Fineman: McCain Wouldn't Approve Of His Own Campaign's Message
Wow, such perfect timing! Below we noted at some length that the national media was failing to hold the McCain campaign accountable for its surrogates' pattern of questioning Obama's patriotism.
Now along comes a perfect example of this from Newsweek's Howard Fineman on MSNBC. Fineman was talking about Joe Lieberman's claim that Obama hasn't always put his country first:
Fineman said that while Lieberman's quote was clearly questionable, McCain himself wouldn't sanction it. "I still don't think if you said to McCain flat out, 'Do you approve of that kind of message,' that he would necessarily agree with it or support it," Fineman said.
But Howard, the McCain campaign itself blasted Lieberman's quote out to its press list, which constitutes an official McCain campaign endorsement of the quote. Isn't McCain responsible for his own campaign's message? And besides, if McCain doesn't agree with Lieberman, why hasn't he said so yet?
This from Fineman is really part and parcel of a larger media meme: The bizarre ability of some people to see questionable political behavior by McCain and his campaign as somehow indicative of good character on McCain's part.
For instance, when McCain pandered slavishly to the religious right, some pundits noted that McCain was uncomfortable doing this and didn't really mean it, so it didn't really matter. Similarly, when McCain constantly talks up his POW experiences, which he's perfectly entitled to do, we're always told that he's really reluctant to do this. This is a twofer for McCain, because he gets to showcase his war experiences and simultaneously be seen as modest about them at the same time.
Let's start calling this stuff for what it really is.
Late Update: TPMer Ben Craw has a sharp take on this over at his fun new TPMtv blog.
New McCain Attack: Obama is bipartisan, moderate.
According to the brilliant Tucker Bounds:
August 13, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, you're f'n kidding me.
Weren't they claiming he was the most liberal Senator?
Man, talk about a total lack of message discipline.
August 13, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
"In lockstep nearly half the time" makes absolutely no sense. Tucker Bounds isn't even trying anymore.
McCain's whole campaign is based on lies and distortions of Obama. He has nothing to offer.
August 13, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is what we call the nefarious voting tendency called, "In Hop Step". Which leads a candidate to bounce back and forth on one foot for every two steps another candidate takes. You can see this in battles like voting to approve appropriations bills, recognizing the national importance of various holidays, etc.
If this is McCain's 'leadership' then what, "Granted, President McCain's administration ordered the troops to move in and arrest the demonstrators, but I'm certain he wouldn't have approved firing on the crowd with live ammunition. Now, I could see him authorizing blanks and maybe some water-boarding to scare those commie-lefties, but live ammunition? Never."
August 13, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Crappy journalism?
It would be amusing, if the stakes weren't so very high. McCain blurts out whatever happens to be in his mind, courtesy of his most recent cell phone call, and the media either doesn't report on it, or if it does, excuses the statements.
The inside-the-Beltway media crowd is positively loathsome in their blind bias towards John McCain.
August 13, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which cell phone call are you referring to CT?
August 13, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh never mind. I realize what you are referring to now. I thought you meant something specific.
August 13, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was referring to the fact that aides are concerned about the fact that McCain can go completely off message if he happened to have had a recent cell phone conversation with someone about the issue in question. So his aides are trying to limit his cell phone use.
No word on whether he's figured out how to use "teh googles" on his own, though.
August 13, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Let's start calling this stuff for what it really is."
Okay. Bullshit, is what it is.
August 13, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Still grading on a curve, I see.
August 13, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sure, Obama is supposed to be responsible for something his minister said when he wasn't even there but John McCain can't be held responsible for what's coming out from the people he pays to run his campaign. If he didn't approve of what they were doing, they'd cut ties, or fire them or something, right? But no, Fineman's idealized vision of John McCain wouldn't approve of his own campaign's message. No cognitive dissonance there.
And anyway, then what exactly is all this shit about "I'm John McCain and I approve this message"?
August 13, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's even worse than that, if you ask me. Joe Lieberman doesn't speak for John McCain, except that he quite obviously does, but John McCain doesn't speak for the campaign, after he's committed another "gaffe".
August 13, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Especially when Lieberman whispers something in McCain's ear to correct him.
