Roundup of MSM campaign “news”
By LisaB on August 21, 2008 at 1:15 PM in ABC News, Annenberg Chicago Challenge, Barack Obama, Campaign Gaffes, Current Affairs
1) Memeorandum has this local media story today about Democratic supporters being asked to pay for tickets to the Investiture at Invesco.
One source directed CBS4 to an unpublicized part of the Obama campaign’s Web site where Democratic supporters, reportedly with deep pockets, could buy tickets for $1,000 each. The source told CBS4 he was solicited three times to buy the tickets through the Web site.
—————————–
CBS4 was able to find the Web site only by directly typing in the URL provided by the source. While CBS4 attempted to contact the Obama campaign about the selling of tickets, the pay-for-tickets page was changed to say no more tickets were available.
It’s pretty clear $1,000 just doesn’t buy what it used to.
2) John Kass of the Chicago Tribune, weighs in on the Obama / Ayers paper cache at the UIC Richard J. Daley Library.
Conservative writer Stanley Kurtz—researching an article for the National Review about connections between Barack Obama and former Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers—made a big mistake.
The poor man took a wrong turn on the Chicago Way. Now he’s lost.
———————————“It leads me to have tremendous fear for the documents,” Kurtz said. “What if they are going through them right now and deciding which names to take out? I’m completely alarmed. I think public scrutiny is the only way to save the documents.”
He should be worried. Though national pundits get thrills running up their legs when Obama speaks, it’s when Daley says “I’ll be very frank” that you’ve got to worry.
Kurtz fears “they’ll manage to take this all the way past the election.”
You think?
3) Jake Tapper at Political Punch (ABCNews) covers the Annenberg cache story from a different angle. The Obama campaign released a new ad tying John McCain to Ralph Reed and Jack Abramoff. When asked about the Obama ad though, a McCain staffer replied this way:
. . . if Barack Obama wants to have a discussion about truly questionable associations, let’s start with his relationship with the unrepentant terrorist William Ayers, at whose home Obama’s political career was reportedly launched. Mr. Ayers was a leader of the Weather Underground, a terrorist group responsible for countless bombings against targets including the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon and numerous police stations, courthouses and bands. In recent years, Mr. Ayers has stated, “I don’t regret setting bombs. . . I feel we didn’t do enough.”
Then the same staffer remarked that the Obama / Ayers papers at UIC should be released.
4) At CNN, David Gergen has an interesting piece. He says Obama needs a “game changer” right now. Although Gergen says campaigns ebb and flow and any McCain advances may be met later by Obama advances, it seems Obama needs to do something interesting – and fast.
Still, this should be a huge wake-up call to Obama and the Democrats. From my perspective, Obama needs to introduce a game changer — and fast — before public opinion starts to gel around the notion that he is a phenom who deserves great respect but is not seasoned enough and would be too much of a risk in the Oval Office.
—————————-. . . Obama must also introduce a game changer through the way he signals who will be in the Oval Office with him. After all, no president governs all by himself; the success or failure of an administration also rests heavily on the team he assembles to work at his side.
Looks to me like Gergen is thinking Obama isn’t getting the job done on his own. Whatever the “game changing” tactic chosen is, it clearly involves bringing in some heavy weight to lend gravitas and experience to a candidate.
But what does Gergen suggest? HRC as VP or Gore as VP or Obama developing his potential administration sooner rather than later. All seem very unlikely to me and that, by itself says something.
Here’s my observation on Gergen’s idea of introducing a “game-changer” to the ticket. When I get a fountain soda, I often get the diet version and then splash a little of the full-sugar version to add a little extra flavor.
But I still know I’m drinking mainly diet soda.
5) Realclearpolitics has a fun article about dueling negative ads. It starts off like this:
In politics, everyone wants to be seen as a mudslinging virgin — who, like King Lear, is “more sinned against than sinning.” Toward that end, Democrats have crafted the conceit that Republicans are attack dogs, while Democratic candidates are not sufficiently ruthless.
The author then reminds readers that Obama spoke some negativity to the VFW crowd this week:
One of the things that we have to change in this country is the idea that people can’t disagree without challenging each other’s character and patriotism,” said Obama. “I have never suggested that Sen. McCain picks his positions on national security based on politics or personal ambition. I have not suggested it, because I believe that he genuinely wants to serve America’s national interest. Now, it’s time for him to acknowledge that I want to do the same.
Now, surely no one here at NQ thinks any campaign is free of mud-slinging. But you may not know this:
You’ve read the stories about McCain’s ad mocking Obama as a Paris Hilton-like celebrity. But the media have barely reported on the Obama spot that hits McCain for playing the “same old Washington games.” And in case you missed the “old” part — the phrase appears in big letters. NBC Political Director Chuck Todd reported that Team Obama has run a “stealth” negative ad campaign, by placing ads in key markets without first alerting the media.
Hmmm. Surprising? No. What’s a bit surprising is the success that Obama still enjoys in portraying himself as a positive campaigner.
