About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

ABC's Tapper, Limbaugh touted Weekly Standard characterization of Obama that is based on false assumption

February 12, 2008 9:11 pm ET

Trouble viewing clip? Download: QT | WMV

SUMMARY: Citing Dean Barnett's Weekly Standard piece about a recent speech by Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, radio host Rush Limbaugh and ABC's Jake Tapper promoted Barnett's claim that without a teleprompter, Obama is, in Limbaugh's words, "a different guy." However, in claiming that Obama "improvised" or "ad-libbed" and that the audience "saw a different Obama," Barnett provided several quotes that have been part of Obama's standard stump speech since as early as November 2007.

16 Comments

In a February 12 Weekly Standard article on Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) speech (text, video) at the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner in Virginia, staff writer Dean Barnett wrote that Obama spoke without a teleprompter and asserted, "Because of Obama's improvised moments, this speech was different than the usual fare he offers. ... Virtually every time Obama deviated from the text, he expressed the partisan anger that has so poisoned the Democratic party [sic]. His spontaneous comments eschewed the conciliatory and optimistic tone that has made the Obama campaign such a phenomenon." Barnett concluded the article, headlined "Obama Unplugged: Lost without a Teleprompter," by claiming: "The pressing question that Obama's decidedly uninspiring Jefferson-Jackson oratory raises is which Obama is the real Obama -- the one who read beautifully crafted words from a Teleprompter after his victory in Iowa, or the tediously angry liberal who improvised in Virginia?" However, to support his claims that Obama "improvised" or "ad-libbed" and that the audience "saw a different Obama," Barnett provided several quotes that have been part of Obama's standard stump speech since as early as November 2007. Citing Barnett's article, ABC News senior national correspondent Jake Tapper wrote on his Political Punch blog that Barnett's "observation" that Obama is "different" without a teleprompter "gets at what could be a real vulnerability for Obama." Rush Limbaugh asserted that without a teleprompter, Obama is "a different guy."

Barnett wrote of the February 9 Jefferson-Jackson Dinner speech, "At one point, Obama launched an improvised jeremiad against the current administration that took special note of the recent revelation that he and [Vice President] Dick Cheney are distant relations," and then went on to quote at length from Obama's speech:

"Now I understand some of the excitement doesn't have to do with me. I know that whatever else happens whatever twists and turns this campaign may take, when you go into that polling place next November, the name George Bush won't be on the ballot and that makes everybody pretty cheerful. Everyone's happy about that. The name of my cousin Dick Cheney won't be on the ballot. That was embarrassing when that news came out. When they do these genealogical surveys, you want to be related to somebody cool. So, but, his name went be on the ballot.

"Each of us running for the Democratic nomination agrees on one thing that the other party does not -- that the next president must end the disastrous policies of George W. Bush. No more Scooter Libby Justice! No more Brownie incompetence! No more Karl Rove politics."

Barnett commented, "None of this was in the prepared text," adding, "And all of it was a marked departure from the kind of successful campaign that Obama has run." He went on to speculate what Obama might have done with the anecdote about Cheney "if he thought things through more fully." But, contrary to Barnett's suggestion that Obama had not "thought things through more fully" with regard to the joke about being related to Cheney, Obama had used the joke in his stump speech for months prior to the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner speech in Virginia. On the December 23, 2007, edition of NBC-syndicated Chris Matthews Show, NBC's Norah O'Donnell noted that Obama "uses that line in just about every speech that he gives, talking about everyone has a black sheep in their family."

Barnett went on to ask: "Looking past the missed opportunity regarding the vice president, how many times has Obama deliberately pushed angry-left hot buttons like Scooter Libby and Karl Rove? Obama has run looking to the future, and thus hasn't felt it necessary to dwell on the purported horrors that the Bush administration has visited upon the nation." In fact, as early as July 15, 2007, the Associated Press reported Obama saying, "People are tired of Scooter Libby justice" and as early as November 3, 2007, The Hill quoted Obama as saying, "The era of Scooter Libby justice, and Brownie incompetence, and the Karl Rove politics of fear and cynicism will be over."

