Curtain Call for Tom Daschle, "A Man of Decency" -- November 4, 2004 -- TimesWatch.org

About

Contact Us

Articles

Topic Index

Reports

Quotes

On the Web

Links

TW Tracker

Support

Times Watch for November 4, 2004

Curtain Call for Tom Daschle, "A Man of Decency"

Sheryl Gay Stolberg offers one last loving profile of Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, who lost his Senate seat to John Thune.

Stolberg's "Gracious but Defeated, Daschle Makes History" repeats a flattering phrase she's used in the past to describe Daschle: "The soft-spoken leader has often been described by his fellow Democrats as a man of decency. On Wednesday, Senator Jon Corzine of New Jersey, chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, called him 'a patriot and a statesman,' and said he would be 'remembered as one of the giants to ever grace the Senate stage.' But in the acrimonious environment of the Senate, where Democrats have blocked Republican legislation and held up some of Mr. Bush's judicial appointees, the majority has vilified Mr. Daschle as 'the chief obstructionist' to the White House agenda. On Wednesday, as they tallied their Senate victories, the Republicans were jubilant."

Daschle isn't labeled liberal, but his opponent is called "conservative": "For Mr. Thune, a telegenic 43-year-old who drew strong support from fiscal and Christian conservatives, the victory was especially sweet."

She later sighs about Republican "vitriol": "The election was bitter, and at times vitriolic. Before the polls closed on Tuesday, Mr. Daschle, who spent three terms in the Senate after four in the House, lamented that the race had been 'a lot more negative a campaign than I have seen in a long time.' In one particularly hard-hitting advertisement, titled 'In His Own Words,' the Thune campaign showed film clips of Senator Daschle saying, 'I'm a D.C. resident.' The clips were meant to reinforce a theme that Mr. Thune struck often: that Mr. Daschle was a creature more of Washington than of South Dakota. Mr. Thune, a fierce opponent of abortion and gay marriage, also hit the senator hard on those issues."

Stolberg has filed several positive profiles of Democratic leader Daschle often emphasizing his "soft-spoken, gentle," manner. Yet none noted his ungentle admonition from November 20, 2002, when he compared conservative critics to the Taliban and suggested Rush Limbaugh was feeding death threats against him and his family: "What happens when Limbaugh attacks those of us in public life is that people aren't satisfied just to listen. They want to act because they get emotionally invested, and so the threats to those of us in public life go up dramatically on us and our families in a way that's disconcerting….We see it in foreign countries and we think, well my God, how can this religious fundamentalism become so violent? Well, it's that same shrill rhetoric. It's that same shrill power that motivates....Pretty soon it's a foment that becomes physical in addition to just verbal, and that’s happening in this country.”

For more about Daschle, "a man of decency," click here.

Centering Hillary Clinton

Mainstreaming Hillary Clinton for Campaign 2008. Raymond Hernandez's Thursday story, "For the Moment, Mrs. Clinton Looks Like the Candidate to Beat," doesn't own up to Hillary Clinton's obvious liberalism, but simply frames it as an accusation made by Republicans and suggests it’s a false charge: "Mrs. Clinton may face another obstacle if she decides to seek her party's nomination: The last thing the Democrats may be looking for right now is a politically polarizing Northeastern senator who is regarded as a liberal in many political quarters. But her aides point out that since arriving in the Senate, Mrs. Clinton has staked out moderate-to-conservative positions on a host of issues, from welfare to the war in Iraq, much to the chagrin of her liberal supporters and the satisfaction of some Republicans."

For the rest of Hernandez on Hillary Clinton, click here.

• Campaign 2004 | Campaign 2008 | Hillary Clinton | Raymond Hernandez | Labeling Bias

Conservatives All Over the Country, But Few Liberals Around

A mother lode of labeling bias in Thursday's state-by-state Election Night rundown. Times Watch can't locate the section online, but by our count the paper's summary of voting in all 50 states includes 20 uses of the word "conservative" as a description, compared to just two "liberals," those being mild, comparative formulations: "Idaho's most liberal legislative district" and "the [Vermont] Progressive Party, which is more liberal than the Democrats on many issues."

By contrast, South Carolina Senate winner Jim DeMint won by "standing by his staunch conservative ideology" and Republicans won big in the "overwhelmingly conservative state" of Idaho. Sen. John Kerry's home state Massachusetts, which he won, was not characterized as an "overwhelmingly liberal state."

