Joe Trippi curses at the media and Obama's hypocrisy, may be foreshadowing Edwards endorsement?

[Herman Munster]

Looks like the Harry and Louise healthcare ad may have been what put Edwards over the edge. Hallperin says the former adviser cursing was Trippi.

http://thepage.time.com/all%E2%80%99s-not-fair/

New York Magazine’s John Heilemann gets Edwards’ strategist Joe Trippi to use a lot of profanity

http://nymag.com/news/politics/powergrid/44211/

Divergence in tone is one thing, double standards are another. And it’s the latter that most galls the former advisers to the other, now-departed, Democratic candidates. “Obama has been able to get away with a stunning amount of hypocrisy that would get called on her,” says one such operative. “They’ve run the nastiest, most deceptive pieces of paid media: the mailer they did lying about her health-care plan, with the Harry and Louise look-alikes. The idea that it took Hillary growling Tony Rezko’s name in a debate to get any national coverage. How he complained in Iowa about 527s and then had them supporting him like crazy in Nevada and California. And nobody says a peep about it. It’s fucking comical!”

There are countless other examples of this syndrome, both large and small. The way that Clinton’s famous fumbling of a question about whether illegal immigrants should be allowed to have driver’s licenses in a debate last fall was hammered on for weeks—whereas Obama’s flubbing of the same question in the next debate was essentially let slide. The way that Obama’s evisceration of his rival in his stump speeches was applauded by the media—whereas Clinton’s plunge into negative territory was widely condemned. The way that Clinton was roundly criticized for being inaccessible, and thus unaccountable, to the press—when Obama has since January been even less available for questioning than she.

Theories abound as to why the media has treated Clinton and Obama so differently. The simplest is that reporters simply like Obama better; that he’s new and fresh and unburdened with anything resembling Clinton fatigue. Another theory revolves around cultural bias. “The fact is that the national press is a bunch of northeastern liberals,” says the adviser to an erstwhile Democratic runner, “and they just love the idea of this post-racial black dude being the nominee.” A third revolves around the respective dramatic arcs embodied by Clinton and Obama. Citing the Times primary-beat reporters assigned to the candidates, a competitor of theirs observes, “Pat Healy’s job is to challenge the Clinton myth and machine. Jeff Zeleny’s is to write the epic rise of Barack Obama. That’s generally the media’s approach—Clinton and Obama are just at different points in their stories."

[ruggerson]

1. The way the media has covered this campaign should be frightening to anyone

interested in democracy and free and fair elections.

[KittyWampus]

2. as an ex-Biden supporter, i surely agree.

[troubleinwinter]

112. As an ex-Biden, ex-Edwards supporter, I agree.

I am not a present BO or HC supporter.

[frogcycle]

138. ditto

[scheming daemons]

3. Translation: Hillary's losing... blame the media....

....sounds just like the Republicans' excuses.

[ruggerson]

9. They've all been treated badly by the media except for Barack Obama

Edwards, Biden, Kucinich - all had aggressively dismissive press coverage. The OP is dead on.

[jackson_dem]

15. It's no fluke the two front runners are the two media darlings

The difference is the msm wants to select the strongest rethug. They want the weakest Dem.

[flyarm]

131. and they have surely gotten the weakest dem..obama!

Obama’s Terrorist Ties
By Larry Johnson on February 15, 2008 at 10:28 AM in Current Affairs

As Democrats and Independents weigh who they want to run against John McCain in the fall, answer this question. Can you support a candidate who is friends with terrorists? Can you support a candidate who takes money from terrorists? Well, if Obama is your man you have some problems. Today’s Bloomberg News drops this bombshell:

Besides Rezko and Giannoulias, Obama could face questions about his relationship with William Ayers, a former member of the radical group the Weather Underground who is now a professor of education at the University of Illinois in Chicago. Ayers donated $200 in 2001 to Obama’s Illinois state Senate campaign and served with him from 1999 to 2002 on the board of the Woods Fund, an anti-poverty group.

A Series of Bombings

The Weather Underground carried out a series of bombings in the early 1970s — including the U.S. Capitol and the Pentagon. While Ayers was never prosecuted for those attacks, he told the New York Times in an interview published Sept. 11, 2001, that “I don’t regret setting bombs.”

Bill Burton, Obama’s spokesman, said Ayers “does not have a role on the campaign.” Ayers said he had no comment on his relationship with Obama.

Does not have a role on the campaign? Well thank God for that. Are you kidding me?

snip:
My point in getting these issues out on the table now is to get them out now. If you don’t understand how to make a TV ad that opens with dead Marines in Vietnam and Beirut, fade to William Ayers calling them terrorists, fade to Barrack Obama and Ayers on the same board, and fade to Ayers as a fund raiser for Barrack, then you know nothing of politics.

Make your decision with the best information available. That’s my point. Let’s get Obama’s skeletons out in the open while something can still be done. Closing one’s eyes and wishing this goes away is silly.

[insanity]

149. Wow

First off, the Weather Underground never hurt anybody, their violence was directed solely at a system of racial oppression and the policies of Vietname; maybe you should learn their history. There is a really fascinating documentary of the same name, look it up sometime.

Secondly, why can't a professor and private-citizen donate money and time to whatever cause/issue he is dedicated to? He isn't Obama's adviser on anti-terrorism, so why should I care that he (as a professor) knows Obama because they worked on an anti-poverty campaign?

Come on, I'm sure that you have had contacts who did things against the law at one point... that doesn't mean your personal integrity is questioned.

[Celebration]

153. someone on some board with him?

Good grief, why not research his family and come up with some sixth cousin who when to jail? This is absolutely ridiculous. Surely they have something more on Obama than this.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

154. their is a method to their maddnes

[JimGinPA]

63. I Don't Agee

While I'm sure it would seem to you Barack gets all the positive press from your point of view, from mine I notice there always seems to be a disclaimer or qualifier at the end of whatever report or comment from a pundit - "The Clinton (McCain) camp says...(whatever the opposite of what they just reported/opined). It's an old Fox trick that all the M$M does now.

