As featured on p. 218 of "Bloggers on the Bus," under the name "a MyDD blogger."
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Swift Boat Surrogate
Seriously, what the fuck is this? How in the world can a Swift Boater be allowed by any Democrat to show their face in public without a massive backlash, let alone become a surrogate for a Republican campaign? Bud Day is an exposed liar and should be treated as such.
I don't want to leave the impression by my "ground game" post that I'm not at all concerned about where the election is headed. Someone like Bud Day should have been blown out of the water by the Obama campaign, if the media is lazily going to allow him to be out in front of a campaign. Their ads could be better. The attacks on McCain could too, though I hope progressives understand that the game is rigged and the BBQ media will jump in front of McCain to provide cover every time.
Picking off Bud Day would be a good place to start.
...just to recap, two prisoners of war have come out to back up McCain's "cross in the sand" story by saying, vaguely, that they heard him tell it sometime. One was Orson Swindle, a right-wing Republican lobbyist with a history of astroturfing, and the other is a Swift Boater.
The Obama campaign has pretty much figured out that the current media landscape is going to give credence to the same set of prevaricators and liars that they allowed to shape the election in 2004. There's no internal debate over whether or not to give something like Jerome Corsi's book oxygen - it's the media world we live in that he will appear all over cable news (not just the right-wing outlets) and in everyone's newspapers. The reason given by the media is always that "it's a best-seller," but that's a system the conservative movement has been gaming for years, and frequently after the boom cycle of early publicity to get their wingnuts onto the teevee the books get remaindered and available for purchase for a penny.
So instead of hoping that these smears go away, the campaign and its allies are fighting back. Chief among them is Media Matters, and Paul Waldman was brilliant with Corsi on Larry King's show last night.
They've also unearthed Corsi's latest media appearance, on a pro-white radio show. I'm guessing that wasn't a hard booking for him to nail down.
In an appearance on the August 13 edition of CNN's Larry King Live, after Media Matters for America Senior Fellow Paul Waldman noted that Jerome Corsi, author of The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality, had "put up on right-wing Web sites a whole series of bigoted and hateful posts," Corsi replied that "you haven't mentioned all my apologies for those statements." But notwithstanding Corsi's apologies for his comments, Corsi is reportedly scheduled to appear with host James Edwards on the August 17 edition of The Political Cesspool Radio Show, which, according to its "Statement of Principles," "represent[s] a philosophy that is pro-White" and which "heartily endorse[s] and accept[s] as our own, the founding tenets of the Council of Conservative Citizens [CCC]." According to a Fall 2007 article in the Southern Poverty Law Center's Intelligence Report, " 'The Political Cesspool' in the past two years has become the primary radio nexus of hate in America." Corsi previously appeared on the July 20 edition of the show, in which he promoted The Obama Nation and criticized Sen. Barack Obama.
There's also a concerted pushback inside the campaign as well, consisting of mau-mauing the media in the same way that conservatives ensure their message is heard.
Obama advisers say that whenever they hear that Corsi has been booked for an appearance on a network program, they are quickly contacting the program's producers to rebut the book's charges in phone conversations and giving them a whole run-down of past Corsi quotes that are controversial.
Obama aides also vow to insist that the producers allow them to have on a campaign surrogate to attack the charges, and are expecting to recruit more campaign surrogates, well plied with talking points, to push back against the book.
They've put out a 40-page document outlining all the falsehoods in the book. And they're using a viral email strategy to push the facts along.
There's no question that Obama's team is better prepared for this than John Kerry's was, but of course that's a low bar. What's notable is how a few of the media fish aren't totally biting at this one. They're giving Corsi publicity, sure, but they are feeling the pressure to present the other side. And Joe Klein, who has been eating his Wheaties lately, is making his disgust known and connecting it directly to the McCain campaign.