In addition, the January 6 edition of CNN's Ballot Bowl aired portions of a live campaign event in which Obama used almost exactly the same language that Barnett said was "improvised" at the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner that took place over a month later. From the January 6 edition of Ballot Bowl:

OBAMA: Now, let's face it: Part of the reason that so many people came out, twice as many people as had come out previously, has to do with the fact that they knew that they -- next, that this November, they'll be going into the polling places, selecting the next president of the United States of America, and they know that the name George W. Bush will not be on the ballot. And they're excited about that.

[applause]

The name of my cousin, Dick Cheney, will not be on the ballot. That was really embarrassing when that news report came out. You know, when they do these genealogical surveys, you're hoping that you're related to somebody cool. You know, maybe Abraham Lincoln, or Willie Mays, or Tom Brady. You know, but Dick Cheney -- that's a, that's a letdown.

But his name will not be on the ballot. And what this means is that the era of Scooter Libby justice, and Brownie incompetence, and Karl Rove politics will finally be over next year. It will finally be over.

Barnett later asserted that:

Other improvised moments also contradicted the generally lofty tone of the Obama campaign. At one, point when addressing what we have to do for the economy, Obama ad-libbed, "The insurance and the drug companies aren't going to give up their profits easily ... Exxon Mobil made $11 billion this past quarter." This is the kind of empty class warfare shtick that earned John Edwards an early exit from the race. What's more, it displayed the kind of simplistic sloganeering that Obama had previously eschewed.

But in a January 27 interview on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos, Obama similarly asserted, "The insurance companies, the drug companies -- they're not going to give up their profits easily when it comes to health care. The oil companies like writing the energy bills, and they have a clear agenda." Earlier, on January 4, according to a Congressional Quarterly transcript (accessed via the Nexis database) of a campaign event in Concord, New Hampshire, Obama asserted, "And, of course, there are going to be insurance companies and drug companies that don't want to give up their profits when we say we need to reform health care. Of course, there will be operatives in Washington who want to tear me down and won't even think about trying to work with me on a piece of legislation when I'm president."

In his post on the Political Punch weblog -- headlined "Not So Inspiring Sans Teleprompter?" -- Tapper quoted verbatim portions of Barnett's article and wrote:

Barnett writes that the lack of a Teleprompter "revealed Obama as a markedly inferior speaker ... Virtually every time Obama deviated from the text, he expressed the partisan anger that has so poisoned the Democratic party. His spontaneous comments eschewed the conciliatory and optimistic tone that has made the Obama campaign such a phenomenon ...

"The pressing question that Obama's decidedly uninspiring Jefferson-Jackson oratory raises is which Obama is the real Obama--the one who read beautifully crafted words from a Teleprompter after his victory in Iowa, or the tediously angry liberal who improvised in Virginia?"

Consider that this is a conservative source, of course. But it's interesting. What do you think?

Tapper called Barnett's story "fascinating" and something that he hadn't "seen anywhere else."

On the February 12 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Limbaugh said of Obama, "[W]hen his teleprompter breaks down, and when he doesn't have the teleprompter, all this flowery, vapid speech filled with hope -- it vanishes." And he reverts into the typical liberal: angry, full of rage, ripping Bush, ripping Rove, ripping Exxon Mobil -- every, every standard Democrat [sic] talking point." Limbaugh concluded, "[W]hen he doesn't have the teleprompter, he's a different guy."

From the February 12 edition of the Rush Limbaugh Show:

LIMBAUGH: And by the way, speaking of Obama, there's another fascinating story today, American Spectator [sic], about Obama. When he -- when his teleprompter breaks down, or when he doesn't have a teleprompter, all this flowery, vapid speech filled with hope -- it vanishes. And he reverts into the typical liberal: angry, full of rage, ripping Bush, ripping Rove, ripping Exxon Mobil -- every, every standard Democrat talking point. He just starts railing with this. Soft-spoken -- when he doesn't have the prompter, he's a different guy.

From the 4 p.m. ET hour of the January 6 edition of CNN's Ballot Bowl:

OBAMA: Now, let's face it: Part of the reason that so many people came out, twice as many people as had come out previously, has to do with the fact that they knew that they -- next, that this November, they'll be going into the polling places, selecting the next president of the United States of America, and they know that the name George W. Bush will not be on the ballot. And they're excited about that.

