Account Of Obama Hailing His Own Symbolic Importance Is Disputed
Okay, just when we get done saying how great The Washington Post was for knocking down McCain's false troop visit attack, along comes a really, really bad one.
The "big story" of the morning is this post from WaPo which purports to reveal that in a closed-door meeting with House Dems, Obama said this:
"I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions."
My gosh, Obama thinks he walks on water! Now the Republicans will be able to create a narrative about presumptuous Obama!
Except that it looks like WaPo may have grossly distorted what he actually said.
A Dem leadership aide who was in the room has emailed me and other reporters this:
"His entire point of that riff was that the campaign IS NOT about him. The Post left out the important first half of the sentence, which was something along the lines of: 'It has become increasingly clear in my travel, the campaign, that the crowds, the enthusiasm, 200,000 people in Berlin, is not about me at all. It's about America. I have just become a symbol ... ."
...and Dem Rep. James Clyburn says this:
"...it wasn't about him. It was about Germany and Europe. And he said that he was a symbol of that hope."
Still no update on the original WaPo post.
Late Update: WaPo has now written up the leadership aides' pushback. Of course, that hasn't stopped the GOP from attacking Obama over the quote.
Comments (68)
Man the press is awful. How is this even a story? Substance anyone?
Flufferwink did a great post on this here:
http://strategy08.wordpress.com/2008/07/30/washington-post-lies-about-obama-quote/
July 30, 2008 10:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
yeah a lot of people are getting sick of the media and turning to the internet to get their news
Raw Footage Of Idiots Stealing Obama’s Prayer
July 30, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is interesting that both Dana Milbank and Jonathan Weisman use the quote and attribute it to "a witness." These guys are so lazy they cannot even cover themselves by using different descriptions of the same source. They are so stupid that they think we would not notice that this occured in a room of elected Democrats and they only have one "witness" to attribute this to?
Talk about arrogance and Hubris. OH, bad journalism, too, but who cares about that arcane practice in this snark fiesta called campaign coverage.
July 30, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeahhh...and that's the media I've come to expect...utter garbage passed off as journalism.
Obama is a naive, uppity negro, McCain is the maverick war hero. That's all we need to know right media? That's the bottom line.
Pieces of shit..
July 30, 2008 10:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Yeahhh...and that's the media I've come to expect...utter garbage passed off as journalism. "
I share your feelings.
Shame on the gutter WaPo, now turned into a rightwing rag.
July 30, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is unbelievably irresponsible reporting on the part of the Washington Post. I'm sure it will generate several letters to the editor from the prominent Democratic leaders who were there, but it sounds like perhaps Jonathan Weisman shouldn't be covering a political beat if he's going to either blatantly distort quotations.
July 30, 2008 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Email to Weisman, everyone, w/ a cc to the Editor. Immediately. Make it clear that this sort of coverage is unacceptable - that WaPo is derelict in their responsibilities to accurately inform the public. The problem with their coverage here is not one of just not yet having gotten the full story - they appear to have deliberately left out an important piece of what was said in order to create a false impression.
Call them on it!
July 30, 2008 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
This link will take you to a form for sending email to Weisman. Include the URL for his article (Greg has the link in his post above):
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/jonathan+weisman/
July 30, 2008 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Before you send the form email off to Weisman, copy it so that you can send a separate copy of it to:
Jim Brady, Executive Editor of WaPo: executive.editor@washingtonpost.com
and Deborah Howell, the Ombudsman for WaPo: ombudsman@washpost.com
July 30, 2008 11:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you, CarolBG! Emails sent to Weisman, Brady and Howell.
Note that Dana Milbank also had a blatant Obama hit piece in the WaPo today.
July 30, 2008 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks CarolBG. Wrote him a letter asking for a public apology to Sen Obama and CC'd letters@washpost.com and ombudsman@washpost.com as well Morning Joe, media matters and all the lefty blogs.
We MUST push back.
