NY Times' Bumiller falsely suggested Clinton or Obama campaigns say women should not be treated equally
SUMMARY: In a New York Times article, Elisabeth Bumiller asserted: "Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama tangled on Friday over whether women should be treated equally to men in the boxing ring of presidential politics. At the same time, Mrs. Clinton elaborated on the 'pile-on politics' video her campaign prepared, which showed her under assault from the six male candidates at the Democratic debate on Tuesday." However, none of the quotes Bumiller provided in the article support the suggestion that either the Clinton campaign or the Obama campaign had asserted that women should not "be treated equally to men in the boxing ring of presidential politics."
In a November 3 article discussing candidates' responses to the October 30 Democratic presidential debate, New York Times reporter Elisabeth Bumiller asserted: "Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton [NY] and Barack Obama [IL] tangled on Friday over whether women should be treated equally to men in the boxing ring of presidential politics. At the same time, Mrs. Clinton elaborated on the 'pile-on politics' video her campaign prepared, which showed her under assault from the six male candidates at the Democratic debate on Tuesday." However, none of the quotes Bumiller provided in the article support the suggestion that either the Clinton campaign or the Obama campaign had asserted that women should not "be treated equally to men in the boxing ring of presidential politics."
Bumiller quoted Clinton's November 2 comments to reporters in New Hampshire that "I don't think they're picking on me because I'm a woman. I think they're picking on me because I'm winning." Clinton added: "I anticipate it's going to get even hotter -- and if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. And I'm very much at home in the kitchen."
Bumiller went on to note Obama's comments on the November 2 edition of NBC's Today:
Mr. Obama got the gender argument rolling early Friday when he criticized Mrs. Clinton on NBC's "Today" show for her post-debate strategy.
"One of the things that she has suggested why she should be elected is because she's been playing in this rough-and-tumble stage," Mr. Obama said in response to a question about whether Mrs. Clinton was playing "the gender card."
"So it doesn't make sense," Mr. Obama said, "for her after having run that way for eight months, the first time that people start challenging her point of view, that suddenly, she backs off and says, Don't pick on me."
Mr. Obama then hinted that he had not introduced race into a Democratic debate in Iowa.
"We spent I think the first 15 minutes of the debate hitting me on various foreign policy issues," Mr. Obama said. "I didn't come out and say, Look, I'm being hit on because I look different from the rest of the folks on the stage."
[...]
Shortly after the Democratic debate, when Mrs. Clinton came under attack, Mrs. Clinton's campaign posted a video on her Web site called "The Politics of Pile On" that showed short clips of the men at the debate.
On Thursday, Mrs. Clinton went to her alma mater, Wellesley, and said, "In so many ways this all-women's college prepared me to compete in the all-boys' club of presidential politics."
The same day, her campaign sent out a fund-raising appeal condemning the men's actions at the debate and saying, "Hillary's going to need your help.
But nowhere in her Wellesley speech, the "Politics of Pile On" video, or the November 1 fundraising email did Clinton or her campaign assert that women should not be treated equally to men. Nor did Obama assert that during his interview on Today.
From the November 2 edition of NBC's Today:
MATT LAUER (co-host): Let's start where Andrea [Mitchell, NBC News chief foreign affairs correspondent] left off, this idea that when the guys challenge the gal at this debate this week, that in some ways, you were ganging up on her. And you heard what Senator Clinton said at Wellesley yesterday. She said that in some ways, that that all-woman's college prepared her for the all-boys club of presidential politics. Now, it sounds to me, Senator, as if I just heard the gender card drop. How are you going to deal with it?
OBAMA: Well, look, I am assuming, and I hope that Senator Clinton wants to be treated like everybody else. And I think that that's why she's running for president. You know, when we had a debate back in Iowa a while back, we spent, I think, the first 15 minutes of the debate hitting me on various foreign policy issues, and I didn't come out and say, "Look, I'm being hit on because I look different from the rest of the folks on the stage." I assumed it was because there were real policy differences there. And I think that has to be the attitude that all of us take. We're not running for the president of the city council, we're running for the presidency of the United States of America.
LAUER: So you don't feel as if you have to be sensitive at all to this gender issue, that if you do vigorously challenge Senator Clinton that it might take on a more perilous tone than if you vigorously challenge a male candidate?
OBAMA: No, look, I don't think that people doubt that Senator Clinton is tough. And she's used to playing in national politics. And, in fact, that is one of the things that she has suggested is why she should be elected is because she's been playing in this rough-and-tumble stage. So it doesn't make sense for her after having run that way for eight months, the first time that people start challenging her point of view, that suddenly, she backs off and says, "Don't pick on me."
LAUER: Let me --
OBAMA: You know, I think that that is not obviously how we would expect her to operate if she were president.
This would be the same Elizabeth Brumiller who wrote untrue stories about Al Gore in the 2000 campaign and appears occasionally on The Chris Matthews show. Is anybody surprised that any story she writes about Democratic Presidential candidates is untrue or misleading? The writers featured by the New York Times are NOT to be trusted.
Well, she does call it the "all boys club" that she is working in. And there were those lines like "Most women would be flattered to have all these men paying attention to them," in the weeks leading up to a debate where they knew she would be heavily criticized as the front-runner.
