ABC baselessly suggested both campaigns are equally guilty of "negative attacks"
SUMMARY: On World News, Charles Gibson and David Wright suggested that Sen. Barack Obama's and Sen. John McCain's presidential campaigns were equally guilty of "negative attacks." However, Wright provided no evidence that Obama had engaged in negative attacks, stating only that Obama is "constantly comparing McCain to President Bush."
On the July 30 broadcast of ABC's World News, both anchor Charles Gibson and ABC News correspondent David Wright suggested that Sen. Barack Obama's and Sen. John McCain's presidential campaigns were equally guilty of "negative attacks." However, Wright provided no evidence that Obama had engaged in negative attacks, stating only that Obama is "constantly comparing McCain to President Bush."
Introducing Wright's reports on "negative attacks" in the presidential campaign, Gibson stated: "It is a pledge made by every candidate in every campaign: to run on the issues and avoid negative attacks. Just last month, John McCain pledged that throughout the campaign, he would 'show my admiration and respect for Senator Obama.' As for Obama, he pledged to 'run a different campaign, run a positive campaign.' Well, that was then. Today, the attacks were flying so fast and furious, it was sometimes hard to keep up." Wright then reported: "The mud has indeed been flying, with Obama constantly comparing McCain to President Bush, and today McCain comparing Obama to empty celebrities: all sizzle, no substance."
Wright offered no justification for suggesting that Obama's comparison between Bush and McCain is an "attack" comparable to McCain's "comparing Obama to empty celebrities." Indeed, Bush and McCain agree on several major policy issues, including taxes and the Iraq war. As Media Matters for America has noted, the nonpartisan publication Congressional Quarterly found that McCain was the Bush administration's most reliable vote in 2007: "Repeated votes on immigration and the Iraq War also helped elevate Republican John McCain of Arizona, one of Bush's chief adversaries in the Senate in 2005, to be one of his biggest supporters in 2007. McCain's 95 percent support score for last year was the highest in the chamber." Moreover, Bush endorsed McCain's candidacy in a joint appearance at the White House, and McCain has reportedly said he was "not trying to separate myself" from Bush on the campaign trail.
Wright went on to note other attacks McCain has made on Obama, reporting: "McCain has recently said Obama would rather lose a war to win an election. He's called him 'Dr. No' on energy reforms and run ads blaming Obama for high gas prices. ... Today, McCain unveiled a new ad in 11 states flashing images of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, suggesting Obama is just another vapid celebrity." Wright noted that the "Obama campaign dismissed the ad as more of McCain's 'steady stream of false, negative attacks' " and that "Obama told an audience in Missouri the Republicans are just trying to scare voters." He later added:
Today, the McCain side released a memo noting, among other things, Obama's fondness for chocolate protein bars, Black Forest Berry Honest Tea, and arugula. In other words, high maintenance, like any big star.
But Obama supporters are having none of it. Today, they called attention to the shoes McCain has worn on stops throughout the Rust Belt -- Italian calfskin loafers that retail for $520 a pair.
But while Wright reported that "Obama supporters ... called attention to the shoes McCain has worn on stops throughout the Rust Belt," the on-screen text that accompanied Wright's report attributed the assertion to an "Obama campaign memo":
Wright did not produce any evidence that the Obama campaign released a memo attacking McCain for his choice of footwear or explain the contradiction between his reporting and the on-screen text. On July 30, The Huffington Post first reported on McCain's shoes, noting that McCain "has worn a pair of $520 black leather Ferragamo shoes on every recent campaign stop -- from a news conference with the Dalai Lama to a supermarket visit in Bethlehem, PA." By contrast, the Politico's Jonathan Martin reported in a July 30 blog post that the McCain campaign released a memo that stated, in part:
Only a celebrity of Barack Obama's magnitude could attract 200,000 fans in Berlin who gathered for the mere opportunity to be in his presence. These are not supporters or even voters, but fans fawning over The One. Only celebrities like Barack Obama go to the gym three times a day, demand "MET-RX chocolate roasted-peanut protein bars and bottles of a hard-to-find organic brew -- Black Forest Berry Honest Tea" and worry about the price of arugula.