July 30, 2008 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
@SimoneDB, I *love* your avatar. One of my favorite books. ;)
July 30, 2008 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Everyone should write and demand a retraction from WAPO for this crap job, no make that hachet job on Obama. Talk about unamerican....
July 30, 2008 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here's Weisman's e-mail:
weismanj@washpost.com
July 30, 2008 10:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm second that. Let's put pressure on the Post.
July 30, 2008 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
pitchforks and torches....
July 30, 2008 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
And this gives the McCain sleaze campaign their next attack point now that their first one has been debunked, though not after they did damage with it.
July 30, 2008 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Everybody's jumping on Weisman but didn't he just get the quote from this Dana Milbank article?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/29/AR2008072902068.html?hpid%3Dtopnews&sub=AR
July 30, 2008 10:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
If he did get it from Milbank it simply proves
the point that often gets lost by partisans of a campaign. It isn't just the bias, it is the use of a narrative designed to hide laziness and studpidity that grates.
American Media: Incompetents Fedding Stool Softener to the Incontinent.
July 30, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Barack Obama = Batman?
July 30, 2008 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
A story put forth in column by Dana Milbank who was not in attendance at the meeting with the House Dems with "quotes" from a reporter who supposedly was -- although if Obama had said it, don'tcha think someone else would have picked up on the story and run with it? I mean aside from Moron Joe Scarborough who went so far as to resurrect the Michelle Obama "proud" comments in a manner completely alien to the original remarks to inflate this story to grandiose proportions.
Will Milbank apologize? Will Scarborough? Will Hell freeze over?
July 30, 2008 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's my naiveté and I'm realizing that, the more I hang around TPM that I still have some left (quel horreur!) to be ripped away from me. Millbank is one of those occasions for me. Sad.
July 30, 2008 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
One step forward, two steps back.
This is part of that Uppity narrative they've been working on.
July 30, 2008 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Truly.
July 30, 2008 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Even before you get to the money quote, the Milbank article sounds so ass-hurt it's astonishing. As I was reading it, my wife looked at me and asked "what's wrong?" - I couldn't believe how bitter and over-the-top it was... or how OBVIOUS... right down to the continued hammering at the "presumptuous" meme.
July 30, 2008 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'll take crap stories that don't have anything to do with the issues that affect voter's lives for $500, Alex.
July 30, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
It was Milbank. Milbank specializes in snark. Taking a quote from his column is like taking one from Dave Barry. His whole column is makinf fun of the way washington works, and while usually funny, should not be taken as a serious article. The whole point of Dana's pieces is to take ourselves less seriously.
The people who are using this part of a quote should be ashamed of themselves. They should know better. Joe Scarborough has been made to look like a fool twice this week. Maybe now he'll check his facts first, before harping on something for two hours... or maybe not.
July 30, 2008 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Obama campaign must know that they are now going to be attacked on EVERYTHING that Obama does and says.
The Obama campaign needs to go on the OFFENSE, attack back when attacked, and MUST have surrogates to stand up for him.
Now I am more and more NOT thinking that Kaine is such a good idea as a VP choice. Obama needs an attack dog as a VP which the best attack dogs are either Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton.
July 30, 2008 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree, and if Obama's not going to do it, I wish a 527 would. McCain is so vulnerable to truly meaningful attack; why won't they do it?
July 30, 2008 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
I suggest that those of us on the blogosphere might claim this role, actually we already have done so.
And rightly so... as Milbank's getting hammered for his careless snark, I also read a certain disgruntlement in his words with the fact Obama's campaign has not been very forthcoming with the press about his floating schedule.
Maybe Dana (like many other notable captives of the MSM) doesn't realize Obama's schedule needs to float, just for basic security reasons. Certainly moreso than McCain's. And even with short notice, Obama can draw huge crowds, so they don't need to pre-announce everything, he just needs to show up somewhere and the throng throngs.