• Campaign 2004 | Conservatives | Labeling Bias

Bush's "Code Words" to Christians

Thursday's front-page story from Elisabeth Bumiller (with reporting from David Halbfinger and David Rosenbaum) argues that Bush's successful reelection strategy was based partially on religious "code words": "Bush campaign officials said they were helped by the man they called a dream opponent, Senator John Kerry, whose nuanced statements about Iraq gave them an opening, day after day, to attack him as a 'flip-flopper.'….Campaign aides knew all along that Mr. Kerry, whose New England reticence held him back from discussing his religion, was at a steep disadvantage with Mr. Bush among regular churchgoers. But while he began over the summer sprinkling the word 'values' into his speeches, it was mainly in saying that hard work should be rewarded, that the middle class and the poor should be given help before the rich got more. And while Mr. Bush could use code words like 'culture of life' and 'armies of compassion' to motivate evangelicals, Mr. Kerry found himself preaching the separation of church and state from pulpits."

For Bumiller's full story, click here.

How Ever Did He Win?

Todd Purdum again takes the front page with a post-election "news analysis" entitled "An Electoral Affirmation of Shared Values -- A Clear Bush Majority in a Divided Country."

Purdum admits Bush won decisively, while suggesting that Bush's actual policies have failed: "It was not a landslide, or a re-alignment, or even a seismic shock. But it was decisive, and it is impossible to read President Bush's re-election with larger Republican majorities in both houses of Congress as anything other than the clearest confirmation yet that this is a center-right country -- divided yes, but with an undisputed majority united behind his leadership. Surveys of voters leaving the polls found that a majority believed the national economy was not so good, that tax cuts had done nothing to help it and that the war in Iraq had jeopardized national security. But fully one-fifth of voters said they cared most about 'moral values' -- as many as cared about terrorism and the economy -- and 8 in 10 of them chose Mr. Bush."

(Nice quote marks around "moral values," by the way.)

Purdum returns to his "polarizing" comment from Wednesday, but at least puts it in context, noting Bush is only polarizing on the coasts and in cities (in other words, among liberals): "In other words, while Mr. Bush remains a polarizing figure on both coasts and in big cities, he has proved himself a galvanizing one in the broad geographic and political center of the country."

Purdum implies that even tolerant Oregon voted to ban same-sex marriage: "Eleven state ballot initiatives to ban same-sex marriage passed easily, even in laid-back, live-and-let-live Oregon, and apparently inspired turnout that helped Mr. Bush."

Purdum thinks he sees a looming clash between "free-market ideologues" and "fiscal conservatives" over Bush's Social Security reform plan: "Will Mr. Bush move to create private investment accounts for Social Security, a move that would follow through on an idea he first broached four years ago, gratify free-market ideologues but discomfit fiscal conservatives worried about how he would pay for them and practical politicians fearful of simply touching such a hot issue?"

For Purdum's full analysis, click here.

• George W. Bush | Campaign 2004 | Gay Issues | Todd Purdum | Social Security

Beware Bush's Supreme Court Nominees

The front page of Thursday's special Elections section is dominated by a large picture of a victorious Bush and Cheney, as well as Robin Toner and Richard Stevenson's "Bush Pledges a Broad Push Toward Market-Based Policies."

They tell of the possibility of "strict conservative" nominees to the Supreme Court: "Mr. Bush, who relied heavily on the support of religious conservatives for his re-election this week, is also likely to push a social agenda in his second term. At the moment, those conservatives are intensely focused on the possibility of vacancies on the Supreme Court, which could potentially shift the balance on issues like abortion. The age of the court -- eight of the nine justices are 65 or older -- was underscored by the recent announcement that Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist was suffering from thyroid cancer. A Supreme Court nomination of a strict conservative could throw the president and the Democratic opposition into open warfare. And while such a nomination would please the conservative base, the resulting fight could drain Mr. Bush of the political capital he needs to push ahead with the rest of his agenda."

For the rest of Toner and Stevenson, click here.

No Marines for Bush?

Reporter Robert Worth talks with Marines near Falluja, Iraq on the eve of an expected assault on the insurgent stronghold in Thursday's "Most of the Troops in Iraq Have Other Things Than the Election on Their Minds, Like War."

"The presidential cliffhanger may have kept much of America up all night, but for most of the troops stationed near here, it was little more than a rumor. As tanks and armored personnel carriers roared through the dust in this makeshift military base in the desert west of Baghdad, the talk was mostly of real battles, not political ones. 'The election?' said Lance Cpl. Jason Skidmore, a lanky Marine infantryman who returned from tank maneuvers just before Senator John Kerry announced that he would concede defeat. 'I didn't even think about it until someone mentioned it just now.'….Some of the marines clearly had strong views about the presidential race and the way it would affect the military, though they have been instructed not to share those with reporters. Others seemed not to care much, saying the election seemed too far from their everyday lives to make much of an impression."

Worth doesn't mention polls that suggest most troops support Bush, though reporters can't ask troops about their voting preference.

