Bill Clinton's Impenetrable Press Strategy
MYRTLE BEACH, S.C.—Former President Bill Clinton, the only class-A champion worker of the media here in South Carolina, is up to something. And no one, particularly the press, is exactly sure what he's doing, or why he's doing it.
In Kingstree, around 6 p.m., Bill Clinton was taking questions and doing his Great Explainer thing for an almost entirely African-American audience in a municipal center. In the back of the room, the New York Times' Kit Seelye was typing away at her story that ran today. "Bill Clinton Accuses Obama Camp of Stirring Race Issue" was the headline, with contributions from two other reporters in other cities and scripts of new campaign ads provided by her editors. The story was largely about Clinton's unexpected (by the media, at least) remarks that took place a bit after 1 p.m. down in Charleston.
(A long aside here: Also in the back of the room in Kingstree: the local police department's Sgt. Huckabee, standing guard. According to research by one of his family members, he said, he is something like a fifth cousin to the Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee. Sgt. Huckabee is neither a Republican or a Democrat, and said that the relationship did not influence his vote but did get his phone calls returned a lot faster these days. He also noted that presidential candidates talked a lot about salaries for teachers and, since 9/11, for firefighters, but not at all about salaries for cops, and that he believed the starting salary for police officers in South Carolina was somewhere just north of $24,000 a year.)
Anyway! Most of the reporters present earlier in Charleston couldn't actually get close enough to Clinton to hear these allegedly impromptu remarks; the Daily News and the Observer were provided with a transcript by Glenn Thrush of Newsday, and a handler tried valiantly to keep the press away from Clinton throughout the event. One wire service reporter was scolded by his editors for not being able to get into the scrum, and was told to never leave Clinton's side again.
At 4:57, CNN emailed out their transcript of Clinton's remarks; they ran video of the "event" in their 4 p.m. Wolf Blitzer-cast.
According to someone who watched Chris Matthews on MSNBC at 7 p.m., "they played it like 100,000 times."
And around 11 p.m. last night in Myrtle Beach, at President Clinton's final appearance of the day (before a nearly all-white audience and with nearly no press in attendance, besides that nice redheaded boy from the AP), a woman in the audience stood up to complain about the media.
"I'm very frustrated with the media," she said. "They just bash her and bash her"--meaning Hillary Clinton.
"I'm glad you noticed," Clinton said.
"Chris Matthews drives me crazy," the woman said.
Then Clinton cited a Howard Kurtz story— presumably this one, from mid-December— in which the media "admitted they had a double standard" in covering Hillary Clinton. Then he went on to praise the importance of Thomas Friedman's "synthetic" work; he defined what he meant by "synthetic" for the audience.
So he's working a very complicated tactic, encouraging public sentiment against the press, but also wrapping us around his finger for reasons that remain fairly opaque.
Because Bill Clinton likes the press, he wanted the people of Myrtle Beach to know. "I like most of them a whole lot better than they like me," he said.
- Poll
- Obama (D)
- McCain(R)
- Spread
- RCP Average
- 49.4
- 42.8
- Obama +6.6
- Candidate
- Favorable
- Unfavorable
- Spread
- Obama
- 56.4
- 36.3
- +20.1
- McCain
- 50.1
- 41.3
- +8.8
Why doesn't our PRESS try something new and STOP COVERING BILL CLINTON, who is NOT the candidate and only manipulating YOU to stop proper vetting of Hillary? He has nothing substantive to say and is not honoring his role as a former President. Billary are complaining, so WHY DON'T YOU FOCUS ON ONLY HILLARY CLINTON AND HER RECORD, VOTES, THE CLINTON WHITE HOUSE YEARS AND HER VALIDATED PART IN WHAT OCCURRED -- GOOD AND BAD??? In an ironic twist, Bill Clinton is correct in his assessment of the PRESS since he orchestrated and is conducting what is happening and how it happens. A former President commands focus by the PRESS. Michelle Obama and Elizabeth Edwards do not. Turn the page. Ignore him since he is not conducting himself appropriately as a former President. Treat him exactly like you would treat Michelle or Elizabeth -- just the ordinary "supportive" spouse he claims he is. Don't show up where he is. Don't take his calls. Don't take the Clinton Campaign's calls if it has anything to do w/the Bill Clinton, SPOUSE. He isn't running the Nation and has violated (again) all sense of propriety, so IGNORE HIM...and focus instead on Hillary Clinton. Then, you won't have to be reduced to his basing in your face and finger wagging...like children. Oops! I forgot, the "child" identity is Mr. Obama's. Nice.
Openly stating he is/was going "door to door" FINGER WAGGING at African-Americans in SC should not be permitted. This was done when Bill walked the floors of the Nevada Caucuses after fighting AGAINST the locations. FINGER WAGGING in the face of young journalists is more of the same. Where is the DNC??? I wouldn't want my daughter to intern in their White House or to interview these thugs! Wake up! Voter intimidation by a powerful former President should NOT be permitted? Is there NO LIMIT?
Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton would help get our country back on track and implement the positive changes we need!
The news media wants to sell papers and increase tv audiences so they can make more money with advertisers.