[jackson_dem]

65. Studies show otherwise. The objective measure is newspaper endorsements

Among the 50 largest newspapers and excluding home state endorsements Obama is beating Hillary 4.3:1 in corporate media endorsements. These can't be spun as subjective measures. They are hard numbers.

[JimGinPA]

86. Maybe I Wasn't Clear....

I was referring to television & cable news. As for newspapers, the possibility certainly exists that the majority truly find Obama the better candidate to endorse. I know I do.

[Skwmom]

76. What a crock. The cult meme, the constant airing of debate attacks

without giving Obama's response, etc. Clinton wouldn't be in the race if it wasn't for a portion of the media (and the Republican party wanting the weakest nominee) propping her up.

[rodeodance]

129. Many people in WI by Obama's refusal. He will not get those votes. Poor political move on

Obama'a part

[Triana]

97. I agree - the lamestream press has treated 'em all like crap - except Obama...

...who gets the same level of free passage that GWB did/does.

And THAT ought to concern people, for sure.

[jackson_dem]

14. Or the reason Kerry lost, Gore "lost"...how quickly "hope and change" erases memories

[Oskie]

19. It's a set-up......once the media puts Obama in for the Dems...they'll

go after him bigtime. Remember what Chris Matthews did to Kerry? He played that Swiftboat ad over and over and over...without any verification of its "truthiness"... totally irresponsible. Then when McCain gets in, it'll be about how the fluff-brained Dems and Indies got turned off by what they learned about Obama. And once again our two-party system of democracy proves that it works. The people have spoken! WAKE DEMS...that's the game and you've got to be awake to play.

[Asia Expat]

49. My belief as well

Once the corporate media gets Hillary out of the way, they will take aim at Obama.

They will swiftboat him six different ways simultaneously.

[goclark]

155. Like they won't wear HC out!

I've watched "Morning Joe" nail her to the cross when she was winning and when she was not.

They hate her with a passion and they are more than ready for Hillary.

They also are Fired Up and always ready to slime Bill as well.

So ~~~~ OBAMA is a big guy from the South side of Chicago.

So far he has not cried,fired a member of his staff,had to dig into his own pocket because he miscaluated his budget etc.etc. etc.

Looks like Queen HC has it locked up so I'll end there because I know that when the going gets rough she will call on Bill - her co President or bring on the tears.

I am a woman too but wait until the Rethugs bash those tears- Bring Her On!

[Iceburg]

114. Setup indeed -- It'll be Rezko et al 24/7 led by Mathews /nt

[flyarm]

132. and they have lots to go after him about..the media is sitting on a treasure load! eom

[BlackVelvet04]

140. and we have Kerry and Kennedy to thank for this mess n/t

[Skwmom]

78. Edwards got plenty of media exposure. The problem was too many

people viewed Edwards as a phony. Unfortunately, he wasn't quite as good as his good buddy Bill Clinton in faking a populist (I feel your pain) message.

[The Traveler]

110. Interesting

that you would say that given the number of time statistical analsysis of media coverage has been posted on this very site. When you subtract hair cut coverage, especially, it is clear Edwards was pretty much deprived of oxygen by the media.

[Clark2008]

127. Interesting that you simply can't accept that Edwards didn't get

media coverage because he was polling well behind the other two.

[NashVegas]

128. Edwards Came In a Close #2 In Iowa And Was Entirely Ignored

The press wanted this story: black guy vs the chick.

[flyarm]

133. bullshit..Edwards got no media ...and the media he got was condescending and insignificant.eom

[formernaderite]

120. again.....hillary hurt by her top down campaign

which pretty much insulated her, from much contact with actual humans..ie the reporters or the populace. What do you think would happen later, when she faces McCain...with his human suffering story? You think her spousal suffering story could match? We already know the press loves McCain...the "maverick"..lol

[VotesForWomen]

139. yep; they haven't laid a glove on O; have to wonder why. nt

[Hart2008]

148. You think this is worse than 20 years ago?

Twenty years ago the Washington Post essentially blackmailed Gary Hart into suspending his campaign by threatening to report on a woman he had dated when seperated from his wife. (No it wasn't the Donna Rice story that did this.)

At the same time the MSM, and the Washington Post in particular, refused to report, or even ask Bush the same kind of questions about his mistress, Jennifer Fitzgerald:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Fitzgerald

Nancy Reagan, herself, was a source for that story.

You really think this year was worse than that?

[Edgewater_Joe]

4. Waah Waah Waah - Stop Blaming Obama for Hillary's Screw-Ups

And, if Edwards wants to follow a loser like Joe Trippi, he'll be sorry.

[ORDem]

46. kick n/t

:kick:

[Donnachaidh]

137. Obama, the candidate of CHANGE using Rovian tactics

Signals NO CHANGE to anyone who hasn't got his/her head sequestered in their anal canal.

But the great unwashed who *do* jingles, and flowery speeches stolen from dead heroes suck the shit up. Six months into his presidency, we'll see a bunch of the posters here stunned into blessed silence.

[THUNDER HANDS]

5. the media is covering Obama the way they should have covered Kerry and Gore

and maybe the media is finally realizing that.

[KittyWampus]

10. I think there's a lot of truth in the 2nd paragraph. About narratives, post-racial etc

and since Clinton has run a crappy campaign, I say good. Let's exploit that as long as possible.

That said, Obama better have a stellar response team for the coming onslaught should he get the nomination.

[rinsd]

13. Gore & Kerry were praised in the primary phase.

I will not get my hopes up that the MSM will do the right thing come this fall.

[jackson_dem]

20. The msm selected Gore after he won New Hampshire by 2 points

They savaged him in the general. Now we are to 'hope" they have "changed"? :eyes:

[KittyWampus]

39. Kerry was PRAISED? In what dreamworld did that happen? The Media flocked to Howard Dean

and pronounced Kerry dead.

[rinsd]

43. That must be why Dean won the Dem nomination.

:eyes:

From after Iowa till about June, Kerry received positive coverage for the most part.

