RECENT POSTS
- Oprah, Health Care Lobbyists, Among Recent Visitors to White House
- An Obama Thanksgiving Menu, with an Extra Serving of Pie
- White House Thanksgiving Traditions: Broken and Observed
- Obama, GOP Air Differences Over Jobs, Economy In Thanksgiving Addresses
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
McCain Campaign v Newsweek
May 12, 2008 4:12 PM
In profile of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, Newsweek writes that the "Republican Party has been successfully scaring voters since 1968, when Richard Nixon built a Silent Majority out of lower- and middle-class folks frightened or disturbed by hippies and student radicals and blacks rioting in the inner cities."
Mark Salter, a senior adviser to Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., took issue with that description in a letter to Newsweek's editor Jon Meacham.
(A letter that hilariously Newsweek is touting as a "Newsweek Web Exclusive"! Hey guys -- it's not a WEB EXCLUSIVE, it's a letter to the editor, a complaint about perceived bias. But I digress...)
"A useful way to read the piece would be to try to imagine you were a Republican reading it," Salter writes. "The characterization of Republican presidential campaigns as nothing more than attack machines that use 527s and other means to smear opponents strikes us as pretty offensive. Is that how Ronald Reagan won two terms? Do they really think other Republican presidential candidates were elected because they ran dirtier campaigns than their opponents? Or could it be that they were better candidates or ran better campaigns or maybe more voters agreed with their position on important issues?"
Salter writes that the story makes "a biased implication that Republicans have won elections and will try to win this one simply by tearing down through disreputable means their opponents."
The authors, Salter wrote, "framed this race exactly as Senator Obama wants it to be framed—every issue that raises doubts about his policy views and judgment is part of a smear campaign intended to distract voters from the real issues at stake in the election, and, thus, illegitimate. And even if Senator McCain might not be inclined to support such advertising, if he can't stop them from occurring then he will have succumbed to the temptation to put ambition before principle. How this notion could appear credible after MoveOn, the AFL-CIO and the DNC launched negative ad campaigns weeks ago, and after leaks from the Obama campaign that they would soon start running negative ads against McCain, is mystifying. When a conservative talk show host emphasized Senator Obama's middle name, Senator McCain immediately denounced it himself in the strongest possible terms. When a left wing radio host called Senator McCain a 'warmonger;' when Senator Rockefeller disparaged Senator McCain's war record; and when Howard Dean consistently accused Senator McCain of corruption, dishonesty and various other smears, the response from the Obama campaign has been either silence or a spokesperson releases an anodyne statement saying they don't agree with the characterization…
Herr Salter concludes that "Without a trace of skepticism, your reporters embraced the primary communications strategy the Obama campaign intends to follow: any criticism of their candidate is a below the belt, Republican attack machine distortion that should discredit the authors. And any attempt by our campaign to counter that suggestion will be dismissed as a rant. The other day, Senator Obama noted that Representative DeFazio's accusation that Senator McCain was up to his neck in the Keating Five scandal was a legitimate line of attack, despite the fact the Senator was largely exonerated by the Senate Ethics Committee, whose special counsel declared he had been kept in the investigation only because of his party affiliation. Were we to raise the Rezko matter, their campaign would accuse us of distracting voters with a low blow by making more of a 'flimsy relationship' than the facts warranted. ...The McCain campaign will keep to the high standards of political debate Senator McCain demands of us. The Senator will not tolerate unfair attacks by anyone on our campaign. We won't, however, abide by rules imposed on us by our opponents, and which pertain only to our campaign and not theirs, even if they manage to get reporters to call the deal fair."
Read the Newsweek piece, then Salter's letter …What sayeth thou?
- jpt
May 12, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (22)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
I agree, Jake. This is a deplorable tactic of the Obama campaign. He plays as dirty as they come, all the while elevating himself to the status of a new kind of politics.
McCain is falling into a dangerous trap. Thank goodness for 527s.
Posted by: HoosierSue | May 12, 2008 4:20:38 PM
You have to be deaf and blind to not recognize the impact of the Swiftboat ads, the Willie Horton ads, etc. They're extremely powerful, extremely negative, and extremely disgraceful.
Posted by: Jim B. | May 12, 2008 4:17:17 PM
Post a comment