From the July 30 edition of ABC's World News with Charles Gibson:
GIBSON: Good evening. It is a pledge made by every candidate in every campaign: to run on the issues and avoid negative attacks. Just last month, John McCain pledged that throughout the campaign, he would "show my admiration and respect for Senator Obama." As for Obama, he pledged to "run a different campaign, run a positive campaign." Well, that was then. Today, the attacks were flying so fast and furious, it was sometimes hard to keep up. ABC's David Wright is in Washington tonight. David.
WRIGHT: Good evening, Charlie. The mud has indeed been flying, with Obama constantly comparing McCain to President Bush, and today McCain comparing Obama to empty celebrities: all sizzle, no substance.
[begin video clip]
WRIGHT: John McCain has been trying to raise doubts about his opponent. Today in Colorado, he was at it again.
McCAIN: The bottom line is that Senator Obama's words, for all their eloquence and passion, don't mean all that much.
WRIGHT: McCain has recently said Obama would rather lose a war to win an election. He's called him "Dr. No" on energy reforms and run ads blaming Obama for high gas prices.
NARRATOR: He's the biggest celebrity in the world, but is he ready to lead?
WRIGHT: Today, McCain unveiled a new ad in 11 states flashing images of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, suggesting Obama is just another vapid celebrity.
NARRATOR: Higher taxes. More foreign oil. That's the real Obama.
STUART ROTHENBERG (editor and publisher of The Rothenberg Political Report): Nobody is going to confuse Paris Hilton with Senator Barack Obama. But over time, the attempt to raise questions about his substance, that could very well work.
WRIGHT: The Obama campaign dismissed the ad as more of McCain's "steady stream of false, negative attacks. Or as some might say, 'Oops, he did it again.' "
OBAMA: We don't need the same old tired answers. What we need is something new.
WRIGHT: Obama told an audience in Missouri the Republicans are just trying to scare voters.
OBAMA: The argument is, "I know you don't really like what we're doing, but he's risky."
WRIGHT: McCain's spokesman shot back: "This is a typically superfluous response from Barack Obama. Like most celebrities, he reacts to fair criticism with a mix of fussiness and hysteria."
Today, the McCain side released a memo noting, among other things, Obama's fondness for chocolate protein bars, Black Forest Berry Honest Tea, and arugula. In other words, high maintenance, like any big star.
But Obama supporters are having none of it. Today, they called attention to the shoes McCain has worn on stops throughout the Rust Belt -- Italian calfskin loafers that retail for $520 a pair.
Late today, the Obama campaign responded to McCain's "Celebrity" ad, with a new ad of their own.
NARRATOR: "False." "Baloney." "The low road." "Baseless." John McCain: Same old politics. Same failed policies.
[end video clip]
WRIGHT: It's getting ugly early, and some Republicans are expressing concern about McCain's tone. In particular, one former McCain aide calling the new "Celebrity" ad "childish." Well, the McCain campaign insists that Obama went negative first. Charlie?
WRIGHT: McCain's spokesman shot back: "This is a typically superfluous response from Barack Obama. Like most celebrities, he reacts to fair criticism with a mix of fussiness and hysteria."
Today, the McCain side released a memo noting, among other things, Obama's fondness for chocolate protein bars, Black Forest Berry Honest Tea, and arugula. In other words, high maintenance, like any big star.
False equivalency: Obama probably has engaged in negative campaigning against McCain, but certainly not at the same frequency and with such strong wording.
They've all been doing this, and it's dishonest.
The worst offender? Abrams, who always cites repub transgressions and then says , "this is why people hate Washington."
It ain't Washington, it's almost always the republicans-- but spreading the blame makes a great smokescreen.
MM conveniently omits the fact that Obama has baselessly and falsely claimed that McCain will use Obama's race as an issue in the election. McCain has not done so, and he will not do so. The McCain family is a multi-racial family (a fact rarely reported in the media), and McCain himself was reportedly the object of a racially motivated campaign in South Carolina in 2000.
Obama has indeed gone very negative on Sen. McCain.
"Nobody thinks that Bush and McCain have a real answer to the challenges we face. So what they're going to try to do is make you scared of me. You know, he's not patriotic enough, he's got a funny name, you know, he doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills."