I think her campaign has been using this subtley but nonetheless consciously and effectively. Look to comments from her supporters all over the web, including her own site and most are echoing the line that the only important thing about the debate was that Hillary could stand up to all these men. It's hard to believe a male candidate either would have tried or been so successful at painting themselves as the victim in a debate that they essentially lost through getting called out on evasive answers.
For her supporters, there is nothing at all about the content of what was said in the debate. Nothing. It does appear like, subtly or not, she is able to use this to galvinize support around her even while removing substance from the internal Democratic debate.
I think you could compliment her campaign for being slippery and clever about this stuff but not so squeaky clean as MMFA is implying by their response to this piece.
1) The "all boys'" comment is a statement of fact, not spin or opinion. There is only one female candidate in the field and that is the speaker. It is absolutely accurate to point this out.
2) Please provide a link to the "most women would be flattered" quote.
Sundog, I would guess that ALL of the Republan talk show/blog/websites are fixated on this point. Doesn't seem to bother the Dems and they will be the Americans who will decide their candidate.
And let's face it, it is a PRIMARY. Nobody uses their hole card. The Repubs certainly aren't above board with their points. Politics be politics. But JOURNALISTS not following up their information are worthwhile to be called out.
It's true that the media are stressing dynamics and conflict over substance (as they always do) but this particular criticism seems to be ignoring the fact that there is an element of truth to what is being said. I think the Clinton campaign is doing a very professional job of alternately playing this card and then pointing out that you can't really prove that they're playing this card. So, in a way, the media is getting played a bit by some rather cynical political players who know how media works. They lay it out there with these little comments and suggestive things like "All these men" and the 'Pile on' video so they know this is the way it will get played and the way people will see it. But when you try to nail down what they're doing there is always that level of deniability that they've left for themselves.
It's all very professional and impressive sure. But I can't help feeling that it's also quite Rovian. And I think the analysis MMFA is making these days is being confused by the fact that we're in a primary campaign and not all of the manipulation and misinformation that is going on is conservative VS reality as is so often the case. Basically, I think the inherent dishonesty of the Clinton campaign is being admired and excused by a lot of people who have gotten used to defending Hillary from these very types of tactics.
This is a weird read by MMFA. It doesn't at all seem like the article is making the argument that Barack Obama is saying women shouldn't be treated equally. The argument is that Obama is finding fault in what he seems to have inferred from the Clinton response to the pile-on in the debate. Obama is saying Clinton is calling foul because the men are piling on her, and that her gender and that of her detractors is fundamentally important when considering her victimization. This seems to be an example of MMFA not even understanding the premise of the article they're citing as misinformative.
JUSTICE AND TRUTH - FACT CHECK:
ON DEADLINE: Hillary hides behind skirt?Rather than rebut her rivals' charges or confront the issues with facts and details, Clinton accused her rivals of ganging up on her.
She released a cleverly edited video showing rivals John Edwards, Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Chris Dodd uttering her name in rapid-fire succession to the strains of Mozart's The Marriage of Figaro.
The video then cuts to the words, "The Politics of Pile On."
Her top strategist, Mark Penn, told supporters on a conference call that Clinton needed their help to survive "this six-on-one to try to bring her down."
In the call, first reported by The Hill newspaper, pollster Penn said he had already detected backlash from female voters.
On Thursday, the senator returned to her all-female alma mater, Wellesley College, and called it a place that taught her to compete "in the all-boys club of presidential politics."
Clinton's advisers, speaking on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss internal matters, said there is a clear and long-planned strategy to fend off attacks by accusing her male rivals of gathering against her.
----------------------------------------------------------
I'm going to have to call this one for the NYT. The fact is that the HRC campaign is determined to use the "GIRL" card to keep HRC from having to answer any questions during the debates - or interviews.
Well, I'm impressed. Starting every post with such an authoritative slogan like that, who would be foolish enough to argue with you?
I'm going to have to call this one for the NYT. - justicetruthus8276
I'm imagining the internal struggle that went on there.Speaking as one who is not too impressed with Hillary Clinton, I can't imagine being so filled with hate for any one person.Dick Morris might be looking over his shoulder.
SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!
The Ron Fournier article about the Clinton's debate with McRae is hardly proof of a gender card being dropped, and since when has a Republican cared what they say about a Clinton because of her gender??
Were these journalists calling the right wing punditry when she was being vilified in ’93 as she was trying to introduce a comprehensive health care program?? No, they sat on their hands as she was accused of anything they could make up.Just grab the volumes of smear books and articles written about them that they have endured, not to mentioned the numbers of Special Prosecutors that couldn’t find anything but a dirty dress and tell me a rational mind would claim she uses her gender to win elections!This desperate effort to smear, and make Hillary some kind of monster is like a slow motion explosion blowing up in their faces, and will surely get her elected to the Presidency after 14 years of lies, distortions, and deceit of the Republican Party!The Republicans and Clinton detractors have been flinging mud at them for so long, the voting public only looks to see who’s doing the throwing to decide who’s lying!Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
"...by accusing her male rivals of gathering against her."
And how does she deal with her female rivals? Oh, right...
So, her strategy, if she has one, is to accuse the other candidates of doing ...um...what they are in fact doing?
Diabolical..