August 13, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe this is the MSM gradually coming around to realize McCain is a fraud and a liar. Right now they're defending him, but not the campaign he's running anymore, even if McCain has come out and said he is proud of his ads and personally questioned Obama's patriotism. Given a couple more months of increased coverage, hopefully the MSM will see him exactly for what he is and quit covering for him in hopes of keeping the race close.
August 13, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fraud? Liar?
Speak to the avatar.
August 13, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Fraud? Liar? Speak to the avatar."
I say we speak to the inbred who created the avatar..
August 13, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
What is it exactly about being called "Barry Soetoro" that's supposed to be a negative for Obama? I mean, people sometimes go by different names. I mean, if he ran for president as Barry Soetoro you'd probably have a picture of him showing his name as Barack Obama.
August 13, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Fineman may be right in a way. If you put it to John McCain directly to approve or deny Joe Lieberman's statement that Obama hasn't always put his country first, I would not be at all surprised if McCain tried to find some way to weasel his way out of approving Lieberman's statement.
The real issue is that ONLY MAKES IT WORSE! In that case, McCain is simply trying to have it both ways, using surrogates and his campaign flacks to hit Obama for lacking patriotism while remaining above the fray himself (although he did say Obama would rather win the presidency than the Iraq War).
In that case, it means he's a hypocrite for allowing his campaign to engage in activities of which he supposedly does not approve. Not to mention a coward and a very poor leader. The fish rots from the head.
August 13, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, like he did this morning on NPR:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=93548659
Steve Schmidt, who is running your campaign, has said something kind of simple and understandable. He said that a campaign needs one positive message about its candidate and then one good, strong negative message about the opponent. Your camp —
I never heard that statement, and I'd have to know who attributed it to him before I would agree with that. We're not sending any negative message in our campaign. We're drawing differences in positions between myself and Sen. Obama, which are significant. He wants to raise taxes; I want to keep them low. He doesn't want to drill offshore or have nuclear power; I want both. I've never heard Steve Schmidt say we need a negative message in the campaign.
I'm quoting The Wall Street Journal here.
I've run many, many campaigns, and I have never believed that we need a strong negative message. And I've been in –-
However, do you not consider it a negative message, though, when a campaign ad goes on TV that blames your opponent, Barack Obama, for high gas prices or –-
I believe strongly that if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. And he voted for the energy bill that had all kind of tax breaks and giveaways for the oil companies. I believe if you're not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. And it's a big problem in America today.
And are you comfortable with ads where your opponent is being compared to Paris Hilton?
I'm very comfortable with my campaign. And I strongly recommend that people who don't find humor in that relax, turn off the computer and go on it and get some fresh air and try to regain some —
Well, Paris Hilton found some humor in it.
Yeah, sure.
August 13, 2008 5:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mostly this showcases NPR's ridiculously bad interview skills. How do these folks keep their jobs?
They followed that up by reading a letter the next day from a listener about how mean they were to McCain for interrupting him during the interview.
August 14, 2008 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's amazing is that, as the MSM knows very well, McCain himself has already made similar comments himself. Most notably, I suppose, the very recent comments about Obama "being willing to lose a war."
But I guess if McCain said that to McCain flat out he wouldn't necessarily agree with it or support it.
I guess the danger for the MSM here is unwittingly diagnosing their candidate of choice with schizophrenia.
August 13, 2008 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain: "Obama would rather lose a war than win an election campaign."
But war or the threat of war has always been the mother's milk of Republican politics, and now that there is a chance to gin up another Cold War, you can expect them to do it.
They would rather restart to the Cold War than lose an election.
August 13, 2008 7:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
CORRECTION: McCain on Obama: "[he would] rather lose a war than lose a campaign."
August 13, 2008 8:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good analysis Greg.
http://strategy08.wordpress.com
August 13, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, this is great news.. it clearly tells me it doesnt matter what they throw at him.. it aint gonna stick!!
August 13, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Inside the beltway, if a journalist doesn't like John McCain's current tone, it doesn't take more than a short leap of faith to find a more preferable one.
August 13, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yet the same pundits don't bother pointing out how odd it is that McCain scores higher on sincerity in recent polls.
August 13, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
LEAVE JOHN MCCAIN ALONE!!!!!
August 13, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah! And get off his goddamned lawn!!!