[jackson_dem]

68. You're wrong. Remember the msm destroying Kerry with the "Kerry scream"?

Oh wait...

[rinsd]

72. I am almost sure that June was the 1st appearance of the windsurfing photo.

[jackson_dem]

101. Yup, and the rethug machine began attacking him in March or April

Bush even had ads up attacking him by then. You know, right around the time Kerry led the national polls by 8 because he was seen as more electable and had low negatives. How short lived that was...By September he would be losing by almost double digits and be in a "do or die" position heading into the first debate. We know, though, that Obama is immune to attacks and that he will not suffer the fate "new" candidates against a non-incumbent almost always suffer. Just BELIEVE and HOPE and there is no way we can lose!

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

94. a good campaign manager would have handled that n/t

[jackson_dem]

99. It always comes back to "hope" that Obama will be better than everyone before him

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

102. Hillary campaign slogan: Queen of Pain

all that negative energy surrounding the Hillary campaign of despair.

[rodeodance]

125. You forget, Obama has gone NEG last several weeks --but you knew that now didn't you!

Take the Repug Harry and Louse ad he put up as an early example.

I am glad Hillary is finally hitting back. she waited too long to do so.

[karynnj]

121. Exactly, I spent a lot of time a long time ago unsuccessfully

googling the media before the Iowa primary to find a reference to a story that I had seen in 2004. I was shocked in retrospect how unkind the media was to Kerry in early January and December - more than anything they were debating why he was still in and when he would drop out. This continued even as he crept up in Iowa polls.

The media gave FAR more coverage to Dean. This was initially very good for him, but later the increased focus was also negative. He and Clark were the darlings of many in the press. Other than Oliphant and gradually Walter Shapiro, who seemed to have a huge respect for Kerry after intensively covering all the campaigns, Kerry had few media allies. He did get very positive coverage a few days before the Iowa caucus when he had the reunion with the guy he saved in Vietnam. That was an almost 1940 movie quality event that had reporters with tears in their eyes.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

50. ummm never mind

[jackson_dem]

18. They did cover Kerry and Gore like that too...in the primaries...

Hopefully Obamites realize that before it is too late.

[KittyWampus]

40. That is totally a lie. The media followed Dean around like puppies and pronounced Kerry dead

you cannot revise history.

[jackson_dem]

44. Pre-Iowa. Post-Iowa, you know when it counted most, it was the case

Obamites tend to confuse volume of coverage with tone of coverage. Dean got the most coverage but much if it was negative. Coverage for coverage's sake is not good for a candidate. Ask Dean and now Hillary.

[ThatPoetGuy]

53. Remember the "Dean scream"?

Of course you do. The media went nuts on that.

I remember one of the Kerry/Bush debates. Bush actually had drool on his lip. He was sweating and shaking and ranting like a madman. When I saw it, I said, "he's finished. This is his 'Dean scream'." I was wrong -- because the media chose to ignore it.

[ThatPoetGuy]

51. This is probably...

the most intelligent way for an Obama supporter to interpret this. Thank you.

I'm supporting Obama. I'm also painfully aware of the way the media creates damaging storylines based on half-truths around candidates. I have to shake my head when I see some Obama supporters mocking this thread.

[Yukari Yakumo]

118. OT, But are you or were you a fan of Kurt Angle?

A part of his shtick was his "Three I's", which happens to be the exact same three I's you have in your sig.

[THUNDER HANDS]

123. i was more of a Rock fan, personally

but yeah, I get the three I'd thing. I realized that after I created this.

:D

It's true...oh, it's true.

[flyarm]

134. that is silly..the media loved Gore and Kerry during the primaries..

then opened a can of whip ass on them once they were the nominees..i guess you have selective memory?

fly

[BlackVelvet04]

141. so he's entitled but Hillary isn't?

Bullshit.

[angie_love]

6. and this one is still here?

:shrug:

[totodeinhere]

7. Joe Trippi is just bitter because his candidate did not make it.

[jackson_dem]

21. Everything Trippi said is true. Obamites may learn this the hard way in the general

Let's "hope" obamites will never have to learn this lesson. The consequence will be President McCain.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

25. maybe Hillary should trade Mark Blackwater Penn for Joe Losing Trippi

he might be cheaper.

[jackson_dem]

30. You, like a typical Obamite, ignore the issue at the peril of our party

[Skwmom]

83. He may already be on the Clinton payroll. Amazing how he, like Edwards

repeats the latest Clinton campaign memes.

Plus, if Clinton is the nominee it will be hello President McCain and Edwards can run again in four years.

[flyarm]

135. ok so lets look at the "daily beat other dems up list " today by obamaites..

Joe Trippi = bad

John Edwards = bad

Joe Wilson = bad

Valerie Plame = bad

Larry Johnson = bad

so do tell us obamanation exactly who you do like in the dem party?

besides your one term wonder.

[Cameron27]

136. You forgot,

Wes Clark is a sell out,

George McGovern's senile,

Maya Angelou's lacking in vision, (I thought that was the most bizarre comment,) until I saw...

Gloria Steinam is sexist!

Did they go after Whoopi yet?

[scheming daemons]

8. Dang... after midnight.... means Herman gets three new threads....

...at least he wasted one of them on this silly one.

[rodeodance]

37. so typical of so many Obamafolk--snarky comments-no substance. over and over!

[Blue_In_AK]

84. I noticed that, too.

[Horse with no Name]

100. Just like their candidate!

:D

[DJ13]

11. Trippi must have gotten a rejection notice to get work in Obamas campaign

[RoadRage]

12. The Media didn't force Hillary to run a smear ad against Obama

about him not trying to connect with Wisconsin voters.. while he was IN Wisconsin the entire time, and she hadn't set foot there yet.

The Media doesn't need to smear or not smear Clinton.. between her & her husband - they seem to do a great job all by themselves.

Perhaps it has less to do with the Media picking on Hillary or not picking on Obama, and more to do with Hillary making mistakes that are easy to pick up, and Obama running a professional campaign with very few flaws.

