Hillary’s latest hit job: The 3 A.M. fantasy phone, now hit on YouTube too.

(Updated with parody video) It appears that Hillary Clinton has revitalized her chance to become the Democratic candidate with the message conveyed in her instantly historic telephone advertisement. Parodies are now a hit on YouTube, but it’s too late to do Obama any good.

No matter that should a crisis occur at 3:00 A.M. it’s quite possible that you wouldn’t see a fully dressed president making a decision over the telephone. Those of us who are old enough remember the hotline established in 1963 between Moscow and Washington (LINK). I think Clinton plays on the belief among some Democrats, especially those our age, that she should be the one talking to Dmitri Medvedev at 3:00 A.M., which after all is 11:00 A.M. in Moscow.

Of course the problem with this is that the more she capitalizes on this in her attempt to defeat Barak Obama, the more ammunition she gives to John McCain if Obama becomes the candidate.

Joe Scarborough asked her about this on his MSNBC morning show and she ignored the question. She didn’t even try to parry the thrust of the question. She ignored it. Instead she gave a canned version of one of her stump speeches instead.

The fact is that for Clinton there’s no good answer to this question because Scarborough and other commentators are right in pointing out that every effective attack Clinton uses against Obama will be used against him by McCain if he becomes the candidate.

McCain will no doubt use Clinton’s recent words about Obama being inexperienced, and a "one speech candidate", against him. Now the best way for Obama to handle Clinton’s attacks is to respond to them as if they are coming from McCain. He can turn the last ditch Clinton attack strategy to his ultimate advantage should he be the national candidate by fine tuning his responses.

The first thing he must deal with is the "one speech" attack. He has to articulate what he explained in his book "The Audacity of Hope" about the extensive thought that went into the speech.

Next he has to deal with that fantasy phone call.

I suggest he start by explaining how he’d handle another 9-11 by assuring that he’d have contingency plans in place for any conceivable crisis.

In an ad I suggest showing him roused from sleep by an urgent knock on his bedroom door, with the next scene showing him in an obviously hastily donned sweat suit , drinking a cup of strong coffee, meeting with top advisors in the White House situation room.

This would be in contrast to the Clinton ad showing her with her make-up on wearing a cream colored pants suit talking on the phone.

Candidates play the fantasy game, and this imaginary scene probably would resonate with voters who are fans of shows like "24". It also has the virtue of probably being close to accurate.


Here’s the CNN video put together from parodies of the ad which have flooded YouTube.


  1. pollchecker

    Hal — interesting note: polls in Texas didn’t swing Hillary’s way until this commercial came out!

  2. old_curmudgeon

    Not that I’m a listener but, wasn’t it Friday or Monday that Limpbaugh ordered his believers in Texas to got to the polls and vote for Clinton? Would the “win” in TX for Clinton indicate that the dittoheads did in fact follow orders? Are the elevated numbers for Clinton artificial? The number of Republican voters seemed pretty low based on party affiliation in past years. Especially after the amount of media coverage that stated that the hate for Clinton in Texas was palpable – not that the media are EVER wrong, oh no…..We’ll find out in PA where the polls are restricted to party of registration, I believe.

  3. Janet

    Hillary didn’t even have security clearance in the White House, so she’s never answered the phone, i.e., she has no experience answering the call.

    My biggest question is why was she all dressed up, with make-up on and perfectly coiffed at 3 AM. Does she stay up all night or would she have to get dressed and made up before she can answer the phone? Maybe that’s why it rang so many times.

  4. pollchecker

    If she has so much experience, how come she voted to give GW authorization to invade Iraq?

  5. Hal Brown


    CNN reports that YouTube has been flooded with takeoffs of the ad,
    to the point where "all Barack Obama has to do is make like he’s
    picking up a phone and his audience snickers."

    A few of the parodies jab at Obama, but most go after Clinton,
    making fun of everything from her pantsuits to her mispronunciation of
    the name of Russia’s new president to the question of where Bill
    Clinton might be at 3 am.

    Others simply mock the ad itself, offering a variety of answers to
    the original punchline — "Who do you want answering the phone?" —
    which range from "Ghostbusters" to "Jack Bauer." And one more elaborate
    takeoff by a comedy group targets the spooky voiceover, reassuring
    viewers, "Don’t be afraid of their narrators anymore."

    Check out their parody video here.

  6. ekaton

    As a resident of PA I should know exactly what is stated in the law but I don’t. What I do know is this. You can walk into the polling location to vote in a primary. The person you sign in with will ask if you are republican or democrat. Depending on your answer you are directed to a ‘republican’ or ‘democrat’ electronic voting machine. I believe one could vote in either primary regardless of party registration. I don’t know if this is legal or not, but its easy to do, at least where I vote in Upper Allen Township. I’ll check into this and report.

    — Kent Shaw

  7. Hal Brown


    I suggest you read his book "The Audacity of Hope" before you conclude that there is nothing there.

  8. jimboz

    Here’s something not a parody. How many flag officers have signed on in Clinton’s corner? How many for Obama? Now why do you think they recommend Clinton? Must be they liked the YouTube dealy, huh?

    My opinion is Obama is done. I’m still looking for something to persuade me to vote for him, but there is nothing there.

  9. SEAL

    As it turns out, with the caucus results coming in, Clinton did not win Texas. The result is that Clinton apparently got 65 delegates to Obama’s 61 in the primary, but that Obama trounced her in the caucus winning 37 delegates to her 30, giving Obama a net gain of 3 delegates.

    However the press is still reporting that Clinton won Texas. I guess they base winning on the popular vote and not what the primary is all about – delegates.

  10. maryadavis

    I can’t believe it’s the first time I hear about these videos. I found the voip articles very funny as well. Who did the parodies has a very British like humor.