Today's miscellaneous news items

[whometense]

Craig Crawford’s Trail Mix: Obama’s Opening Gaffe

If Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, John Kerry or Joe Biden had said that American lives lost in Iraq were “wasted,” a media firestorm would have erupted.

And yet there was Sen. Barack Obama, just 24 hours after his presidential campaign announcement over the weekend, saying the nation had “seen over 3,000 lives of the bravest young Americans wasted.”

Immediately following his off-the-cuff remark during an Iowa town hall meeting — and after huddling with horrified aides — the Illinois Democrat told the Des Moines Register that he regretted his choice of words, and wished he had instead said “their sacrifices are never wasted.”

Despite the mea culpa, Obama’s gaffe caused no break in the media gushing over his budding candidacy. But if he does win the nomination, expect Republicans to play that tape over and over, arguing that it shows a lack of respect for soldiers who gave the ultimate sacrifice.

Contributing Editor Craig Crawford is a news analyst for NBC, MSNBC and CNBC. He can be reached at [e-mail].

[whometense]

1. For McAuliffe and Schumer, it's all about the money

Walter Shapiro in Salon
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/02/13/schumer_mcauliffe/

Feb. 13, 2007 | Former Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe is a brash and unabashed self-promoter, who has utilized those gifts to become the best fundraiser in the modern history of his party.

New York Sen. Chuck Schumer is an aggressive and unashamed publicity hound, who has utilized those qualities to become the most successful self-made politician in his home state and the architect of the Democrats' 2006 Senate takeover.

Given the similarities between a book tour and a political campaign, it is probably not surprising that both McAuliffe ("What a Party!") and Schumer ("Positively American") have just become published authors. Pity any self-effacing literary novelist who might have to compete with the salesmanship of McAuliffe or Schumer at a Barnes & Noble book signing. But the real irony of the publication of both of these books on the same day is that comparing one to the other points up an underlying, unresolved tension as the Democratic Party seeks, yet again, to define itself. The issue is money.

The exclamation mark in the title of McAuliffe's book is comically redundant, since everything the man does is broadcast at high decibels. This midlife political memoir has a rollicking style and captures McAuliffe's voice, and on the surface seems like nothing more than a diverting book to carry on a cross-country flight (preferably aboard Air Force One in a Democratic administration)...

[PresidentObama]

2. I'm very impressed with Senator Obama...

....And if Gore or Clark doesn't get in, I'll probably end up supporting him in the long run. But isn't this unfair? I don't mean to be complainy, but John Kerry leaves out the word "us" and it's frontpage news and gets nonstop coverage on all news networks. But Obama says a poorly worded statement about the troops lives being wasted, and nothing? I heard MSNBC mentioning earlier but it was twenty seconds of commentary (tops) about that statement.

Am I seeing things or did the media hype up the John Kerry botched joke to get him out of the race? And now, they give Obama a free pass? I like Obama, but how unfair can this be!!

[whometense]

3. completely and utterly UNfair.

The current media storyline is that Obama is a saint. Have you seen the Daily Show lately? Every time they do a story that mentions Obama his name is greeted by a choir of angels or he appears wearing a halo.

This has nothing to do with Obama and everything to do with the media narrative. It won't hold. When his time has come (i.e. when his candidacy appears too plausible?) they'll fall on him like vultures.

[PresidentObama]

4. Without a doubt.

Remember when Hillary was the fresh and exciting face to the media a few months ago? They played her up, and made her saint-like. But as soon as Obama hit the scene and a bigger story approached, they dropped her and even started to turn on her a little bit here and there. It's all in the story, and less in whats really happening. What happened to covering the race as you see it? And not beefing these candidates up as American Idol contestants.

The media wanted John Kerry out of this race, and overplayed the botched joke. And now they've given the free pass to the newest 'story' in the 2008 horse race with Senator Obama.

[Blaukraut]

6. well put, whome

It seems that the media indulge a candidate until he looks viable. Then the long knives come out.

[blm]

5. Media has long targeted Kerry - they know he will interrupt their greater powergrab.

Notice the date here - shortly after this, Kerry's campaign was roundly ignored by media while by the end of June someone high up in the media decided Dean campaign would get a press plane. That was unheard of that far away from the first primary. Corpmedia knows well how to use and abuse and turn on any Democrat.


From the Office of Senator Kerry


KERRY SEEKS TO REVERSE FCC’S “WRONGHEADED VOTE”

COMMISSION DECISION MAY VIOLATE LAWS PROTECTING SMALL BUSINESSES; KERRY TO FILE RESOLUTION OF DISAPPROVAL

Monday, June 2, 2003


WASHINGTON, DC – Senator John Kerry today announced plans to file a “Resolution of Disapproval” as a means to overturn today’s decision by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to raise media ownership caps and loosen various media cross-ownership rules.

Kerry will soon introduce the resolution seeking to reverse this action under the Congressional Review Act and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act on the grounds that the decision may violate the laws intended to protect America’s small businesses and allow them an opportunity to compete.

As Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Kerry expressed concern that the FCC’s decision will hurt localism, reduce diversity, and will allow media monopolies to flourish. This raises significant concerns about the potential negative impacts the decision will have on small businesses and their ability to compete in today’s media marketplace.

In a statement released earlier today regarding the FCC’s decision, Kerry said:

“Nothing is more important in a democracy than public access to debates and information, which lift up our discourse and give Americans an opportunity to make honest informed choices. Today’s wrongheaded vote by the Republican members of the FCC to loosen media ownership rules shows a dangerous indifference to the consolidation of power in the hands of a few large entities rather than promoting diversity and independence at the local level. The FCC should do more than rubber stamp the business plans of narrow economic interests.

“Today’s vote is a complete dereliction of duty. The Commissioners are well aware that these rules greatly influence the competitive structure of the industry and protect the public’s access to multiple sources of information and media. It is the Commission’s responsibility to ensure that the rules serve our national goals of diversity, competition, and localism in media. With today’s vote, they shirked that responsibility and have dismissed any serious discussion about the impact of media consolidation on our own democracy.”

-- 30 --

[karynnj]

8. No, it's not unfair - it's the way it should be

What was unfair was all the manufactored outrages. Dean was caught far more often than anyone else. Kerry was actually very very good in avoiding these potholes, while still speaking out in a vibrant, unscripted way. The only way to avoid the problem is to rigidly repeat a speech and answer most questions with lines from the speech or prepared answers. This creates a very robotic candidate.

When Kerry was caught making a tiny mistake, where the prepared text was even available, a big deal was made - not because it meant anything bad about Kerry - if there was one issue where he had a long history of being a good guy on, it was supporting the troops - but because it was a chance for the media and the party to show him, not just the lack of support, but their willingness to go for the jungular. (I note on the GD-P, the usual suspect is saying that the speed of his correction is the difference. Unnoticed is that the issue with Obama is what he said not a rw spin of what he said.

Obama's problem in that statement is actually tougher - he very likely meant exactly what he said and most of us here would have at least thought the same. Not being able to say that a loss was for nothing is the same as saying all soldiers are heros. For Kerry, this is what he questioned in horror in his Vietnam journals - hoping that his friend had not died thinking the war was for nothing and contemplating - at 25, that he could die for nothing. Kerry, very carefully, is implicitly saying the same thing when he compares Iraq to Vietnam and concludes with needing to get the policy right.

I do think it is lucky for Obama that he is in a honeymoon phase where he gets breaks. I also wish we could end this whole nonsense of taking a sentence - however unwise - and spinning it to mean something it really doesn't. If this keeps up - all our candidates will be damaged.

[Mass]

7. The media narrative is surprising. Many focused on Obama's "gaffe", though it was

nothing else than telling the truth, but how many have focused on Romney's gaffe, missing the Ford's pro-nazi background and only focusing on his business accomplishment. I have not seen the media spending their time on the symbolic of this announcement: Lincoln for Obama, Ford for Romney! I think this tells us all we need to know.

[whometense]

9. Clinton Pries Spielberg from Obama

Sounds like a lot of arm twisting is going on. How on earth are people going to keep up this intensity? It seems to me like it will turn people off in a big way.

http://politicalinsider.com/2007/02/clinton_pries_spielberg_from_o.html

Robert Novak will report an interesting scoop in his Sunday syndicated column.

"Democratic sources say Hollywood producer Steven Spielberg, previously listed as a probable supporter of Sen. Barack Obama for president, has agreed to host a major fund-raiser for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg, Spielberg's colleagues at the DreamWorks film studio, are backing Obama. It was thought that Spielberg was too, but sources say Bill Clinton prevailed on him to help his wife. All three men were generous backers of the former president."

[MBS]

10. surprising, except for the fact that Bill Clinton

milked the Hollywood crowd so much, and was so clearly himself star-struck. I agree that there must be a lot of arm-twisting (and worse) going on. To me, it says a lot that it takes a power-play approach to get "support". Not exactly what I'd call heartfelt, spontaneous, or grassroots.

[whometense]

11. I agree this doesn't present

the most flattering view of the Clintons. Apart from the arm-twisting, I have a viscerally negative reaction to the bigfoot double-teaming. I resent it. I know, that's politics. But I still hate it. I feel like she should be doing this on her own.

This added to that impression: http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/9915.html

* Hillary Clinton made her first campaign appearance in a decade in New Hampshire yesterday, and frequently brought up her husband. The NYT noted, “For the first time in her bid for the White House, Mrs. Clinton directly laid claim to the legacy and popularity of former President Bill Clinton — and did so in a crucial primary state where her husband showed his resiliency in 1992, when he finished second despite weeks of troubles.”

[Inuca]

12. The double-BILLing was

all over the news today, generally with rather negative comments (double-edged sword, etc.).

[rox63]

13. I heard Spielberg was going to have fundraisers for both Clinton & Obama

But I don't have a link, because I forgot where I saw it.