Na.. we wouldn't want to give him credit, or make Hillary responsible for anything. It must be the media!

[jackson_dem]

24. Your reply goes to the writer's point

When Hillary attacks it is a "smear" but when Obama, who has run the dirtiest campaign of any Democrat, does it the msm and Obamites who follow the msm line either excuse it or ignore it.

[anamandujano]

54. You're trying to debate a functional idiot.

I can only wish you good luck.

[rodeodance]

27. Obama refused a debate that would have benefited voters. Good for Hill for going

after Obama on this issue. Stop whining--Obama was the one that dissed the voters.

[tishaLA]

48. Sen Obama has been in WI, whereas Sen Clinton

has been trying to revive her flagging campaign in TX. So he won't acquiesce to Her Majesty's request for a debate at the time and place she insists? Too bad. Next year, when she returns to her undistinguished senate career, Hillarhoids will get used to it.

[rodeodance]

55. Marquette asked both of them weeks ago they found out Both would be in Milwaukee

this Saturday to speak at Founders Day Celebration.
The Univ. extended the invite--had abc with George. S to moderate.

Clinton said yes a few weeks ago--Obama waited with his response then said no. So get your facts straight before you spout off again

[tishaLA]

61. So where has Sen Clinton been?

She hasn't been in WI, has she? Meanwhile, Sen Obama has been there...and even voted against phone company immunity.

[rodeodance]

64. You missed my point. But I do not think you wanted it anymore as both times you just

dissed Hillary without engaging in what I said

[tishaLA]

69. I didn't see a point

Sen Obama has been in WI and have had the opportunity to hear him; Sen Clinton has not. In fact, she didn't even manage to manage to make a vote against telecom immunity. She's just gone from TX to OH trying to revive her flagging campaign.

[rodeodance]

87. I am well aware that o. is here. that is not the issue. The issue was the debate that O.

walked away from.

Recall that i said it was Marquette Univ. that issued the invite weeks ago. It is large respected Univ in the heart of Milwaukee. The debate was to focus on how there policies affected the local area--Wisconsin and the great Lakes Region. such as how did o. and c. health policy impact on WI residents. How did each energy policy affect the state? ect ect.


Going around the state is not the same as having as having a regional debate that would have been televized on wisconsin public tv.

The argument that they have had 18 debates is bogus. because this particular debate was not structured as the others were.

[tishaLA]

91. the voters of WI will decide....

after seeing Sen Obama up close and personal (and not seeing Sen Clinton until Sunday) who is more responsive to them.

[rodeodance]

104. memories di not fade of how Obama dismissed them.

[tishaLA]

108. By not showing up until the Sunday before the election?

Yes, that will haunt them on Tuesday.

[spag68]

73. No he didn't

Both did not vote.

[tishaLA]

77. Constitutional scholar pans Clinton for fleeing from FISA fight

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Turley_The_fix_has_been_in_0214.html

Republican John McCain and Barack Obama both voted on amendments to the measure; Obama opposed telecom immunity, while McCain supported it. Clinton left town early to get to a campaign stop in Texas.

Although he voted to sustain a filibuster on the FISA update, Obama left Washington for a campaign stop in Wisconisn without voting on the final bill.

[Blue_In_AK]

95. According to MSNBC, Sen. Clinton will be in Wisconsin

all this weekend.

[jackson_dem]

71. There goes the Obama talking point about Hillary doing it out of "desperation"

[tishaLA]

80. Maybe if she had more money, she wouldn't need the debate

I guess that $$$$ spent on the Hallmark infomercial was money well-spent, eh? Now all she can do is attack, attack, attack in her classic division and derision style. Thank goodness the American people have indicated they want something to move toward the future instead of engaging in the sad politics of the past; I hope Sen Clinton gets the message soon.

[jackson_dem]

103. She had plenty of money and was the front runner weeks ago when she stepped up to the plate

Are you serious? Obama has been full of attacks which are divisive. He is the politics of the past--past 200 years! Obamites pretend history never existed. Compare what Jefferson and Adams said in 1800 to what Bush and Kerry said in 2004!

[tishaLA]

107. Yes I'm serious.

Sen Clinton is writing herself $5 million checks and humming "Yesterday"...while she stays away from WI.

[bellasgrams]

67. BO's afraid to debate her, he knows he's not that swift at debates.

If he can't get up there and prance and chant his slogans he knows he's sol

[rodeodance]

90. gawd. !!!

[Blue_In_AK]

93. The TV media, especially, are very selective

about what they pick up and cover. They'll take one tiny sound bite and blow it up and play it over and over and over, ad nauseam, and ignore everything else that went on that day in the campaign. They cherry pick.

TV news, and especially talk shows, are entertainment, after all, so they go out of their way to pick the most controversial remarks, the heated exchanges, the attacks, the retort. They love to pore over every little turn of phrase, every nuance, and place their own interpretation.

When it gets right down to it, very few of us really know either of these candidates. Everything we know about them, we know through the media, aside from their votes in the Senate, and even that is subject to interpretation because we don't see the full text of whatever it is that they're voting on. We're not privy to their thought processes or their debates -- unless we're sitting around watching C-SPAN all day which most of us can't.

The influence and bias of the media cannot be ignored.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

16. Edwards timing has always been the problem

He had no history in govt, got elected to the US Senate, missed about half the votes,
pissed off people in North Carolina because he DID NOT vote.

We in NC have too many right wingers in congress to have a democrat who doesn't
represent us.

keeping that in mind, he had been in my two choices for Pres this year, him or Obama.

He didn't run as good a campaign as he needed to, but that is probably due to his funding.

People in NC turned against him too - mocking his hair, calling him fake etc.
I didn't agree, but its important to have good support from those who know you.

Then having 3 candidates - some say more, some say less - that are very appealing can make it
much much harder to win.

[K Gardner]

17. An Edwards endorsement is fairly moot at this juncture, for either candidate.

[AtomicKitten]

22. Edwards waited too long and let all the air out of his endorsement.

The unions are choosing up sides. I think the natural gravitation is already occurring.