They've already done all of those things. What part of that statement isn't true?
When did either Bush or McCain state that people should fear Obama because he doesn't look like the other presidents on the currency? Stated otherwise, when did Bush and McCain state we should fear Obama because he's black, unlike the other presidents? I haven't heard them.
I'm sure there's rightwingers who have said as much, but do we really want to continue down that road where McCain and Obama are accountable for everything said by a republican or democrat?
Obama should have delivered that message without specifically invoking McCain, which was misleading
Negative ads
Most of the comments concerning these ads & what McCain & Obama are saying about each other is like watching someone tip-toeing around a flame that's sure to blaze up at any moment.
McCain is trying, oh so hard, to show Obama is no substance. Obama is saying things he's vowed not to inject into the campaign...both are wrong & should stop now.
Problem is, their campaign mgrs. can't help themselves....it's too tempting to go negative. All the while trying not to bring race into it altho they are utilizing subliminal images....all the presidents who appear on our currency are WHITE & the celebs are bimbettes/blond meaning no brains.
This is a sad commentary coming from both camps. Maybe it's best they go thru this now instead of Oct/Nov.
Heru
White racist ad????....huh?? Blond dumb ad, but not racist !!!
"Stop Lying." Wow. I'm convinced. I must be lying because I never heard McCain say that. Nice job. Nothing slips by you. "Liar, liar pants on fire" wins every time.
Nonetheless, and backtracking from my original post, I'm now unsure that Obama in fact did intend to refer, specifically, to McCain, in the quote referenced by Clams.
And as it turns out, that comment about not looking like the other presidents on dollar bills may have actually been based on an earlier McCain ad. Take a look at this video from crooksandliars and you'll see that the McCain campaign already executed that attack:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/08/01/mccain-ad-did-make-fun-of-obamas-appearance/
So they literally showed Obama's face on a dollar bill in order to mock him.
MM conveniently omits the fact that Obama has baselessly and falsely claimed that McCain will use Obama's race as an issue in the election. McCain has not done so, and he will not do so.
Of course he does. He doesn't come out and say 'hey look, the guy's a negro!" but he uses coded language that emphasizes Obama's outsider status, that "we really don't know him" and that there's something "different" about him.
All code for look at the Black guy who's not like us.
<i>MM conveniently omits the fact that Obama has baselessly and falsely claimed that McCain will use Obama's race as an issue in the election.</i>
They omit that because you're lying. Obama has not claimed that, and if he had it wouldn't be baseless. as to whether it is false, we can't know that yet.
<i>McCain has not done so, and he will not do so.</i>
Your saying he won't doesn't make it so ... rather, it makes you intellectually dishonest.
<i>The McCain family is a multi-racial family (a fact rarely reported in the media), and McCain himself was reportedly the object of a racially motivated campaign in South Carolina in 2000.</i>
So what? After that nasty campaign that Bush ran against McCain, McCain embraced Bush, both physically and ideologically. The notion that, because he was attacked a certain way, he won't attack that way is stupid. You might as well claim that abused children never abuse their children -- but we know that simply isn't so.
<i>Obama has indeed gone very negative on Sen. McCain.</i>
You're a blatant liar.
1. Please stop th eugly name-calling.
2. Obama HAS said that McCain would use his race against him. In addition to yesterday's comment about "not looking like the other presidents on the dollar bills" (or however it was worded), Obama has also said that McCain will say, "Did I mention that he's black?" McCain has NEVER said such a thing, nor has he given any indication at all he will.
Of course McBush would never come out and say what he implies directly because white racist cowards have learned to use plausible deniability as a cover for their pay-ops.
Shoes, check this out.
Then rethink your claim that McCain isn't trying to bring attention to Obama's appearance. Apparently McCain was the one to come up with the "Obama-on-the-dollar" concept first.
Another curious thing - In all the McCain ads I've seen, we get more images of Obama than McCain. I sure can't think of any other marketing campaigns that show more images of the competitors product than the one they're trying to sell.
ABC News: "Obama Concedes Racial Dimension to 'Dollar Bill' Comments":
Obama: "I don’t think it’s accurate to say that my comments have nothing to do with race."
