At the 4:40 mark of the video, she asserts the following:
"Our campaign is about the future. It's about these kids who are here today. And, you know, our opponents...Our opponents, for a campaign that likes to talk a lot about the future, our opponents, sure really, talk a lot about the past and point fingers backwards. And they look to the past, because that is where you can find blame. But we join you in looking to the future, because that's where you find the solutions."
I understand how something like this could play well. No one wants to be involved in the blame game. It could also be a little bit of a veiled attack on how there's not a lot of voting history in Obama's record to compare to the long history that one can look at with McCain. However, at the 12:55 mark of this video, she says:
"It was just a couple of weeks ago that Joe Biden said to a voter that he's against clean coal. And Barack Obama has opposed offshore drilling. Now, you heard the other night in John McCain and Barack Obama's debate kind of a flip-flop on that, but you gotta go with someone's record, where they'd been in the past to let you know where they're gonna lead you."
So, let me get this straight. Your history is off-limits as a blame-game tactic, but you have to look at your opponent's record as a predictor of future actions. While I completely agree with the latter position, you can't have it both ways. Either we're looking forward or we're learning about how these people will lead us? I really don't see how those are mutually exclusive methods for looking at a race.
One other thing, when you're trying to oust the incumbent political party from the White House, blame seems a terribly effective tactic.