[rodeodance]

23. ABC evening news did a big story on his Nuclear Leaks deceptions tonight. I was

shocked actually that they did it. Talked of his connections with the industry, his getting money for his campaign. It was great to see. Hope to see of this.



Story below





http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?_r=2&em&ex=1202187600&en=095184f64ec13024&ei=5087%0A&oref=slogin&oref=slogin





February 3, 2008
Nuclear Leaks and Response Tested Obama in Senate
By MIKE McINTIRE

When residents in Illinois voiced outrage two years ago upon learning that the Exelon Corporation had not disclosed radioactive leaks at one of its nuclear plants, the state’s freshman senator, Barack Obama, took up their cause.
……..
A close look at the path his legislation took tells a very different story. While he initially fought to advance his bill, even holding up a presidential nomination to try to force a hearing on it, Mr. Obama eventually rewrote it to reflect changes sought by Senate Republicans, Exelon and nuclear regulators. The new bill removed language mandating prompt reporting and simply offered guidance to regulators, whom it charged with addressing the issue of unreported leaks.

Those revisions propelled the bill through a crucial committee. But, contrary to Mr. Obama’s comments in Iowa, it ultimately died amid parliamentary wrangling in the full Senate.

“Senator Obama’s staff was sending us copies of the bill to review, and we could see it weakening with each successive draft,” said Joe Cosgrove, a park district director in Will County, Ill., where low-level radioactive runoff had turned up in groundwater. “The teeth were just taken out of it.”

The history of the bill shows Mr. Obama navigating a home-state controversy that pitted two important constituencies against each other and tested his skills as a legislative infighter. On one side were neighbors of several nuclear plants upset that low-level radioactive leaks had gone unreported for years; on the other was Exelon, the country’s largest nuclear plant operator and one of Mr. Obama’s largest sources of campaign money.

Since 2003, executives and employees of Exelon, which is based in Illinois, have contributed at least $227,000 to Mr. Obama’s campaigns for the United States Senate and for president. Two top Exelon officials, Frank M. Clark, executive vice president, and John W. Rogers Jr., a director, are among his largest fund-raisers.

………..………..
Asked why Mr. Obama had cited it as an accomplishment while campaigning for president, the campaign noted that after the senator introduced his bill, nuclear plants started making such reports on a voluntary basis. The campaign did not directly address the question of why Mr. Obama had told Iowa voters that the legislation had passed.

Paul Gunter, an activist based in Maryland who assisted neighbors of the Exelon plants, said he was “disappointed in Senator Obama’s lack of follow-through,” which he said weakened the original bill. “The new legislation falls short” by failing to provide for mandatory reporting, said Mr. Gunter, whose group, Beyond Nuclear, opposes nuclear energy.

……………..

The Nuclear Energy Institute jumped out in front by announcing its voluntary initiative for plant operators to report even small leaks. An Exelon representative told an industry newsletter, Inside N.R.C., that Exelon was “working with Senator Obama’s office to address some technical issues that will allow us to support the legislation.”

Last week, an Exelon spokesman, Craig Nesbit, said the company sought, among other things, new language to specify what types of leaks should be reported, and assurance that enforcement authority remained with the nuclear commission and not state or local governments.

“…………

The rewritten bill also contained the new wording sought by Exelon making it clear that state and local authorities would have no regulatory oversight of nuclear power plants.

…….

Still, the legislation has come in handy on the campaign trail. Last May, in response to questions about his ties to Exelon, Mr. Obama wrote a letter to a Nevada newspaper citing the bill as evidence that he stands up to powerful interests.

“When I learned that radioactive tritium had leaked out of an Exelon nuclear plant in Illinois,” he wrote, “I led an effort in the Senate to require utilities to notify the public of any unplanned release of radioactive substances.”


……
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?_r=3&ei=5087&em=&en=095184f64ec13024&ex=1202187600&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1203134225-U9/2rSO50iXSEh4zNnlg2Q&pagewanted=print


February 3, 2008
Nuclear Leaks and Response Tested Obama in Senate
By MIKE McINTIRE

When residents in Illinois voiced outrage

[Skwmom]

56. Like the corporate media wants Obama. They want Clintons. They've

always been good friends with big business.

[rodeodance]

62. well if they want Hillary--your logic is unside down as she is the one usually attacked.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

105. poor Hillary, the Clintons have always been such victims

:sarcasm:

Time for Hillary to ramp up the tears.

[in_cog_ni_to]

57. They talked about the Tritium leaks on the news??? on teevee?!

REALLY? I'll be damned. That's going to be a tough one for him to overcome. Being in the pocket of Excelon isn't going to sit well with most people and then LYING about passing the legislation he never passed, isn't going to help either.

[rodeodance]

59. Yes they--BrianWilliams --lots of detail. It was really the first Neg. news report I can

recall from the networks

ps--i included the article link in my earlier post

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

96. Clintons and Uranium/Nuclear Hypocrisy from the Hillary Camp

Nuclear Hypocrisy from the Hillary Camp?
AlterNet, CA - Feb 14, 2008
As Hillary blasts Obama for ties to Exelon, key Clinton advisor Mark Penn's firm took $230K from the nuclear company. Even as Sen. ...
http://www.alternet.org/story/77111/

The Pennsylvania Progressive: Bill Clinton and the Kazakhstan Deal
This is a tale about a Canadian mining operator who wanted to get rich mining Kazak uranium. Mr. Clinton seems to have been the deal maker,
http://pennsylvaniaprogressive.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/02/bill-clinton-an.html

[goodgd_yall]

144. This is your best answer?

Obama caves in on legislature on requiring notification of leaks at nuclear plants = A Clinton advisor receiving payment for work done for a nuclear plant client?

A bit of reach, yes?

As for your 2nd link---It's Hillary Clinton running for president, not Bill.

[jackson_dem]

75. So did NBC. I guess they may be assuming Obama is the presumptive nominee

So it is time to fire up the rethug msm machine against him.

