When will Fox News ask Rove about his reported role in "informally advising" McCain?
SUMMARY: Despite discussing on The O'Reilly Factor how Sen. John McCain should run against Sen. Barack Obama if he is the Democratic nominee, neither Karl Rove nor host Bill O'Reilly addressed Rove's reported role in "informally advising" McCain's campaign. Further, Rove did not disclose that he has reportedly given $2,300 to McCain's campaign.
During Fox News political analyst Karl Rove's appearance on the March 12 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, neither Rove nor host Bill O'Reilly addressed Rove's reported role in "informally advising" the campaign of Sen. John McCain. Further, Rove did not disclose that he has reportedly given $2,300 to McCain's campaign. Rove has not addressed these issues in repeated appearances on Fox News.
During The O'Reilly Factor, Rove discussed how McCain should run against Sen. Barack Obama if he is the Democratic nominee. "Well, John McCain doesn't need to run against a black American," Rove said. "He needs to run against the person that he sees, who is an inexperienced senator with very liberal views, who's out of the mainstream of American politics. You know, look, this -- again, you do not -- you want to stay away from race." Neither Rove nor O'Reilly mentioned Rove's reportedly acknowledged contribution to the McCain campaign or his reported role as an informal adviser.
In a March 8 Politico article, staff writer David Paul Kuhn reported that Rove "gave money to McCain and soon after had a private conversation with the senator," adding: "A top McCain adviser said both [former Bush campaign manager Ken] Mehlman and Rove are now informally advising the campaign. Rove refused to detail his conversation with McCain."
From the March 8 article in The Politico:
John McCain is getting much more than President Bush's endorsement and fundraising help for his campaign. He's getting Bush's staff.
It's no secret that Steve Schmidt, Bush's attack dog in the 2004 election, and Mark McKinnon, the president's media strategist, are performing similar functions for McCain now.
But other big-name Bushies are lining up to boost McCain, too.
Ken Mehlman, who ran Bush's 2004 campaign, is now serving as an unpaid, outside adviser to the Arizona Republican. Karl Rove, the president's top political hand since his Texas days, recently gave money to McCain and soon after had a private conversation with the senator. A top McCain adviser said both Mehlman and Rove are now informally advising the campaign. Rove refused to detail his conversation with McCain.
The list could grow longer. Dan Bartlett, formerly a top aide in the Bush White House, and Sara Taylor, the erstwhile Bush political adviser, said they are eager to provide any assistance and advice possible to McCain.
Rove explained that he and McCain "got to know each other during the 2004 campaign." In a separate interview, Mehlman noted that "McCain was completely loyal to the president in 2004 and worked incredibly hard to help him get elected." According to Taylor, "The Bush Republicans here in town are excited for John McCain."
From the March 12 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: "Personal Story" segment tonight -- a few days ago, former vice presidential candidate and Hillary Clinton supporter Geraldine Ferraro said that Barack Obama's race was a positive for him, and that he might not be where he is if not for that. Well, yesterday I spoke with Ms. Ferraro on The Radio Factor.
O'REILLY: You know you're gonna get hammered on that. But do you believe that Barack Obama, if he were a white man, white senator, would not be in the position?
FERRARO: Absolutely. And let me tell you what I said before that. I said, "If I were not Geraldine Ferraro, if I were Gerard Ferraro in 1984, there's no way I would have gotten -- been a nominee."
O'REILLY: Well, Senator Obama responded this morning.
OBAMA [video clip]: If you were to get a handbook on what's the path to the presidency, I don't think that the handbook would start by saying, "Be an African-American named Barack Obama."
O'REILLY: Well, Ms. Ferraro is angry. She's being called a racist.
FERRARO [video clip]: I have to tell you what I find is offensive, is that every time somebody says something about the campaign, you're accused of being racist.
O'REILLY: Joining us now from Washington, Fox News political analyst Karl Rove. All right, this is a minefield. There's no doubt about it. I know that firsthand. If you discuss race in any way, shape or form, anything you said can and will be held against you. So the question is, Ms. Ferraro has been asked to leave her position as finance -- on the finance committee of Hillary Clinton. That came from Hillary Clinton herself. Number one, was Geraldine Ferraro wrong, in your opinion, for what she said?
