| About | |
| Contact Us | |
| Articles | |
| Topic Index | |
| Reports | |
| Quotes | |
| On the Web | |
| Links | |
| TW Tracker | |
| Support | |
Times Watch for
March 16, 2004
Kerry's "Astute" Gaffe
Did Sen. John Kerry really mean for his attacks on Republicans as "crooked" and "lying" to go public? Some Kerry aides are pushing the theory, and a front-page headline in the Times readily chomps at the bait.
Campaign reporter Adam Nagourney ponders Sen. Kerry's controversial attack on Republicans ("the most crooked, you know, lying group I've ever seen") in Saturday's "Testing, Testing. Shrewd Politics or Kerry Foot-in-Mouth Syndrome?"
He notes: "When Senator John Kerry was overheard describing his Republican opponents as 'crooked' and 'lying' to a voter the other day, his campaign quickly offered two explanations for the unusually harsh words. One was that Mr. Kerry did not realize he was wearing a live microphone. The other was that he said what he meant and he meant what he said."
Nagourney expands upon this ludicrous-sounding argument: "Some of Mr. Kerry's advisers, confronting a Republican-generated tempest about his latest comments, claimed there was nothing accidental about the senator's remarks. These were, they said, the calculated maneuvers of an astute politician, skillfully trying to steer public debate to a subject damaging to his opponent--be it Howard Dean's temperament or President Bush's rough campaign tactics."
(By the way, Nagourney insists, against the run of evidence, that Bush has unleashed a "fierce campaign of attacks" on Kerry.)
But Nagourney eventually knocks down the strange idea that Kerry's comments were part of some cunning political jujitsu: "But Democrats, including some supporters of Mr. Kerry, were hardly convinced of that. Indeed, considering what even Mr. Kerry's advisers acknowledged was becoming a pattern, this seemed to be less by design and more the careless utterances of a fatigued or undisciplined candidate."
But the "Times Inside" box on Saturday's front page, which highlights news stories contained deeper within the paper, takes Kerry's sucker bait and spins totally in Kerry's direction: "Remarks With a Purpose--When Senator John Kerry made offhanded remarks about Republicans this week, some aides say, the comments were not accidental but the move of an astute politician aiming a spotlight on a topic harmful to his opponent."
That Kerry--He's so smart, even his gaffes are on purpose.
For the rest of Nagourney's story on Kerry's gaffe, click here.
• Campaign 2004 | Gaffes | Sen. John Kerry | Adam Nagourney
David Halbfinger opens his Monday story from deep within the Kerry campaign: "When President Bush went on television last week with advertisements attacking Senator John Kerry, Mr. Kerry's campaign took precisely 12 hours to fire back with an expensive multistate ad barrage that accused Mr. Bush of 'misleading America.' The speed and scope of the counterattack took the Bush team by surprise and enlivened Democrats hungry for a fight this year."
Apparently embedded so deeply he can't see any bright side for Bush at all, Halbfinger relays more details from Kerry's adroit campaign: "Indeed, Mr. Kerry has taken every opportunity to hit Mr. Bush in response to the news of the day, a tactic he has used so frequently and effectively that his aides have made it an essential part of their strategy. On Wednesday, Mr. Kerry even got ahead of the news, attacking before it was announced the president's choice for manufacturing czar of a business executive who had laid off workers and opened a factory in China; the next day the executive withdrew from consideration. Kerry advisers have not had to look hard for openings."
The bubbly tone of Halbfinger's article reminds Times Watch of a phenomenon noted by journalist Mickey Kaus of Slate: Democratic wishful thinking on the part of reporters. In an entry explaining what he calls "the Liberal Cocoon," Kaus wrote: "The point is that reporters and editors at papers like the Times (either one!) are exquisitely sensitive to any sign that Democrats might win, but don't cultivate equivalent sensitivity when it comes to discerning signs Republicans might win. (Who wants to read that?) The result, in recent years, is the Liberal Cocoon, in which Democratic partisans are kept happy and hopeful until they are slaughtered every other November."
Indeed, in a new entry titled "Spinning the Cocoon," Kaus notes caustically (third item): "Doesn't the NYT's David Halbfinger know any Republican political strategists? Or even any Democratic strategists willing to offer anything other than new variations of hopeful spin? (Sample: "He's tough, he fights back, he stands up, he doesn't apologize," says Tony Coelho.)
For the rest of Halbfinger's story, click here.
• Campaign 2004 | David Halbfinger | Sen. John Kerry
In an unusual video commentary posted on the
Times website, Frank Rich answers reader mail. By what surely is sheer coincidence, every single reader agrees with Rich's take on whatever issue is in question, praising Rich's support for gay marriage and his foaming dislike of Mel Gibson and "The Passion."
Near the end of segment six, he sniffs: "One of the sad things about the Bush administration is, the president did talk about wanting to set a new tone when he came in and indeed he was in a good position to do so, because he not been caught up in the Clinton wars, he had been away from Washington, he had been a governor in Texas, and had not been an antagonist in all that really, and there was an opportunity there that I think he lost, because he's turned out to be as much a divider as a uniter, if not more so."
Apparently, it's not "divisive" to talk of "right-wing bloviators" and comparing supporters of traditional marriage to George Wallace.
E-mail TimesWatch Director, Clay Waters, with TimesWatch feedback at cwaters@mediaresearch.org