[rodeodance]

92. ha--we know the media has been wrong on this call before--but hey let'em

do lots of stories like the one on the nuke leak.


meanwhile...........

[jackson_dem]

106. Yeah. It might actually be better for Hill to lose Wisconsin

If she wins the msm will be back on guard. If she loses they may spend the next two weeks going after Obama...

[rodeodance]

111. NAH--in either case they are relentless--most will go after her.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DURHAM D]

36. Nice talk - you have just exposed yourself for the sexist jerk that you really are. n/t

[Danger Mouse]

28. one of three, and this is the best you can do?

make the other two count! :hi:

[anamandujano]

82. You can't get any hotter than nuclear leaks and dropping the ball

for your constituents. Well, taking money from the bad guys and bragging about the bill adds a little sexy to the story.

Oops sorry, I thought you were talking about post #23.

Actually the Original post is pretty good. You all are laughing about the negative press and it's effect on Hillary's campaign, while Obama has been getting a free pass. Post #23 may give you reason to reign in the euphoria of an illusionary impending victory.

Here's hoping the story gets some traction so you all can get a taste of your own medicine.

[ProSense]

29. Carolinas: Top Edwards donors looking toward Obama

DECISION 2008

Top Edwards donors looking toward Obama

But some say they'll wait to see who ex-senator endorses

JIM MORRILL
[e-mail]

Jim and Susan Phillips were loyal supporters of fellow N.C. Democrat John Edwards and backed up their support with money.

But a day after Edwards dropped out of the presidential race, Susan Phillips sent $500 to Sen. Barack Obama.

"He is the most likely guy to bring people together and the guy with the most potential to fundamentally change the way we do business in the United States," says Jim Phillips, a Greensboro lawyer and chairman of the UNC system board of governors.

Of the $44 million Edwards raised through December, more than $2.6 million came from the Carolinas.

Interviews with nearly 20 of Edwards' top Carolinas contributors, selected randomly, showed a majority of them tilting toward Obama, with some undecided.

None said they're ready to back Hillary Clinton.

<...>

Not all Edwards donors are looking at the two remaining Democratic candidates.

Owen Andrews, a New Bern businessman, says he and his wife are looking at Republicans John McCain or Mike Huckabee.

"We obviously were Edwards supporters," he says, "but we're not sure we're going to support the other two (Democrats). The Clintons have already had their time. And Obama doesn't have enough experience."

link

[Blue_In_AK]

31. I think Obama has received an incredible amount

of media deference in this campaign, and I'll probably be flamed for saying this, but I think pundits and critics may be wary of being labeled as a "racist" if they come out too strongly against him or attempt to point out his flaws. Hillary has long had a target on her back, so the media has no problem at all going after her, and words do matter. A positive or negative spin can be put on any particular action taken by a candidate merely by changing a few descriptors. Obama has benefited from this; Hillary has suffered. Race trumps gender this time around.

I often wonder how different this campaign season would have been if Obama, Clinton and Edwards had all been white guys. Would the results be the same? Would there be the same excitement and drama? I really kind of doubt it.

[ProSense]

33. Hillary made

her bed

[Blue_In_AK]

58. I'm not really here to defend Hillary...

I'm just saying that there is a certain amount of manipulation going on by the media, and I do think they've tended to give Obama a pass. He's the cool black guy, he gives good speeches that inspire people, and most important of all, he's NOT HILLARY, whom they feel very comfortable bashing -- for whatever reason. Policy-wise, they're just not that different.

I don't expect this kid-glove treatment to last once Hillary is out of the picture, but I doubt that they will go after Obama as hard as they would if he were white. If that's racist of me, then call me a racist. It's just the way I see it.

[nolabels]

116. I was kind of reading the tea leaves the other way

They would rather ignore him if and whenever possible to keep him from getting any more momentum. This i hope they do at their own peril. Yea, that full court press by the press might be too late for them but i would also bet that is what they are banking on. With all them corporate mergers in corporate media they have gotten rid of a lot nuts and bolts of how all independently but together worked and installed just a few irresponsible managers and editors. I am guessing they will not be clever enough this time till after it's too late.

[rodeodance]

41. The media is afraid of being labeled racist if critical of Obama!--Here on DU--obamafolks

constantly throw out the race-baiting card--toss it out willy nilly.

[Renew Deal]

32. Trippi is a 2 time loser that can't figure out how to win.

I like Trippi. He's good at certian things, but managing a campaign isn't one of them. This sounds like sour grapes to me.

[Olney Blue]

34. So far, Obama seems to reflect the heat pretty well.

However, the thermostat is going to be cranked up several hundred degrees by the GOP.

[rodeodance]

35. The Obama folk here meme this: Clinton going neg-but deny that Obama hit on HIllary!!:

The way that Obama’s evisceration of his rival in his stump speeches was applauded by the media—whereas Clinton’s plunge into negative territory was widely condemned.

[ProSense]

38. It is not a meme, it is a

fact

[rodeodance]

45. You missed the fact from the article I had included in my text--Here:

The way that Obama’s evisceration of his rival in his stump speeches was applauded by the media—whereas Clinton’s plunge into negative territory was widely condemned.

[LulaMay]

42. The media is male dominated. Their attacks are very sexist. That's the reason.

[Skip Intro]

47. The same media that served up w while slandering Gore.

yep, been here before - no less appealing when it's on our side

[Skwmom]

52. Oh please. There has been PLENTY of written press favoring

Clinton and bashing Obama (for example the cult meme). Furthermore, CNN might as well be Clinton News Network. After their health care special they showed Clinton bashing Obama on his health care proposal and they showed the attacks against Obama (by Edwards and Clinton) nonstop without showing Edwards response. Furthermore, if Obama had lost EIGHT straight primaries they'd be calling for him to drop out.

About that deceptive advertising - Clinton's mailers in NH were so false they caused people to switch to Obama and condemn the actions. Furthermore, speaking of comical Trippi was willing to represent a guy whose rhetoric didn't match his RECORD or his ACTIONS. Just love the post-racial black dude comment. Since I've felt that Edwards and some of his people have been in cahoots with the Clintons, I'm not surprised at all by this article.