I know that people like me are supposed to try to be fair...and balanced. (The Fox mockery of our sappy professional standards seems more brutally appropriate with each passing year.) In the past, I would achieve a semblance--or an illusion--of balance by criticizing Democrats for not responding effectively when right-wing sludge merchants poisoned our national elections with their filth and lies. And it is true, as John Kerry knows, that a more effective response--and a bolder campaign--might have neutralized the Swiftboat assault four years ago. It is also true that Corsi's book this time is far less effective than his Swiftboat venture, since it doesn't come equipped with veterans willing to defile their service by telling lies to camera.
But there is no excuse for what the McCain campaign is doing on the "putting America first" front. There is no way to balance it, or explain it other than as evidence of a severe character defect on the part of the candidate who allows it to be used. There is a straight up argument to be had in this election: Mcain has a vastly different view from Obama about foreign policy, taxation, health care, government action...you name it. He has lots of experience; it is always shocking to remember that this time four years ago, Barack Obama was still in the Illinois State Legislature. Apparently, though, McCain isn't confident that conservative policies and personal experience can win, given the ruinous state of the nation after eight years of Bush. So he has made a fateful decision: he has personally impugned Obama's patriotism and allows his surrogates to continue to do that. By doing so, he has allied himself with those who smeared him, his wife, his daughter Bridget, in 2000. Those tactics won George Bush a primary--and a nomination. But they proved a form of slow-acting spiritual poison, rotting the core of the Bush presidency. We'll see if the public decides to acquiesce in sleaze in 2008, and what sort of presidency--what sort of country--that will produce.
It still has a hint of that Village aroma, but the words "character defect" are pretty strong.
We'll see how this progresses, and if the coverage changes when the inevitable TV campaign gets matched to the book, but for now, it's actually important that we all keep on top of this. The right is extremely good at character assassination, and the only way to counteract it is to punch right back and expose them.
I hope we're all clear about the strategy for John McCain evidenced by his sustained outrage fit over Wesley Clark's perfectly legitimate comments. I don't even understand what they're outraged about in that press release, and they probably don't either - it's outrage for the sake of outrage. I think Chris Bowers nails this one:
Another lesson worth noting from the frothing attacks Republicans are now delivering on Wesley Clark is that the McCain campaign really, really wants a prominent Democrat to demean his service record. This is a prospect they are drooling over, right along with their hopes that a prominent Democrat will attack McCain in age-based terms.
Why not, they've been playing that card for this long, and it's seemed to work. Now they're hopping forward and, in the most paranoid fashion possible, accusing Obama of coordinating with Jim Webb and goading Webb into making off-the-cuff comments. Webb had to clarify his remarks today.
Senator Jim Webb's staff issued a clarification late Tuesday over comments made by the Virginia Democrat in which he urged John McCain to "calm down" with the discussion of military service in the presidential campaign.
"Senator Webb's comments were not targeted at McCain's military service," said spokeswoman Kimberly Hunter. "He has consistently called for politicians not to insert politics into military service. This is the exact same argument that he used against Lindsay Graham in their Meet the Press interview last year."
With both Webb and Clark not backing down from their statements, I think it's important to note Bowers' other point - that just because the media is outraged, and the conservative noise machine is outraged, doesn't mean the public gives a fig. See the Terri Schiavo situation for an example. There's a great deal of truth-stretching and near-delusional claims of nefarious Democratic cabals coming from the McCain camp, and furthermore their surrogates are demeaning Wes Clark's military service while supposedly defending McCain's service.
"General Clark probably wouldn't get that much praise from this group. I can't speak for them, but we all know that General Clark, as high-ranking as he is, his record in his last command I think was somewhat less than stellar."
Given that one of McCain's biggest defenders here is Swift Boat Veterans for Truth star Bud Day, who was McCain's DIVORCE LAWYER by the way, there's a lot to untangle and sort out, and I don't think the blind expression of outrage is really going to impact people one way or the other. I wish Obama backed him up more strongly (though today he explicitly denied any analogy connecting Clark's remarks to the Swift Boaters, and insisted that his comments in his patriotism speech had nothing to do with Clark and were written two months ago), but I think Clark's going to be just fine, and he'll be in a future Democratic administration in a major role. Furthermore, the way the Swift Boaters acted in 2004 just gives the sense that Republicans have no problem lying and demeaning the service of leading Democratic vets (which they do), and McCain using an associate of that effort damages the credibility of this manufactured outrage. I think most people shrug their shoulders at the whole thing, and the election will be far more likely to be decided on things like this graphic:
UPDATE: Paul Waldman is absolutely right. John McCain has leveraged his POW status forever, despite media myths that he's reluctant to talk about it. POW footage has appeared in half his campaign commercials this cycle.