[applause]

The name of my cousin, Dick Cheney, will not be on the ballot. That was really embarrassing when that news report came out. You know, when they do these genealogical surveys, you're hoping that you're related to somebody cool. You know, maybe Abraham Lincoln, or Willie Mays, or Tom Brady. You know, but Dick Cheney -- that's a, that's a letdown.

But his name will not be on the ballot. And what this means is that the era of Scooter Libby justice, and Brownie incompetence, and Karl Rove politics will finally be over next year. It will finally be over.

[applause]

But what is bringing people out is not just opposition to George Bush. I mean, that's easy -- being against something. The reason people were coming out in Iowa was because they wanted to be for something. They want some affirmation that we can still come together as a nation and solve big problems. That we are not inevitably divided into Red States and Blue States. That we are not just a collection of individuals. That we're not just in it on our own, but we can in fact join together and dream big dreams and do big things.

From the December 23, 2007, edition of the NBC-syndicated Chris Matthews Show:

MATTHEWS: Strangest bedfellows: Who made the oddest couple this year? Well, there's televangelist Pat Robertson endorsing Rudy Giuliani. There's Barack Obama and Dick Cheney, who found out from genealogists that they are in fact long-lost cousins.

[...]

O'DONNELL: I would have to say the lost cousins of Barack Obama and Dick Cheney. And that's because it was my interview with Mrs. Cheney that first let that out, where Mrs. Cheney said, "You know, by the way, they're eighth cousins." What's happened is that as a result, Barack Obama now uses that line in just about every speech that he gives, talking about everyone has a black sheep in their family. And it's Dick Cheney. And it's applause --

MATTHEWS: Ha!

O'DONNELL: -- line that works for him.

From the January 27 edition of ABC's This Week:

OBAMA: So, part of what -- part of what I think we have to do is to set a new tone in politics. Not -- not a naive one. The insurance companies, the drug companies -- they're not going to give up their profits easily when it comes to health care. The oil companies like writing the energy bills, and they have a clear agenda. But it does mean that we have to reduce the interests of -- or the influence of special interests and lobbyists. I think that we've got to take ethics reform seriously. I think that we all have some responsibilities in terms of focusing on how are we going to solve problems for the American people.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by IRONY 101 (February 12, 2008 9:28 pm ET)
         
      Wait a minute, let me get this straight...after watching George W. Bush campaign, a candidate who could not speak a coherent sentence that was unscripted but yet was (some say) twice elected, these guys are going to say Barack Obama is ineffective without a teleprompter. LOL...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (February 12, 2008 9:28 pm ET)
         
      Wait a minute, let me get this straight...after watching George W. Bush campaign, a candidate who could not speak a coherent sentence that was unscripted but yet was (some say) twice elected, these guys are going to say Barack Obama is ineffective without a teleprompter. LOL...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by BayAreaDem336 (February 12, 2008 9:31 pm ET)
         

      Simply amazing how these conservatives actually think anyone cares about their wishful thinking on Senator Obama. Their president (not mine) always has been a unremarkable man and they hate for anyone to pint out his disastrous failures. 

      To the senators people who I know read these blogs well done! If this is the best that conservatives can come up with then they are in serious trouble come November. I can understand the conservatives anger though... particularly Tapper who was caught in his lies about President Clinton... And Rush bless his heart is resorting to lies about his audience numbers (by 8 million) and the fact that his jihad against McCain fell flat on its face. I would be be very angry also if the party that I shill for has lost all credibility and is corrupt to its core.  

