing in place of private donations during the general election. Obama's aides say he did not make a firm commitment to accept public financing if he won the nomination.

Yesterday, key Clinton supporters accused Obama of "lifting" a passage of the rousing speech he delivered to a party gathering in Milwaukee on Saturday night from Massachusetts Gov. Deval L. Patrick, a longtime friend and supporter. Side-by-side YouTube videos distributed to reporters by the Clinton campaign show Obama repeating, almost verbatim, lines from a speech Patrick gave two years earlier.

"The point we're making overall is that Senator Obama's record as a senator and as a public official is thin," said Howard Wolfson, a senior Clinton adviser. "If you're asking an electorate to judge you on your promises and you break them, and on your rhetoric and you lift it, there are fundamental problems with your campaign."

Answering a reporter's question in Niles, Ohio, Obama said he does not think using Patrick's words was "too big a deal."

"Well, look, I was on the stump. He had suggested we use these lines. I thought they were good lines," Obama said when asked why he did not credit Patrick. "I'm sure I should have. Didn't this time."

...

Wolfson has a good point and it is one that the Clinton campaign needs to bring more focus to, i.e. his thin record. This is a much better way to raise the experience issue, because it puts Obama on the defensive in a way that he can't explain by just saying the word "change." It focuses on his accomplishments or lack there of and the shallowness of the soaring rhetoric.

The next time he starts talking about change, they might also look at the letter John McCain sent him on his failure to follow through on ethics reform legislation that McCain thought he was working on with him. It was a missed opportunity for change and a missed opportunity for accomplishment. Clinton has a harder time making this case than McCain because it was party leaders who talked Obama out of the deal.