You can leave your apologies to me below for falsely calling me a "liar."
Oh, darn. And the Republicans declared the "everybody does it" excuse to be INVALID, back when Clinton's infidelity was being compared to JFK's and other presidents.
Now, the "everybody does it" excuse is again in favor, defending McCains negative attacks agains Obama.
Maybe nobody will notice this obvious double standard.
It's about competence, that's all. And Republicans are intrinsically corrupt and/or incompetent when it comes to governing, thus proving their basic theory that government can't solve all our problems.
But how about government not creating any NEW problems?
This sort of personal characterization of Obama as a high maintenance celebrity is pure Rovian junk of attacking people on their strength, in this case that Obama is popular and athletic. It has nothing to do with issues or qualifications and isn't even true -- a Met-Rx bar involves a lot less maintenance than a hamburger. And a careful examination of John and Cindy McCain's lifestyle choices ... well, they would fare a lot worse than the Obamas.
To say that Obama has "probably" done the same sort of thing but less vehemently is nonsense; he hasn't done it at all. After repeatedly praising McCain's service to the country, Obama has pointed out that McCain isn't running the sort of high-minded campaign he said he would -- which is a highly relevant fact -- and that he falls into line with the policies of the Republican Party leader and incumbent President -- which is a highly relevant fact.
This tactic is about making participation in our political process, somehow, negative. And the cons are doing this to suppress voter turnout by painting Obama as scary because it's well known that as voter turnout rises, Republican success sinks.
WRIGHT: Today, McCain unveiled a new ad in 11 states flashing images of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, suggesting Obama is just another vapid celebrity.
I wonder what the people who did this ad actually consider the secondary, more subliminal message of the ad. Think about it...you've got Obama juxtaposed with two smokin' young white women (vapid) celebrities who are known mostly for what? Promiscuity... Just wondering what the real intended message is...
ZING !
And we know whom out of the three has spilled the most alchohol.
Especially when one expressed her support of the GOP and President Bush:
"...Spears avoided the political pot hole that other entertainers have fallen into when she was asked about whether she supported the war in Iraq.
"Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision that he makes and we should just support that," she said.
She said she trusted President Bush but said she didn't know if he would get re-elected to the White House...."
<i>Shouldn't McCain kinda lay off the rich, dumb blonde bimbo angle?</i>
Only if there's any chance that the media or the Obama campaign would draw attention to why that's hypocritical -- but they won't.
But if McCain was surrounded by young gorgeous women you'd compare him to Roger Moore's grampa version of James Bond in the '80s.
(sorry, I couldn't find much else to compare that with)
But if McCain was surrounded by young gorgeous women...
They're called lobbyists... ;>)
Heidi Montag's support for McCain doesn't count? She's the biggest, blondest bomboest celebrity out there - and she supports McCain.
Apparently Paris Hilton's family is none too happy with John McCain, to whose campaign they have contributed, for the so-called celebrity ad...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/31/hiltons-support-mccain-re_n_116212.html
Apparently Paris Hilton's family is none too happy...
No wonder. The poster child for the anti-Estate tax movement being compared to the candidate who might try to force these poor elites to try to survive on a mere billion or so of inherited money.
Irony,
no offense, but you must have been smokin' to think either of those two pixie sticks are attractive. Early Britney in school girl clothes was nice though. :)
It's either that or the McCain campaign is just out of touch with America.
I'd say it's probably a mixture of both.
"The mud has indeed been flying, with Obama constantly comparing McCain to President Bush..."
You know, it's really gotta suck when comparing someone else to you is considered "mudslinging"....
Poor George.
Poor George indeed. He'll have to console hisself with a pile of loot and a chainsaw after he leaves office. - Mary59
And he'll probably start drinking again... - Irony101
Hmmm... Start drinking again and pull out the chainsaw. Doesn't sound good. I wonder how closely his Secret Service detail will be watching him.
But in yet another depiction of the hypocrisy of the right, the W's aren't going to be staying in the woods at the ranch after he's out of office.
They're moving to Dallas.
The only reason he had a "ranch" was the PR value. Now that he's out of office, they're moving to the city, where they'll feel comfortable.