ROVE: Well, look, let's stipulate right from the beginning that she is not a bigot or a racist. Her record gives no evidence of that whatsoever. In fact, just the opposite. But what she said was offensive. And it detracted from the message that she wanted to convey, which was that she felt Barack Obama was inexperienced and not fit to be commander in chief. But she tied it up with bows and ribbons that made it extremely offensive.
[...]
O'REILLY: But going ahead, now John McCain has got to run against, if Obama gets the nomination, a black American. And there -- everybody on the Democratic side is gonna be looking for any kind of race deal. You know that.
ROVE: Right. Well, John McCain doesn't need to run against a black American. He needs to run against the person that he sees, who is an inexperienced senator with very liberal views, who's out of the mainstream of American politics. You know, look, this -- again, you do not -- you want to stay away from race. And what Geraldine Ferraro had was a legitimate argument. He is not experienced enough to be president of the United States. And rather than make that argument, she, unfortunately, tied it to race. And as a result, she blew it up.
O'REILLY: All right. So you basically say to John McCain if you're running his campaign, you never mention race anyway?
O'REILLY: No way.
O'REILLY: Don't even - now, do you campaign to try to get black votes? Or do you cede --
O'REILLY: -- that? You do?
ROVE: No, absolutely. You campaign as hard as you can. One, because the American people want it. They don't a president who says, "You know what, there's some group of people I'm uncomfortable campaigning with" --
O'REILLY: No, it wouldn't be that. It would be like -- look, there are some states the Democrats don't even bother with. Howard Dean wants to change that, but there are some red states -- saying, "Look, we're not gonna win that. Idaho, we're not gonna go up there." It would be like, we're not gonna -- John McCain's not gonna spend the money and the resources in certain areas because he's just not gonna get those votes.
ROVE: But look, he needs to make an appeal to all Americans. So yeah, he needs to go into the African-American community. Look, in 2000, we got 9 percent of the African-American vote in the Bush campaign. Democrats took 91 percent of the African-American vote. But it was still important for us to ask for the vote, 'cause it wasn't just African-Americans who were watching. All Americans were watching. And what they want in their president is somebody who will go out and campaign aggressively for all kinds of votes.
O'REILLY: OK, so it's a symbolic gesture, rather than --
O'REILLY: So to recap, no race at all, just keep it out of there, right?
ROVE: Right.
The same day they disclose that Dick Morris eats, sleeps and breathes his hatred for the Clintons, even though he is regularly trotted out as "Fox News contributor" with no mention of his seething contempt for Bill and Hillary.
It's as well known as Karl Roves 180 degree bias against Democrats and his label as Bush's Brain.
Fox News, enough said.
Steve,
I missed it. Fortunately we can count on MMFA to reprint his sermonette. :-)
It was barely comprehensible. Olbermann's a self-righteous douchebag.
It was awesome. Enjoy:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=qXBXD2zizIYOlbermann's a self-righteous douchebag.
I was thinking along the lines of sanctimonious prick, but your description will do :-)
I was thinking you are both a couple of clowns
Real nice Solon. I always figured you & I were above name-calling with each other. But whatever.
I was thinking that when a moron refers to others as clowns you have to take that with a grain of salt...
Thanks for the post Solon, & if I read you wrong then I'm sorry too. You & I have had a respectful friendly relationship here & I'd like that to continue. Hey you're my favorite Moonbat [ha! kidding] my favorite Liberal.
To be honest Olbermann has gone from pompous to prick in short order & is coming close to being as obnoxious as O'Reilly.
It's sad to have seen that happen, for a short time I had begun to like the guy. Now he's just another hack, IMO.
So Olbey can take Bush apart for Rovian tactics but Hillary is off limits when she emplos Rovian tactics?
Hillary is a disgrace.
Tomy, look over there. Don't look over here.
;-)
I wait for this one, as an example;
"Olbermann attacks Clinton for Ferraro remarks, even though she has publicly said she disagrees with them".
I think you make a very legitimate point.
That's why partisan websites lack a certain something on the credibility-meter. In general...