August 13, 2008 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah...
this always makes me think of that Kids in the Hall sketch:
Skoora, Skoora. Skoora the gentle shark.
Skoora, Skoora. He's a killer with a broken heart.
Don't blame him! He blames himself.
Don't hate him! He hates himself.
Skoora, Skoora. Skoora the gentle shark.
August 13, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain and the dumpster diving lobbyists running his campaign speak with one voice. When will msm learn that McCain is not a good guy. He has no sole.
To hint that McCain is just going along to get along shines a bright light on some serious character flaws in McCain. First, he does not stand up for owns convictions (he just flip flops on them) and is easily led astray. Secondly, by blaming these shit bag tactics on his campaign McCain refuses to take accountability for his actions. Like they say 4 more years of Bush
August 13, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was just going to say, haven't we just dealt with 7+ miserable years of a guy who, for a long time, people were convinced didn't actually believe in the things his administration did or said because, you know, he's a swell guy. Took the press and this country way too long to figure out that he was complicit in almost all of it. We can't afford another wait like that - need to nip this in the bud by keeping this lunatic - there, I said it - out of the Oval Office.
August 13, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
We have had 7 years of not only the Bush executive, but a total Repug majority until '06, when we eeked out a tiny majority that isn't veto-proof and doesn't hold together.
If McLame wins - you know what will happen? Nothing. Because the Democrats will hold the clear majority in Congress.
August 13, 2008 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, no: it was Adlai Stevenson who had no sole.
We all know who has no soul and something is eating him from the inside. McMajorShit is beginning to come off as another Nixon and boy, if he makes it to the Oval Office, he's gonna get even, gonna get out his enemies list and kick butt. Amy Silverman's profile of him in the 7 August Phoenix New Times News is food for thought.
August 13, 2008 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
How anyone can view Fineman's comments as complimenting McCain is beyond me. He was referring to a man running a campaign that is out of control
August 13, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like Clinton's campaign - no?
[smile]
this'll backfire just like it did for her.
August 13, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whether or not it's a compliment is not relevant. It's the "nudge nudge wink wink" behavior on the part of Fineman that is the problem.
At least Joe Klein had the decency to come right out and say that John McCain's campaign was scum.
Fineman is basically saying "No, it's not scum, because, trust me, trust me, trust me, he doesn't really mean any of it."
August 13, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
The main thing I can't stand about McCain are his teeth.
Horrible small brownish-yellow.
And when you combine his yellow teeth with his creepy chester-the-molester laugh and and that vacant stare he does...as he pans the room looking to see if even one person got his - whatever - joke or something...MAN...
His beautiful wife must look at him and think...WTF.
I have an image in my mind of him practicing some speech in their bedroom mirror with her listening to him flub lines - then smirking - then him freaking-out and punching a hole through the drywall.....
August 13, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
More proof that McSame isn't a native-born American. . . . He's English!
August 13, 2008 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is so obvious that McCain's campaign ain't got nuthin'. . .The conventions will accentuate that point and then the aggressive (not negative, mind you) Sept-Nov run by Obama will bring it on home!!!!
August 13, 2008 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
MUST READ profile of McMajorShit:
http://phoenixnewtimes.com/content/printVersion/848709
August 13, 2008 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes Tena, I'm getting feelings of deja vu here. Once again Obama is trying to run a respectful, issues oriented campaign against an oppontent who just wants to wallow in the mire of rumor, innuendo, deflection oriented politics. And we know how well that worked out before.
Lack of a coherent message .... been there, done that, won the nomination.
August 13, 2008 6:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Normal people worry me, too.
August 13, 2008 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
ABC just had a fair piece on McCain's two-facedness.
August 13, 2008 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
"McCain's whole campaign is based on lies and distortions of Obama. He has nothing to offer."
Which, let's face it, makes him just about the ideal candidate for his party -- and, I fear, for this corrupt,decaying excuse for a republic.
McCain may lose, but looking around at the country we live in, I think he may deserve to win.
August 13, 2008 9:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Literally, I think he's right. If you asked this to McCain's face, with a camera there, he'd say he doesn't support this kind of campaign. It's possible that was what Fineman was saying but I'm not quite willing to give he the benefit of the doubt here.
August 13, 2008 10:13 PM | Reply | Permalink