Now that he's out of office, they're moving to the city, where they'll feel comfortable.
And the bars stay open later... ;>)
Still putting the pieces together, but:
I can't shake the feeling that George will be exploring a new hobby after retirement.
ABC baselessly suggested both campaigns are equally guilty?
They must have been taking lessons from the righties who post here. I can't count the number of times that it's been suggested that all politicians are the same, and all political parties do equal amounts of negative attacks and the people supporting the left lie and attack just as much as those on the right.
Let's see...
Obama going negative: "He's just like Bush."
McCain going negative: "That elitist, muslim loving, phony christian european loving terrorist appeasing scary black nazi rallying commie boy is getting too uppity for his britches!"
Yeah, I can see how they are pretty equal.
Interesting tidbits about McCain from this article by Roger Simon, Jewish World Review, May 21,2004:
".....During the 2000 campaign, at a dinner with the editors and reporters of U.S. News & World Report, I said to McCain: "Anecdotal evidence -- what we call reporting -- suggests to me that many of the independents and even Democrats who are supporting you in New Hampshire have no idea how really conservative you are."
"Done a hell of a job fooling them, haven't we?" McCain said.
We all laughed....."
_________________________________________________________________
It was in South Carolina that I asked Bush whether he thought there was a press conspiracy to boost McCain at his expense."I don't think there is any plot; I hope there isn't," Bush said, "but it's an amazing phenomenon, I'll tell you that. It's like the flap over the foreign leader deal. A guy gets up and quizzes me — it's my fault for trying to answer — but John McCain says something about the 'ambassador to Czechoslovakia.' Well, I know there is no Czechoslovakia [it's the Czech Republic], but yet it didn't make the nightly national news. I'm not going to gripe about it, but the media question is starting to pop up."
___________________________________________________________________
"Favorite word," a reporter asks him."Principle," he says.
After all that has been said about Obama by McCain's campaign, it's ironic his favorite word is principle.
At some point, majority of voting Americans have to see through this Republican/Media self-interest. Till then we (and America) are screwed. MCain (and his campaign) is acting like a typical whining wife (some movie where Nicholas Cage wins a lottery comes to mind) . Darned if you do darned if you don't.
Do Americans want to elect their whining wife as their next President?
How are McCain's policies on Iraq, economy, health care, different from Bush's? McCain will not tell nor does the media ask him. OTOH, they will report/debate that Obama is inexperienced in foregin policy, wants to raise your taxes and wants a socialist health care.
The whole news operation in the country is busy reporting and debating (and will be till election day, just to make the voters forget the real issues till then)
whether Obama played the race-card,
whether he is an elitist
.......and anything else the McCain campaign decides is fodder for the day.
best of luck to us
Ughh...hmmmmm "whining wife"?
Didn't we spend weeks here at MMFA discussing the sexist phrases applied to Hillary Clinton ?
BTW... My husband does one a heck of a good job of whining when he doesn't get his way. ;-)
PEOPLE'S heads aren't quite screwed on tightly enough, if they think the presidential campaign so far, between Senators Obama and McCain, is "negative" or "attacking"...
"constantly compared to President Bush" and "compared to empty celebrities"... being called "Dr. No"... Britney Spears and Paris Hilton... chocolate protein bars, Black Forest Berry Honest Tea, and arugula... Italian calfskin loafers:
This is negative and attacking?
If my very few enemies in this world, did nothing more negative or attacking to me, than call me the names and imply the things about me, that I just listed above, then I would be too embarrassed to even call those people my enemies any longer: I'd probably be compelled to call them nothing worse than "my smart-alec wise-cracking friends".
PEOPLE should check the tightness of how their heads are screwed on, and realize that the presidential campaign so far, is nothing truly negative or attacking ("A celebrity? Did you just call me a celebrity? OK pal, that's the last straw: let's step outside, so I can scratch the side of your face up, real serious, on the pavement of the sidewalk... It's GO TIME pal! It's the last freaking time you'll ever get away with calling me a celebrity!")
The presidential race between Senators Obama and McCain is nothing truly negative or attacking so far, it's really just EMPTY and INSUBSTANTIAL and VOID of serious talk about any National Policy issue at all: that's what it is so far... screw your heads on tight, and you'll see that's the truth.