As far as some of the media not liking the Clintons - I don't really blame them. Many people don't like the Clintons b/c they are nothing but phonies who ran on a fake populist message.

[LulaMay]

60. That is baloney, and you know it. They bash her daily, and promote him daily.

[Skwmom]

66. Oh please. Clinton has been getting PLENTY of help from the press.

Without it she would already be toast.

[Blue_In_AK]

74. I respectfully disagree. n/t

[emilyg]

85. She has not.

[rodeodance]

88. in you tiny little bubble of Obamamania it is possible you are not aware of what really goes on.

[Blue_In_AK]

70. The cult thing

I'm sorry, but SOME (emphasis) of Obama's supporters really do act that way, and I was glad to see that a few columnists, wearing their flame-retardant suits, finally said it. I have nothing against enthusiastically supporting one's candidate, but for those of us who haven't been "touched" or "seen the light" or whatever, the swooning and the refusal to even consider that Obama might have weak spots is really mind-boggling and disturbing.

As I said, I'm not pro-Hillary particularly, but it does seem that by and large her supporters have a more realistic view of their candidate.

[NoLockstep]

89. As an Obama supporter I can concure... somewhat

I think that most candidates bring a great deal of media scrutiny upon themselves. Being in the public eye brings many reactions depending upon who the person is.

Let's take Clinton for example. When he first came on the scene he was fresh and new. He did things, however that caused the media to scrutinize him. Remember the famous I put the marijuana to my lips but I didn't inhale line. The media would scrutinize the gall of such an explanation. If Bill Clinton had have just told the truth and left it at that, the media would have said he was forthright, honest. The Clinton problems can be traced back to those words of denial, "I did not inhale.

Hillary Clinton by virtue of being tied to her husband has been embarrassed often and early by the media but it isn't without noting that she has been uncharacteristically inflammatory to Obama. The media picks up on this. In one debate she continued to attack and attack and Obama was forced to defend himself from these attacks by her and eventually Edwards. Both Clinton and Edwards both attacked Obama for his "present" votes.

I believe the media didn't look too kindly on her and Bill. The democratic party thought coded words inciting racial volatility could tear the Democratic party apart come the general election and this leaked into the media, further fanning the flames of hostility toward the Clintons for injecting race into the primaries. The media actually became willing accomplices to Clintons by bringing up race at every turn. Hillary Clinton knew this but what she didn't plan on was getting the blame, or the scrutiny.

Obama handled it pretty well and now we come to understand that the game of politics as it relates to the media is won in the vote count. Obama fairs better than she does because when you're speaking to change in a positive way then everyone is on board, everyone is listening.

[Blue_In_AK]

98. NoLockstep, I see you're new

but thank you for a reasoned response. I like Obama supporters who are reasonable. I agree with you on Bill and his truth-telling issues. He did set himself up with that unbelievable comment about not inhaling and then later Monica, of course, and I feel he did irreparable harm to Hillary in the process. Things were good in a lot of ways in the Clinton years, but Bill made some really stupid mistakes. Now Hillary pays for them.

And a warm welcome to the insane asylum that is DU. :hi:

[jackson_dem]

79. 81% newspaper endorsements go to Obama

[troubleinwinter]

113. Who owns those newspapers?

22 corporations own the largest part of our newspapers.



Why would I give a shit about a media corporate conglomeration's endorsement of any candidate?

81% of corporate media endorses a candidate? Does it fucking make you wonder WHY????

[LulaMay]

115. Sam Zell, a Chicago real estate tycoon,owns both LA Times and Chicago Tribune.

both endorsed Obama. The LA Times hadn't endorsed a presidential candidate since the 70's until Zell bought Tribune company recently.

I find it interesting that he is a billionaire real estate magnate in Chicago, where Obama hails from and also has ties to people in the real estate business, like Rezko. He won't approve a foreclosure moratorium. I wonder why???? Maybe so his real estate magnate pals can profit from it.

[crispini]

81. A lot of very good points in this story

especially the last paragraph:

The implications of Obama’s and Clinton’s respective meta-narratives for their press coverage have been profound. For Clinton, the inability to change the story line meant that any vaguely negative maneuver was interpreted in the darkest possible light, for it reinforced a preexisting supposition. For Obama, however, any criticism could be fended off as a manifestation of grubby old politics. And any act he committed that could be perceived as nefarious created cognitive dissonance. As Just points out, a prime example is the case of Tony Rezko, the now-indicted Chicago fixer and slumlord to whom Obama has been linked for many years. “There was no way for the press to believe it wasn’t true—because, you know, it looks like people are going to jail,” she says. “So instead the press dismisses the story as an aberration.”

The trouble for Obama is that the Republicans aren’t terribly likely to let that dismissal stand—nor the polite avoidance of discussing his controversial minister, his wayward youth, or, indeed, his blackness itself. Again and again, as Clinton often points out, the GOP has proved painfully adept at taking compelling, carefully honed meta-narratives and blowing them to pieces. In ways too numerous to mention, Obama has been toughened up by the primary process. But no matter what his handlers say, the notion that he’s been subjected to the most withering press scrutiny imaginable is—how to put this?—a fairy tale. His success has turned in no small part on his skill at avoiding such flyspecking, and on his rival’s inability to muster the same kind of dexterity. If Obama winds up facing John McCain, a man whose meta-narrative is spun from pure gold, he is unlikely to be so fortunate again.

[Stephanie]

109. You post Heileman's recitation of the theories he's heard but not his conclusions

All these theories contain at least some truth, but it’s the last one that edges closest to what I think has actually gone on. Campaigns are, at bottom, a competition between memes: infectious ideas that gather force through sheer repetition. The most powerful of these memes are what Just refers to as meta-narratives, the backdrops against which everything plays out in the media. “Clinton’s meta-narrative,” she says, “is that she’ll do anything to win; she can’t be trusted, she’s ethically challenged; she’s manipulative, calculating, and programmed.” Obama’s meta-narrative is decidedly otherwise. “It’s the same, in a way, as John McCain’s,” says Just. “He’s authentic, honest, free of taint. Then you add in new, charismatic, and an agent of change.”