      Report Abuse
    • Author by lostlogic (February 12, 2008 10:05 pm ET)
         
      Waite for it...does anyone else notice a theme brewing...Obama is a phony...I guess we now know how they are going to try to frame the attack.  I gotta say I didn't see this one coming...and I am usually pretty good at this stuff--I guess that says something about me that I can think like these jerks. )-:  I really thought the attacke was going to come from a security stand point with lots of terrorist scares and national security news dominating the airwaves.  This may be effective it they can get it to catch on. 
      Report Abuse
      • Author by bittermarv (February 12, 2008 10:24 pm ET)
           
        I suspect they're still tossing stuff at the wall and seeing which nasty, unsubstantiated swift-boat-like attack will stick come the general election campaign.  They can't win the campaign on ideas, so they'll raise bogus character issues.  Again.  Regressives lack any and all shame.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by mdm40398218 (February 12, 2008 10:30 pm ET)
         
      Just another conservative hit piece. What don't they try real journalism for a change? And we all know Bush is so wonderful without a stump speech and I am sure the Weekly Standard has told us so. Bush can barely form sentences without a prepared text.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (February 12, 2008 10:40 pm ET)
         
      The, he's a secret muslum, seems to have some traction with the 30%ers.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by dave_chicago (February 13, 2008 12:10 pm ET)
           
        The very first caller on C-Span's Washington Journal this morning: "Obama's a Muslim. People should know this, but the media won't tell them!".
        Report Abuse
    • Author by mrahen (February 13, 2008 12:19 am ET)
         
      When I saw Barack's stump speech in Florence, SC the day before the South Carolina primary, there was no teleprompter in the room.  The one minute section of his speech that Mr. Barnett and Mr. Limbaugh portray as being unprepared was nearly verbatim what I heard in January.  Obama’s speech was eloquent and full of hope not vapid, was at least 20 minutes long and he ad-lib in response to audience comments.    Relics like Limbaugh view Obama through myopia’s microscope searching for any blemish that they can construe to be a major deficit in Obama’s character or ability.  Obama’s full message is so inspiring that the ultra right-wing conservatives like Limbaugh can not diminish Barack’s significance.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by truthseeker77 (February 13, 2008 12:52 am ET)
         

      Obama did pause a lot and seemed unimpressive in the Virginia dinner.

      The Weekly Standard makes good points. 

      http://youtube.com/watch?v=tydfsfSQiYc 

      Report Abuse
    • Author by dangrady (February 13, 2008 10:09 am ET)
         

      SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!

      Man, are the Republicans pathetic, or what??????????????????!!!!!!!!

      Where's the THERE THERE?? What are they talking about, so confused aren't they. Can't help themselves, if the call him the "N-word" game over. If the to call him a drug dealer for having admitted using drugs as a teen, then they have to discuss GWB and his long term experience with drugs they were willing to forgive, and went bisserk if anybody mentioned it.

      Hell we elected DRAFT-DODGERS that were proponents of the war they DODGED, and not a peep. I say let them say what they will there is one simple truth they're are going to run scared from.

      That fact is that Democrats are voting 2-1 to the Republicans, hell the Republicans are voting as Democrats, Independants would vote for anything that wasn't a Republican.

      Let's start the lessons now; can you say "Historical Landslide for the Democrats in '08.'

      Happy Thoughts;

      Dan Grady

      Report Abuse
      • Author by truthseeker77 (February 13, 2008 10:59 am ET)
           
        Dan, please show us a historical correlation between party primary turnout and general election success for an individual candidate in the general election.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by dangrady (February 13, 2008 11:10 am ET)
             

          SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!

          You must be the Don Knotts of Truthseekers.

          The most likely voters poll of most likely voter polls is the primaries/caucuss, and we are turning out by 2/1. In my 32years of voting hasn't seen this before, and is not likely to see it again anytime soon.

          But, you can argue with this if you like, I know it will make me feel good.

          Happy Thoughts;

          Dan Grady

          Report Abuse
    • Author by MoonbatYouBet (February 13, 2008 10:54 am ET)
         

      So many myths and falsehoods all in one article.

      I'll stick with this one: This is the kind of empty class warfare shtick that earned John Edwards an early exit from the race.

      Um, no.  That "empty class warfare schtick" was the only thing that gave Edwards as strong a showing as he had in a primary season dominated by celebrity candidates and fluff media coverage. 

      If Edwards leaving the race is a sign of a population that doesn't believe in his message, what does Thompson's departure say about "True Conservatism," Rudy's losses about a Homeland Security based candidacy, Mitt's about easy pliable whatever-you-want-me-to-be faux conservatism and the no doubt soon to be announced exit of Huckabee about the Evangelical movements?

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.