Of course, if your lid is loose, then in the VACUUM of actual discourse on actual National Policy issues, you're likely to think expensive shoes are something to talk about... you're likely to flip your freaking lid at being called a celebrity, in the current EMPTY INSUBSTANTIAL state of this presidential campaign so far.
Ah, so there’s nothing negative about the McCain ad that tries to blame Obama for the high gas prices? And there’s nothing negative in the McCain ad that repeats the Landstulh lies? All good, clean, honorable fun on the part of Sen. McGrandpaSimpson?
If you want to argue that these examples are hardly going to seem negative and attacking compared to what’s to come I’ll give you a slight nod. Of course, then it’s fair to suggest that the McCain folks have already reached deep into the slimiest section of the mud pool through their favorite surrogates, Limbaugh, Hannity, and the lesser pieces of the right wing noise machine.
Got to love the fact that they see the comparisons to Bush as “negative.” Seems the Neocons have finally realized just how bad the current occupant of the White House is.
I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!! AND TOO YOU SO CALLED DEMOCRATES"HILLARY SUPPORTERS" AND INDENPENDENTS YOU WILL DESERVE MCCAIN. I WANTED HIM TO WIN IN 2000 BECAUSE HE WAS DIFFRENT FROM OTHER REPUBLICANS BUT HE HAS SHOW THAT HE WILL DO AND SAY ANYTHING TO WIN THIS ELECTION JUST LIKE BUSH AND THE REST OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. AND I SAY THIS TOO MY BLACK RACE I WOULD NOT HELP HILLARY OR BILL GET INTO ANOTHER OFFICE. HILLARY, BILL AND HER SUPPORTERS SHOWED THERE TRUE SIDE. LIKE I SAID MARK MY WORD DEMS WILL TAKE BOTH HOUSES BUT OBAMA WILL LOSE THE WHITE HOUSE. FEAR OF ATTACKS IN 2000 AND FEAR OF A BLACK MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE IN 2008. SAD BUT TRUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I wrote on another thread the media is actively looking for ANYTHING negative to say about Obama, no matter if he fights back or not. How can he be considered engaging in negative campaigning by likening Bush, who is in favor of war to McCain, who is in favor of war? That's called a comparison not negative campaigning. This time it's ABC, last time it was CBS, it's always Fox and MSNBC is still hiring Pat Buchanan, which brings me to my point. How does one win a game if the rules keep changing as the game is played?
That's the problem, none of the rules are fixed. Obama is not black enough initially, then he's too black. He's Muslim, then he's a separtist Christian. He's elitist yet militant. He's weak on foreign policy and when he's loved by Europe he's the anti-Christ.
Let's switch candidates and point out a similar trend. McCain is against negative campaigning then he's for it. No media outrage. McCain flip-flops on taxes. No media outrage. McCain admits being a P.O.W. does not qualify one to be president only to have fake outrage when this very idea is presented by General Clark. Media outrage for McCain. How can you defeat an opponent who is not only cheating themselves, but also getting help from the referee, i.e.the media? When has the media had to spice together a response for Obama? It is more than obvious to anyone with an ounce of honesty that Obama's popularity has been counteracted with flat out lies in the media. If we are debating policy, so be it. But these random lies that are being spread through, once respectable, news sources are exceedingly difficult to combat.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/01/anthrax/index.html
Here's another great article that identifies multiple issues with ABC. This is in regards to the Anthrax baloney that they pushed 6 years ago. they were misled by people in the Bush Adminstration, and it's since been proven tat they were lied to, but they still haven't called out their "anonymous sources' who lied to them.
He is referring, of course, to Gen. Wesley Clark's comment that just because John McCain was a POW, does not mean that he has military command experience -- which is just a fact, absolutely true, and _not_ denigrating of his experience, just the facts! To say that this is a negative attack, is untrue just for starters, and to _compare_ it in the same breath as the sleezy, lying attacks that the McCain campaign has made against Barack Obama, is just unreal! _Shame_ on Bob Schieffer, who I thought was better! I can't believe it. What is happening to the truth, and the news?