As I said, there's nothing wrong with that. But what happened with Gen. Clark reveals the McCain Rules, as he and the press would have us understand them. Here's how things are supposed to work: It's fine for the McCain campaign to run ads touting his time as a POW, create web videos touting his time as a POW, have him mention his time as a POW in speeches, and have him bring it up in debates (remember "I was tied up at the time"?). In other words, it's fine to have John McCain's entire presidential run be presented through the filter of his POW experience. Should, however, someone even ask the question of whether the fact that McCain was a POW really qualifies him to be president, that would be a deeply offensive affront to all that is right and good, and must not be tolerated. Talk about having it both ways.
During the first Yearly Kos convention in Las Vegas, I remember heading to my room and encountering a hotel guest with a Southern accent who wasn't an attendee. She asked me what the gathering was all about and I explained that it was a convention for a Democratic website. We got out of the elevator and right before she went into her room she turned to me and said, "I still don't like John Kerry."
It occurred to me that if I had said "I don't like George Bush" unsolicited, I would be seen as an angry vituperative blogger. But after reading this I think I understood why she didn't like Kerry. During the campaign, he didn't have the gumption to stand up for himself. That was Kerry the Presidential candidate, a construction of consultants. Kerry the man has no such problem.
Sen. John Kerry, whose 2004 presidential campaign was torpedoed by critics of his Vietnam War record, said Friday he has personally accepted Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens’ offer of $1 million to anyone who can disprove even a single charge of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
"While I am prepared to show they lied on allegation after allegation, you have generously offered to pay one million dollars for just one thing that can be proven false," Kerry wrote to Pickens. "I am prepared to prove the lie beyond any reasonable doubt."
The Massachusetts Democrat, a Navy veteran and former prosecutor, said he was willing to present his case directly to Pickens and would donate any proceeds to the Paralyzed Veterans of America.
In an interview, Kerry added: "It’s beyond me; it’s important for all the vets who served with me, who cared about it, whose own records were lied about. The problem is, it’s the way they operate on the other side, and we have to end swift-boating forever. The way to do that is to have this public accounting."
T. Boone Pickens is one of America's worst people, a filthy rich oilman who is one of the behind-the-scenes forces behind movement conservatism. He made a crack that he would give a million dollars to anyone who disproved any Swiftie allegation, expecting nobody to take him up on it. As soon as John Kerry challenged him, Pickens started changing everything around:
In his response, Pickens wrote: "I am certainly open to your challenge," but he said he would not pay Kerry unless the senator first provided him with copies of his wartime journals, as well as movies he shot while on patrol and his complete military records for 1971 to 1978.
Pickens said such documentation, which the group has previously sought, would be needed to disprove its ads.
"When you have done so, if you can then prove anything in the ads was materially untrue, I will gladly award $1 million. As you know, I have been a long and proud supporter of the American military and veterans’ causes," Pickens wrote.
He also proposed a counter-challenge: "If you cannot prove anything in the Swift Boat ads to be untrue, that you will make a $1 million gift to the charity I am choosing — the (Congressional) Medal of Honor Foundation."
Now who's being defensive? T. Boone Pickens is a bully, who thinks that the fact that he has more money than God will sufficiently stop anyone who dares to challenge him. John Kerry did and now he's changing things around, moving the goalposts and generally running scared.
In his letter to Pickens, the senator challenged the billionaire’s honor.
“I trust that you are a man of your word, having made a very public challenge at a major Washington dinner, and look forward to taking you up on this challenge,” Kerry wrote.
Why is this important? Because liars and con artists ought to be exposed for what they are. The Swift Boat allegations may be old news, but John Kerry is offering a model for the next Democrat in the line of fire. We all wish he had done this sooner, but it's great that he's doing it now.