Much like in the 2006 election, it will be up to the blogs (particularly the "usual suspects" like TPM, FDL, Truthdig, MoveOn, etc.) in this current season of lies, to hammer away at the MSM's complacency, nay, their complicity, in bending reality to benefit the neocons who now own the MSM, lock, stock and over-a-barrel.
The closer we get to election day, the more important it is that we all keep the pressure on the MSM by exposing their blatant partisanship, whenever it rears it's ugly head.
PS... for a great synopsis of how this mess all transpired, check out Tom (what's the matter with Kansas) Frank's latest essay, at http://darwiniana.com/2008/07/26/frank-on-right-wing-con-men/
It really helped me clear up some of my questions about connectivity between neocon operatives and their pernicious agendas over the past few decades.
Abramoff and South African aparthied?
YES, they do connect, in a very big way...
A great read...
July 30, 2008 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. We HAVE to.
Check out the new McBush ad "Celeb"
Shots of Obama rally in Germany interspersed with clips of BRITTANY SPEARS.
Another "where the white women at" ad. Echoes of Harold Ford "Call Me" racist ad from '06.
People. Please bookmark FAIR's Media Contact List and use it. Every day. Please.
We -- WE -- MUST push back.
July 30, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
The page 28-A vigil begins.
July 30, 2008 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
MSNBC's Morning Joe went on and on this morning about this quotation and the hubris it supposedly revealed. Scarborough and Geist are normally idiots, but even Chuck Todd, who I tend to respect, talked at length about Obama's hubris as revealed by this out-of-context, second-hand quote. The only person trying to put a brake on the runaway truck of self-righteousness was Mika Brezinski, but as often happens on this show, she was dismissed as having drunk the Obama Kool-Aid (which was really Scarborough's way of saying "you're a blonde woman and though you are smarter than all of us, your opinion doesn't really count.")
While you are writing Milbank, you might also write Morning Joe and demand they spend as much time parsing their own motives (and, in fact, their own hubris) as they spent judging Senator Obama. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/ (comment box is at the bottom right hand part of the page)
July 30, 2008 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I did my part. I let them know I heard Morning Joe had avoided an intern scandal when he was in Congress. I was shocked to hear he was so cocky he thought he was above the law. But unlike Milbank and Weisman, I would let him comment on the truth of the matter before e-mailing it to all my friends.
July 30, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seriously: If it was true what the WaPo writes, which Dem would go out there and confirm it? They depend on Obama, so they aren't really sources you can trust without second thoughts.
Come on, Greg, you did a great job in the early days of primaries. Where's that spirit gone?
July 30, 2008 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe the Obama camp will release a terse email rebuttal - That'll teach 'em.
July 30, 2008 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
How DARE a presidential candidate act all presidential!!
Who does he think he is? A potential president?
The NERVE!
July 30, 2008 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yellow journalism, people. Nothing more.
July 30, 2008 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
I co-sign damn near everyone who commented before me. I think the original sloppy reporting came from Dana Milbank, I couldn't find his email address, but I found this Washington Post Contact page for him: http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/dana+milbank/
(..if someone has Milbank's actual email addy, please correct me)
We have to let Mr. Milbank know how hamfistedly clumsy his reporting is. That being said, I agree with people on this thread who say that Obama being misquoted is fanning the "Uppity" narrative. The thing is, as a black man hearing another black man characterized as being "Uppity" - it just seems to be code for "..this n*gger thinks he's better than you!" I think we all have to aggressively push back against this form of racism.
July 30, 2008 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is losing the narrative battle. It's not about gas prices, the wars, social security, health care it's about fabricated stories and cherry picked quotes out of context. What happened to this being about Bush's Third Term? Why isn't it about the economy being in the dumps? Why is Obama letting McCain control the narrative? Once they make something stick, they'll ride it all the way to election day - they did it against McCain in 2000 and against Kerry in 2004. I thought Obama said he learned something form the 2004 campaign? This "I'm above it all" attitude is infuriating.