As the MRC's Brent Baker notes, a National Annenberg Election Survey (a group whose political director is former NYT reporter Adam Clymer) found that when those in the active duty military were "asked whom they would trust more to handle the responsibility of commander-in-chief, 69 percent...preferred Bush to 24 percent for Kerry."

For the rest of Worth's story from Iraq, click here.

"Blunt" Cheney Claims Mandate for Bush

Richard Stevenson's story on Bush claiming victory doesn't see much of a second-term honeymoon for the president, and seems to question how a "blunt" Cheney could possibly take cheer from an "often vituperative" campaign: "With cabinet members and aides arrayed in front of him and thousands of cheering supporters cramming the atrium where he spoke, Mr. Bush called his victory historic but did not directly claim a mandate. He left that to Mr. Cheney, who as he often does, spoke more bluntly. 'President Bush ran forthrightly on a clear agenda for this nation's future, and the nation responded by giving him a mandate,' said Mr. Cheney, who called the hard-fought, intensely personal and often vituperative campaign 'a tremendously uplifting experience.' Mr. Bush may not be able to bask in his victory for long. The president is likely to turn his attention quickly back to Iraq, where American and Iraqi forces have been preparing for an assault on Falluja, one of the cities effectively under the control of the insurgents."

For the rest of Stevenson on Bush's victory claim, click here.

• George W. Bush | Campaign 2004 | Dick Cheney | Richard Stevenson

Overdosing Again on "Conservatives"

David Kirkpatrick continues his label-happy conservative beat reporting in Thursday's post-election story, "Some Backers of Bush Say They Anticipate a 'Revolution.'"

From the start: "Exulting in their electoral victories, President Bush's conservative supporters immediately turned to staking out mandates for an ambitious agenda of long-cherished goals, including privatizing Social Security, banning same-sex marriage, remaking the Supreme Court and overturning the court's decisions in support of abortion rights."

In all, the 1,300-word story used the word "conservative" as a description (not including quoted material) 22 times, with three "neoconservatives" thrown in for good measure.

For the rest of Kirkpatrick on conservative prospects, click here.

• George W. Bush | Campaign 2004 | Conservatives | David Kirkpatrick | Labeling Bias

Nagourney: Bush to Push "Conservative Agenda"

After Bush's convincing triumph, chief political reporter Adam Nagourney weighs the state of American politics in his Thursday lead, "Mandate Seen for 2nd Term With Gains in Congress."

"George W. Bush declared victory yesterday in the race for president after a decisive national election that bolstered Republican strength in Congress and led the White House to proclaim that Mr. Bush had won a mandate from the American public for a second term….In calling the president, Mr. Kerry abandoned a threat to contest the election result in Ohio in deference to a decisive popular vote victory by a man who four years ago won the presidency with less than 50 percent of the popular vote."

Times watcher Greg Djerejian argues that's not quite how it went down: "Kerry conceded because he could not win the electoral college -- per his own admission and the bare-bones facts -- not in 'deference to a decisive popular vote victory' writ large. This isn't just nit-picking. It's important -- given the barely concealed innuendo underpinning that spin. After all, Nagourney's copy strongly suggests that Bush stole the election from Gore -- but, now come a Democrat's turn, nobility reigned and election results weren't contested -- in 'deference' to the popular vote margin. Nothing of the sort occurred."

Nagourney continues: "The victory by Mr. Bush amounted to a striking turn in fortunes for the nation's 43rd president, who had at times this year seemed destined to repeat his father's fate of losing a second term because of a weak economy. Instead, he won about 8.7 million more popular votes than he did in 2000 and positioned himself and his party to push through a conservative agenda in Washington over the next four years."

For the rest of Nagourney's analysis, click here.

• George W. Bush | Campaign 2004 | Gaffes | Sen. John Kerry | Adam Nagourney

California Dreaming of Stem Cell Success

Dean Murphy reports from California on a ballot initiative: "Defying Bush Administration, Voters in California Back $3 Billion for Stem Cell Research." Murphy repeats the optimistic Democratic line: "Though there is disagreement over the use of human embryos for research, many scientists and patient advocacy groups say they believe stem cells have great potential for deriving therapies and cures for diseases like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's."

Do they? The Washington Post in June noted "the infrequently voiced reality, stem cell experts confess, is that, of all the diseases that may someday be cured by embryonic stem cell treatments, Alzheimer's is among the least likely to benefit."

Such doubts didn't stop the Times from trumpeting the practice, which Sen. Kerry supported, every chance it had in Campaign 2004.

For the rest of Murphy's stem-cell story, click here.

• George W. Bush | California | Campaign 2004 | Dean Murphy | Stem Cell

E-mail TimesWatch Director, Clay Waters, with TimesWatch feedback at cwaters@mediaresearch.org