I confess that I haven't been writing much about John McCain, mainly because I forgot he was still a Presidential candidate. But he's had a couple newsworthy moments of late. First he participated in a political rally on 9/11 where he said the following:
“The important thing about Sept. 11 is that it not be repeated,” McCain told reporters after the event. “And if we leave Iraq, then it will be repeated.”
This is the tired old "they'll follow us home" argument, propagated mainly by the fact that V-22 Osprey transport planes leave a trail of bread crumbs. They'll know the routes! Even General Petraeus was careful to distance himself from a notion that Iraqi insurgents fighting for their own country will get on boats and start car bombing Milwaukee.
McCain began by calling on the Democrats to repudiate the aspersions cast by Moveon.org on the patriotism and integrity of General Petraeus. McCain reminded us that he repudiated what he considered attacks on the patriotism of Max Cleland and John Kerry.
Repudiated the attacks, but appears at campaign events with those who do the attacking.
There's talk of a great McCain comeback in his core constituency, the media. Somebody ought to tell that to the three more staffers who resigned this week.
We know that the President has failed at just about every level of governance, has isolated this country, made us less safe and less respected in the world, and left as a legacy a mess that it will take decades to clean up. It's easy to forget that he's also a garden-variety asshole.
President Bush named Republican fundraiser Sam Fox as U.S. ambassador to Belgium on Wednesday, using a maneuver that allowed him to bypass Congress where Democrats had derailed Fox's nomination.
Sam Fox funded the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and had absolutely no explanation for why when John Kerry demanded one in the Foreign Relations Committee.
This guy slandered the good name of an American hero, and for this act of devilry he gets to sip tea in Brussels for the next two years. I guess it's a reward for services rendered.
People chuckled when presidential candidate Mitt Romney, a Mormon raised in Michigan and elected in Massachusetts, bungled the names of Cuban-American politicians during a recent speech in Miami.
But when he mistakenly associated Fidel Castro's trademark speech-ending slogan -- Patria o muerte, venceremos! -- with a free Cuba, listeners didn't laugh. They winced.
Castro has closed his speeches with the phrase -- in English, ''Fatherland or death, we shall overcome'' -- for decades.
''Clearly, that's something he was ill-advised on or didn't do his homework on,'' said Hialeah City Council President Esteban Bovo. "When you get cute with slogans, you get yourself into a trap.''
This is one of those superficial things that always annoys me with modern campaigns - that moment when the white guy has to start talking in a language he doesn't know or understand to vote-pander. It doesn't impress anyone anymore, and it inevitably leads to awkwardness like this. This is like saying "white power!" at an NAACP meeting, I would imagine.
The primary funder of an independent group that raised questions about the résumé of Sen. John F. Kerry during the 2004 presidential election has signed on to raise money for former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney's GOP presidential campaign.
Bob Perry, a Houston home builder, is named as a member of Romney's Texas Leadership Team in an invite for a fundraising event in Dallas on March 26.
Perry has earned a reputation for his willingness to finance "527" groups. He gained notoriety for the $4.5 million he donated to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group of Vietnam War veterans who questioned Kerry's military credentials. He funded similar pro-GOP groups in 2006, including the Economic Freedom Fund, which ran ads attacking Democrats in Georgia, Iowa and West Virginia, and A Stronger America, which financed ads attacking Democrat Mike Hatch in his Minnesota gubernatorial bid last year.
In 2006, Perry was the largest political donor in Texas, doling out nearly $400,000 to GOP Gov. Rick Perry's campaign alone (the two are not related).
I guess Mitt's going for an Administration filled with honesty, right?
One thing that has come out of 2004 is that anyone associated with the Swift Boaters is immediately demonized by a substantial segment of the population. Votes are hard enough to come by without something like this anchoring you down. Good job, Mitt: Tone deaf on multiple counts!
I am a film and video editor, stand-up comedian, and blogger. My editor resume is here. A sample of my stand-up is here. The blog is what you're reading right now. Wasn't that easy?
View blog reactions