Fight back dammit!
July 30, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sorry Jonze - but come on. You say this every day all day and it's driving me nuts.
David Plouffe has run a very damn good campaign and no offense, Jonze, but I trust his judgment more than I do yours.
No Obama hasn't lost the narrative - the narrative is all about him. Negative, positive - whatever. He is front and center. Do you really think that voters are talking about McLame? I don't think so.
They are talking about Obama. I'll say this again: this whole week has been GOP and GOP hacks in the media pushing back against the unbelievably brilliant week Obama had last week in Iraq and elsewhere.
July 30, 2008 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
CNN has a "Ticker" bit saying the election is a referendum on Obama. The Republican strategy is clearly to make Obama so unlikable that McQueeg wins by default. More explicitly: drive up Obama's negatives. Promote as many statewide initiatives as possible to bring "conservative" voters out to the polls. Between disenchanted Obama supporters staying home and right-wingers coming out to oppose phony state constitutional amendments opposing the use of burning flags to have sex with underage animals, McQueeg takes the election, which everyone realizes too late is the last thing anyone wanted or expected.
July 30, 2008 12:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
cleavermeat - make that SAME SEX sex with underage animals...
July 30, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can hear Fox & Friends' Steve Doozy now
"This is HUGE!!"
July 30, 2008 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
the media is fucking sloppy.............
July 30, 2008 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
A lot of people should have just read the story to discredit it. He said he gave "advice" to Gordon Brown the british P.M and then goes on to misquote, again, a conversation that was picked up by ABC news mics between Obama and CAMBELL the opposition leader. That should discredit the whole article.
July 30, 2008 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
The media is doing what the media does: telling a familiar, easily understood story, reinforcing something they hope we already believe or are predisposed to believe.
July 30, 2008 11:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
i just loved how msnbc cut off obama town hall meeting just before he was about talk about fixing the economy............
July 30, 2008 11:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
So this is just the new attack line. 'Obama is an Uppity Negro who doesn't know his place.' Thats what the Repubs really want to say........
And Joe Scarborough is a pompous windbag.
July 30, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess the truth hurts. Obama IS a symbol for me, and I suspect, for a whole lot of other people as well. I don't understand how this hurts him, if anything it hurts the GOP for even bringing it up...
July 30, 2008 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let the echo begin! Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Ingram, Savage, Couric, Brokaw, Hume, at al
July 30, 2008 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
a very good point, Mishkin, no doubt Media Matters and Newshounds will have lots of fodder from this to send to me, since I can't in my left mind stomach listening to or watching any of these unpatriotic posers, We (The Union of 9th Level Bloggers) should meet this inevitable neocon media dogpile with a good old liberal website blogpile.. and if your IP address hasn't been blacklisted, try to get on one of their blogs (if you can) and tell them what a bunch of foolish lemmings they make themselves into by picking up on every distraction as if it is the real story...
July 30, 2008 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
It hurts because Americans don't want to have a beer with someone who puts himself on a pedestal. It's OK for us to put him on a pedestal. But if they can somehow make it seem that Barack Obama is blowing his own horn it can put some people off.
July 30, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
*** Swiftboat alert ****
*** Swiftboat alert ****
*** Swiftboat alert ****
*** Swiftboat alert ****
*** Swiftboat alert ****
July 30, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
As usual, the old saying still applies at the Washington Post:
Don't let the facts stand in the way of a good story!
July 30, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
And anything you say from this point on is totally irrelevant, as you're obviously a narrow-minded, bigoted fool whose only defense is some synthetic "THEY HATE HIM BECAUSE HE'S BLACK" tripe. Idiot.
If Obama's really that good, he doesn't need any of his chump-ass cult members pulling out the race card every time something doesn't go his way. Only losers need to pull that crap.
July 30, 2008 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
That was in reply to "LuxVeritas" in case anybody didn't read his crap.