The author goes on to call hypocrisy on THAT. Then she ends with this:
So when I hear Democrats complain that McCain did not stay in a “cone of silence” before the Saddleback Church debate, it means Obama lost the debate. It couldn’t be that McCain won because he does frequent town hall meetings, and he’s heard all the questions before — and he has good answers. No, it has to be because he cheated.
The left then whines that the right plays hardball, and the right excels at slinging mud — blind to the fact that both sides have able mudslingers, but only one side has champion poor losers.
Sounds about right.
6) From sfgate comes one of the more interesting assessment of poll fallout I’ve seen.
At the Saddleback forum with Pastor Rick Warren on Saturday in Orange County, the Republican presidential candidate delivered on-the-money messages and answers so effective they were “scary to me,” said George Lakoff, a renowned author and UC Berkeley linguistics professor who has studied how the human brain absorbs and processes messages.
Lakoff, whose work has helped shaped numerous Democratic candidates’ campaigns, said that “right through the motivational campaign theme, they were doing everything right.”
By contrast, Obama was “overconfident … and certainly not prepared” before the evangelical audience with definitive answers to clearly explain to voters his world view, values and vision, Lakoff said.
————–Two examples from Saddleback that Lakoff and others said underscore Obama’s troubles:
– McCain – asked his reason for running for president – confidently outlined a strong message of “country first,” urging service to America. That idea, dominant in McCain’s message and the theme of the GOP convention, showed that McCain Republicans have “figured out the formula” of effective campaign communication – and brilliantly melded ideas touted by both Presidents Ronald Reagan and John F. Kennedy.
– Obama, in contrast, delivered a far more nuanced plea for empathy and building bridges across party lines instead of a more direct answer – telling voters what those values would mean specifically “to your children, your future, your environment,” said Lakoff.
Worth clicking on to read the whole piece.
7) The Boston Globe has a piece that looks interesting. But it isn’t. The title – “It’s up to Obama to erase the doubt,” sounds like a discussion of Obama’s leadership will ensue. Not. The best part is the beginning:
IT’S STILL all about Barack Obama.
Is he ready to be president? Does he care enough about ordinary people to deliver for them?
After that comes a short summary of how McCain and Obama have campaigned over the summer and then the author’s ideas of how Obama can “lose” the election.
He can lose if he keeps responding to debate questions by saying the answer is “above my pay grade.” He did that last week when asked by the Rev. Rick Warren to define the beginning of life, feeding the Republican script that Obama is not up to calling the shots in the Oval Office.
He can lose if he is cast as an abortion-rights extremist, a theme that Republicans are also pushing. A focus on abortion would give the GOP a wedge issue it can use to undercut Obama on the so-called “values” front.
Uh. Ya think? Unfortunately, you won’t learn much from this article. Don’t bother.
8 ) Then contrast that with this lively Boston Herald piece today. The author has a little Obama buyer’s remorse, and he even mentions PUMA!!
Here’s how it begins:
Hillary’s marauding women may be vindicated yet.
The tide has turned for The Precious, The One, The Eloquent and Elegant and Lithe and Liquid and Cool as a Cucumber – except for those unfortunate stick legs (which explain the sweats on the basketball court).
What happened to Obama’s Midas touch? Was it overkill at Coronation Berlin? The tongue-tied orator this weekend uh-uh-uh-ing before the evangelicals at Saddleback Church, his stumbles replayed all over the Internet? I watched and felt – how could this be? – like I was watching a George Bush press conference, sweating it out and wondering, “Oh no! Doesn’t he know the answer to the question?”
The writer goes on to say that as Obama’s campaign has gotten tiring:
The only person who’d bring some excitement back is Hillary herself as veep.
. . . Besides, in a new poll, 28 percent of Hillary’s voters said they weren’t voting for Obama no matter what. Her biggest backers, including PUMA (better known as The Party Unity My Ass girls), are imploring delegates to vote for the candidate who can win (Hillary). Many women still upset about the sexist attacks on Hillary – from MSNBC’s “nutcracker Hillary doll” jokes to Obama himself saying she’s “likeable enough” – aren’t interested in giving her the No. 2 spot when, they say, she earned No. 1.
It ends like this:
I can’t say I have Obama remorse. Yet. But I’m nervous. How did he get so annoying? I wish he’d save nuance and sanctimony for senior seminars; give America some straight answers; crack some jokes at his own high-horse expense; convince me he’s up to this and soothe my furrowed, fretful brow.
That’s what McCain’s done lately. It’s working.
Go and read. It’s short, amusing and worth the time.
, the basis for the Best Motion Picture Nominee (Golden Globes) starring Brad Pitt.
, the novel by John Le Carre, a new motion picture starring Gary Oldman and Colin Firth.
by 
* (Included in the 
* 
.by David Fredosso who wrote 2008's 
- You'll have access to 18 million movies, TV shows, songs, magazines, and books, as well as ultra-fast Web browsing with Amazon Silk -- faster than iPad. Full e-mail and document access and a keyboard. Fire can transmit what is on your screen onto a connected TV or monitor without an accessory. It runs Flash (iPad doesn't). 