Tommy, did you watch it? Every point that Olbermann made was correct. He wasn't even getting mad at her, it was more like he was mourning the death of her campaign.
The point of his special comment is that Clinton's campaign needs to distance themselves from these comments, because even though they're made by surrogates, they have ties to her campaign, and reflects the attitude of her campaign.
The only people I've found who didn't find it relevant and accurate are Hillary supporters, and that's only natural.
Face it, Clinton's campaign has reached the level of dirty politics, and this special comment was well-deserved.
DB,
I don't disagree with Olbermann at all, that is not the point. Had another, less MMFA-friendly commentator made similar comments and Olbermann was not in agreement with them, this would be front page MMFA stuff.
Maybe so, I don't really know anymore.
I was more commenting on your assertion that he attacked Clinton.
I watched the video and jotted down a few things that I think would get highlighted if they hadn't been said by St. Keith.
About Hillary: "you are campaigning as if Obama is the Democrat and you are the Republican". (comparing Hillary to the "Repugnants, the Knuckledraggers, the Trogs....not very nice)
About the campaign: "these advisors give Ferraro a week to send Senator Clintons campaign back to the vocabulary of David Duke" (David Duke? wow, Ferraro WAS actually on the Dem ticket in 1984. Any vetting done there with reard to her opinions on race?)
So, what say you?
Thank you Bruce for doing the legwork. Great examples.
Governor, here you have it.
You're asking if Hannity, or any rightwing blabberer for that matter, gets posted here for their "hyperbolic opinion" on something?
Ah, yes.
OK, O'Reilly accusing Huffington Post of being like Nazis, that is purely his "hyperbolic opinion".
Look at the mission statement Governor, it not only includes misinformation, but any conservative who furthers the conservative agenda, and that is done quite nicely when they offer up their "hyperbolic opinions".
This is my personal favorite, but there are really so many to choose from:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200802150011?f=s_search
It goes back to Tommy's original post. Olbermann went after Clinton for Ferraro's comments despite the fact that Clinton disavowed the comments. Since the campaign didn't do it fast enough or in accordance with St. Keith's personal timeline on the matter, he hammered her for it.
I don't know if it's a theory, or not. But it's certainly one thing to only post thread topics which favors the liberal point of view and highlights conservative misinformation, it's still only half the story, but it's MMFAs mission and they don't shy away being upfront about reporting only their one-sided view of media misinfomation.
However, in my opinion, it's quite another to selectively highlight only those you don't like when they misinform and leave out such blatant examples such as Olbermann, for whatever reason. Maybe he would get pissed? Maybe they have some agreement to never criticize him? Maybe he gets a pass because he is a liberal?
I don't see anything in the mission statement about only hightlighting crap that conservative media personalities pull against liberals, and look the other way when liberals do it.
One wonders if it's more about propping up certain media folks MMFA likes, aka Olbermann, than it is about correcting real misinformation against Democrats and liberals.
Personally I think Natalie Portman and Scarlett Johannson are really hot.
I believe Glenn Beck is outright lying in that thread.
I further believe that Progressives have the hotter chicks.
The only hot one I can think of on the conservative side is Hasselbeck.
Well, you know what they say about looks and brains...
;-)
(That was a joke)
You were talking about the grand daughter not the grandmother, correct?
I would contend that her campaign is acting like a Republican. I don't think that's spin. She's fear-mongering, twisting words, attacking, then when they respond, playing the victim, spreading whisper campaigns, and pulling Orwellian remarks and Rovisms.
As far as the David Duke thing goes, I believe saying "the vocabulary of David Duke" is quite valid. Ferraro's statements, which she's made more than once (three times, by my last count), is rhetoric that wouldn't surprise me to hear David Duke say.
For the longest time I was fine with either candidate, though I supported Obama for reasons I've stated here before. Now? If Hillary has more delegates and the popular vote by the time this is over, and she gets the nomination, I'll probably still vote for her. If she doesn't have more delegates and popular votes, and she's still the nom, I may just sit out this election.Randi Rhodes just said something I found very poignant. It was something to the effect of "I don't think they're racist, I think they're opportunists."
Indeed.
hmm. Quite.
"you are campaigning as if Obama is the Democrat and you are the Republican".