July 30, 2008 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
...and "ultramagnetic" - another member of the racist echo chamber.
July 30, 2008 12:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
"If Obama's really that good, he doesn't need any of his chump-ass cult members pulling out the race card every time something doesn't go his way. Only losers need to pull that crap."
Its my experience, when someone loudly protests about someone playing the "race card" - they are usually just mad that someone is calling them on their racism. That being said, Lux was exactly right, the "Uppity Negro" narrative is one that the McCain campaign has fully embraced. The "..this n*gger thinks he's better than you!" approach.
July 30, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I find this to be a much grayer issues than most readers here. To be sure, I do agree that the media should have printed the quotation in its entirety, given the standard the industry (typically) strives for in relation to establishing credibility. Of course, headlines also sell papers.
But I think there is plenty here to at least make the argument that it was not 'irresponsible' to leave the 'stump speech' part of the quotation out. Again, I am just saying it is enough to squabble over, not that it is what a particular editor should or should not have done.
But the "campaign" (Obama 08) the "crowds" and "enthusiasm" and the "200,000 in Berlin" are still, in some sense, about "him." This is his campaign and these are his supporters. Is it "clear" to you because it is "clear to him" that he is just "a symbol of the the possibility of America returning to [their] best traditions." Can anyone honestly sit here confidently and say that he did not mention this first part to get to the second part? Come on. EVERY politician says that the supporters and the campaign is more important than the politician. EVERYONE.
Even still, I don't care about the answers to these questions. For a campaign as brilliant as the Obama campaign, they should know better. People will read the whole quotation, but this one line is still the juiciest part. If the Post had printed the whole quotation first, it would only have been a matter of time before the sound byte would found its way into the news cycle.
And here is where I think it is fair game. You cannot simultaneously praise your campaign and supporters as you are trying to fend of criticisms of your hubris and "premature drape measuring." ESPECIALLY when you say a line so provocative as to suggest that you (as "symbol") can return America to it's best traditions. Haven't we heard enough 'messiah' mentions? Does the 'anointed one himself' need to make (another) subtle reference?
I'm not suggesting what he said is wrong nor am I suggesting that the Post was fair and accurate on this matter. I am merely saying that, for a campaign that is so disciplined and cautious, why throw the red meat?
OBAMA '08
July 30, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Peter Hamill made a good point on Morning Joe. Politicians aren't robots able to churn out exactly the right thing all the time. He was talking in a private meeting and a distortion of his words was leaked by someone who wants to hurt him to a reporter who wants to hurt him. There is no tape available, so we would never be sure what was said. So what justification do you or the media have for wagging your finger at Sen. Obama on this? It's just another distraction the media and the GOP bring up election after election. They're the ones who deserve chastising IMO.
July 30, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Humble Obama. That's a new one.
When he says it's not about him, it's about him.
July 30, 2008 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Humble Obama. That's a new one."
I'm still waiting for you to make one coherent point, now that would be a new one.
July 30, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another swiftboat alert.
On the View, they were saying that the prayer that was stolen in Israel was leaked by the campaign in a PR stunt. Except, this has been completely debunked, the New Republic originally wrote about the accusation and then debunked it the next day when they did further investigating . Damn liberal media.
July 30, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is this really all the Repugs have? This is just silly stuff.
July 30, 2008 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure how serious you are, but you may have a point. Sen. Obama watches a lot of movies.
July 30, 2008 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
And now ABC has picked up on the story...
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNote/story?id=3105288&page=1
love the part where it says " ((Read that sentence again, and try to imagine how it would look if it was said on camera.) "
These people are frickin' insane...the unfairness of it all (among other things) has me in a tizzy...
Why don't we just change the Constitution so that the news media gets to pick the President and we can all just sit back and relax...
July 30, 2008 6:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's an attempt to smack-down that n..... by Wapo.Shamless indeed but hang on to your knickers folks more is coming down the pike.
July 30, 2008 9:40 PM | Reply | Permalink