For any candidate and his or her team, the formation and management of the meta-narrative are paramount strategic challenges. And these challenges were especially daunting for Clinton because she started out with much of hers already baked in. Even so, early on, her campaign had ample opportunity to alter the vestigial perceptions of her. They had done so effectively, after all, when she first ran for the Senate in New York. But instead, the affect she presented to reporters was in perfect keeping with all the stereotypes about her: She was guarded and relentlessly, robotically on-message on the rare occasions when she sat for interviews, displaying little of her charm or humor. She adopted an arch-Establishmentarian posture rather than an inspiring, transformational one—an alterna-stance that wouldn’t have been such a stretch for someone who stood a reasonable chance of becoming our first female president.

And, in fact, it was worse than that. By arguing that one of Clinton’s key virtues was her ability to go toe-to-toe with the GOP attack machine, her campaign exacerbated instead of ameliorated her reputation for ruthlessness. “By bragging about how tough they were,” says John Edwards’s former chief strategist, Joe Trippi, “they reinforced the sense of the media that everything they did had a negative cast to it.” At the same time, Trippi argues, “it made it really hard for them to call Obama on his shit. How can you complain about Obama being negative when you’re bragging about your willingness to do the same thing against the Republicans?”

[my3boyz]

117. HA! Now this shocked me! The other day he

was on there talking about how great the Obama campaign was. Edwards must have said something to him. Perhaps Obama ticked Edwards off and that is why the meeting did not take place. I don't care what anyone says it is STRANGE that the Obama camp's first response was to ask the Edwards campaign why it did not take place. It does not pass the smell test (as Judge Judy always says...lol). Joe Trippi is a mess anyway. He was fired from Dean's campaign. I think it may have been bad luck with Edwards this year. THey just happened to be running against the first female and first African American that had a good shot and got lost in the shuffle. Having said that, I have a pretty good feeling that Edwards will come out swinging next.............

[dkf]

119. Oh boy, Obama gets good coverage, Hillary gets bad coverage and Edwards got no coverage

If Trippi has a problem with the MSM why is it Obama's fault?

[boston bean]

122. The republicanization of Healthcare being used by a DEM candidate against another DEM

really hit home to me how Obama is really in this for himself, not us.

To do that in a democratic primary season, and basically ruining our chances for better healthcare for no other reason than for him to further his own political ambitions was grotesque to me.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

124. this sure has gotten a bunch of panties in a wad eh?

[Maribelle]

126. Truth Wins Out

in more ways than one

:thumbsup:

:dem:

[Raffi Ella]

130. ah!Hey now,this is an interesting developement...

It would be so great if Edwards got on board to Fight The Good Fight with Hillary.



Thanks for posting,great to see Trippi getting the truth out there.

[LostInAnomie]

142. If Edwards endorses Hillary I will lose all respect for him.

I say that as a die hard Edwards supporter. Obama may not be the best choice, but Hillary is the personification of the problems that Edwards brought up in his campaign. I would see it as a betrayal of all the time and money spent trying to help his campaign.

If you can't support Obama stay neutral, John.

[BlackVelvet04]

143. Wow.....

“Obama has been able to get away with a stunning amount of hypocrisy that would get called on her,” says one such operative. “They’ve run the nastiest, most deceptive pieces of paid media: the mailer they did lying about her health-care plan, with the Harry and Louise look-alikes. The idea that it took Hillary growling Tony Rezko’s name in a debate to get any national coverage. How he complained in Iowa about 527s and then had them supporting him like crazy in Nevada and California. And nobody says a peep about it. It’s fucking comical!”


I'm amazed. Obama has gotten a pass from the media from day one.

[ClericJohnPreston]

145. And if you don't believe the OP

or BlackVelvet, just look at the tripe authored by Obamites. They have ZERO analytical skills, ZERO questioning of motives and practices and a total disdain for all the hypocrisy of Obama.

They just don't see it or want to see it. Can you say zombie?

[ClericJohnPreston]

146. K&R

:kick: & Recommend

[BlackVelvet04]

147. Thanks for the reminder....

I forgot to recommend.

K&R

[Maribelle]

150. The truly scary part in these passes Obama receives is that it resembles Bush2000 to the letter.

Nothing from within the state borders of Texas was discussed. An the truly ironic drift through all of those passes, were issues we could find in Texas: his gross mismanagement of other's money; his neglect of immigrants flooding across the southern border, coupled with the abject poverty on the U.S. side of the Texas border; turning Houston into the #1 polluted city in the U.S., faking improvements in education, on and on and on.

Obama is an empty suit exactly as George W. Bush was. I cannot figure out, however, which one of them has most platitudes, the most fake smiles, the most promises of change with an empty shell to back up their endless promises. And should we be expecting Obama to play the god-talks-to-me card before to long?

And all the while Gore was being negatively bashed each and every time he turned sideways, much the same as Hillary is being bashed today: her tears, her cackle, the color of her jacket, her misty eyes, on and on and on.

Nothing's changed.

[blues90]

151. I don't know how anyone can't see how the media has chosen

the candidates . They got rid of Kucinich and Edwards in one big hurry , bave them little air time or attention . Now since they are gone all the focus of bashing is on Hillary .

You see much more media attention given to Obama in a good way and the little given to Hillary is for the most part negative . This is far from fair and balanced that should be what is done .

[butterfly77]

152. Anyone can see what they are doing...

and now some in the media are trying to pretend as though they are being fair because they are now being called on it. Too little too late, there are a lot of brainwashed uninformed people who don't listen to the issues and believe the media hype and follow just like sheep.

[TreasonousBastard]

156. Oh, I just love the gossip...

that is soooo... much more important than anything else going on in this campaign.

And endorsements! They mean so much to me.