In Olberjerk's rant is his bias that it's the republicans that are the racists, sexist and bigots. Recent statements by the Clinton campaign have revealed that those traits also run through prominant democrats. He knows the Repubs will use that against them!. He is worried HRC's campaign my ruin the prospect of any Democrat becomming president.
Well, Dems, you've just inadvertently confirmed Olbermann's point: that the Clinton campaign, in their desperation, are adapting time-proven Republican strategies. They are using tactics that are strikingly similar to ones used by the neo-con Dubya' machine in 2000 and 2004. Hillary might as well go the whole nine yards at this point and hire Turdblossom to run her campaign.
At this point, my disgust at the Clinton campaign for their race-baiting and general dishonesty is so great that if she wins the Democratic Party's nomination, I'll vote for Nader.
That was in the context of how MMFA would headline it if the commentators were different, or if they were consistent.
Fox News has on other politcal commentators, as do all the others. Do any of them provide this full disclosure?
If not, perhaps MMFA could go find a list of every single person who appears in these talking head programs and make the same argument.
If anyone watching does not know who Carl Rove is, they simply are tuning in for the first time. Which come to think of it, may be most of Obama's fan base. :-)
I for one, would like to know what exactly is "informally advising". Is it stealing top secrets like Sandy Bergman, or is it simply taking phone calls and talking to members of McCain's team, or is it something more?
Hi Tommy,
Are PB and JC advising HRC? I hadn't heard that.
I know they were in the past, I wouldn't be surprised if they are in some "informal" manner now, but I don't really know if it's mentioned each time they offer their opinion on CNN.
But I don't need to know considering their history of supporting the Clintons and the Democratic party is well known, especially to viewers of CNN......just as Karl Rove's affiliations are most likely well known to Fox viewers.
AA,
Appearantely you don't know him very well...... his name is Karl not Carl (Rove)
Though you are right that MMFA should do this, if only to show the double standard and hypocrisy of either side and the partisanship of the corporate owned media.
AA,
If you are going to repeat rumors about someone, at least get their names right, Sandy Berger, not Bergman ;).
If anyone watching does not know who Carl Rove is, they simply are tuning in for the first time. Which come to think of it, may be most of Obama's fan base. :-)
Good point - Obama supporters know to avoid Fox News like the plague that it is.
TRUTH AND JUSTICE IN THE USA !!!!
FACT CHECK !!!!
(sorry, i miss that)
WITH? The GOP media outlet, employing the GOP propaganda overlord, doesn't mention that that man is advising the GOP candidate. Who needs this explained to them?
Actually AA,
I have been an Obama fan since his 04 speech!
I then became a supporter after reading both of his books "Dreams of my Father" and "Audacity of Hope"
Then I became a financial supporter just as he was declaring his run for the presidency....
Of course, it helps that I'm from the Chicagoland area too, so I have the privy over most others that I follow the local media (WGN, Tribune, SunTimes, WCPT820am, Daily Herald) and wish that anyone with an extra brain cell would realize that the Resco case has nothing to do with Obama.
Moulitsas is running for President? Isn't he like, what, 37?
Interesting fact: Markos was in the army.
I mean, he has military experience...Though he's so darn "librul."
Maybe KO will be his running mate.
Or maybe Sue doesn't understand analogies. ;)(kidding! Sue)
But to answer your question Steve, KO actually blogs over at Daily Kos.
What's KO's role with Daily Kos?- thomp.steve9098
Come on, TS, do we have to connect the dots for you ? ;o)
*iced coffee spat on keyboard*
I assumes that comes w/ VP AnonymousLefty.blogspot.com
Regarding the question in the headline (sorry I'm going on topic here).
How bout never. Does never work for you?
Ah..that would be TruthSEEKER.
Nobody lied about John Kerry -- and don't claim the Swift Boaters did since nothing they've said has been refuted. It was simply a matter of voters getting to know the Junior Senator from Massachusetts. John Kerry's own words best describe him and his campiagn. "It was a botched joke"
More like a serial public asalter.
On one occasion Karl's candidate lost. The winner got out of politics after his term expired.He didn't want to have to go though the experience of winning against Karl twice. So he wins even if he loses.
Whats not to love about that.