This profit motivation is a leading cause of the media's efforts to create contreversy, stir up trouble and thus avoid covering candidates solutions to our problems.
Every loves to watch a fight--just ask any middle school teacher or newspaper editor.
The sad part of this equation is that this is a critical time for our country. We need to choose a leader who will help us solve our problems. If we vote for another "Bush" we may very well see "The Fall of the Roman Empire" in our life times.
We must ensure that we elect some one who is serious about solving our problems and keep our country strong.
I support Bill and Hillary Clinton for President because
1-They will balance the budget
2-They will cut middle class taxes--not millionaire's taxes
3-They will restore our economy to greatness
4-They will mend our international relationships
5-They will create millions of new jobs by promoting
Renewable Energy-Wind, Solar, Geothermal, etc.
6-They will build coalitions to solve challenges
Deep in my heart and soul I strongly believe that they want to do good and help average people.
They have proven they can do what is right for America and I trust them to continue to help us enact the positive changes we need.
Kevin
PS-Please note that at no time did I engage in hateful commemts about Obama in articulating my reasons why I feel that the Clinton's are best suited to lead our country.
Hillary-Haters please respond in kind.
Let's raise the level of discourse in our primary and communicate why we feel our candidate is good, not why the other is bad. Let's debate why we ought to vote FOR some one not AGAINST some one else.
Make no mistake, Bill Clinton will be the co-president if Senator Clinton wins the Democratic nomination and the fall election. The Clinton's, like George W. Bush, are self centered yuppies. They are at the center of their own universe and always will be. Truth is the first casualty whenever they are attacked because their being wrong is never an option. Forgive me for feeling far safer with John McCain when he admits to the Wall Street Journal editorial board that he doesn't understand much about economics. While I wish McCain didn't consider Phil Gramm a good source of wisdom on matters economic, I find his frankness (think Harry Truman) over the top refreshing. Can anyone reading this post think of any substantive example where either Mr. or Mrs. Clinton has ever admitted to being wrong or ill-informed on ANYTHING? Their egos, just like Dubya's, don't allow such humility. Wake up America before it's too late. We can't afford another four years of what we have now.
-- A lifelong Democrat who is supporting Obama and McCain, because character matters more than ideology.
There's an interesting story in the subtext, about the AP reporter who was apparently blocked by Clinton's handlers from getting close enough to hear. That happened to me when I tried to get a comment on a late-breaking poll from Iowa from candidate Mike Huckabee at the St. Petersburg CNN GOP debate. i was so pissed off I knocked the handler down and got booted from the spin room. But lartely I see Bill O'Reilly and another reporter somewhere in similar circumstances. I can't recall these issues getting reported in earlier campaigns, and I'm wondering if these handlers are getting more aggressive on their own, on instructions from the candidates, or whether - God forbid - reporters are becoming more aggressive about asking questions. I thought the "scrum" usage was really apropriate terminology for what's been going on. Reporters may be realizing that a handler has no more right than anyone else to block your access to a candidate. A Secret Service agent does, however, and only a law enforcement officer on duty does.
Handlers deserve out courtesy, and some like Marvin Nicholson for Barack are paragons of courtesy, but a few are too dim for the job.
Give me a break. You know, and I know that the only reliable campaign coverage these days is on the internet, that's how I found this site. I'm waiting for Wolf Blitzer (CNN)to offer a marriage proposal to Mr. Obama any day now. It seems as if every time Mrs. Clinton gains some ground with the public, the media tries to downplay it. I was in the crowd, a few rows behind the lady who made the "media comment" and I was elated that she did so. However, I had hoped that she would have asked the question that's been burning in my mind: Why? Why is this happening? I think what it boils down to is that for some major news outlets, it's no longer enough to report the news. Now they want to create it. I don't care who you're voting for, nobody in this campaign is being presented without bias by the media. Enough is enough.
The Clintons have a RECORD. It is OUR job to vet it. It is the job of journalists to sort though it to help us vet it. It is not for Hillary to TELL US SHE IS ALREADY VETTED. This is 2008 and we have real problems. She should put forth HER independent credentials, provide the RECORDS from the Clinton Library to the journalists -- and allow American voters to do OUR job w/out interference by a former President or ANYONE ELSE. The journalists of the Nation need to GO TO WORK and distill what Hillary Clinton did/or didn't during her tenure(s) as First Lady of Arkansas and the US -- vet what scandels/problems were on HER watch/or not. Stop playing THEIR game and do your jobs. Some of us remember REAL JOURNALISM and investigative reporting. Watergate! Pentagon Papers! Dah???
That how he rolls. Good for Clinton for slapping around the reporters.
He can slap around EVERYONE, which he does. The Clintons will not win The White House in 2008. MANY Democrats will re-register as INDEPENDENTS and vote for anyone but these thugs. 2000 and 2004 and now 2008 -- thanks to Bill and Hillary Clinton. Watch. There are Democrats who share the ideal for some kind of integrity to manage this Nation and even the fears of another Republican do not match our fears of this race-baiting couple. We will put their arrogance and hubris to bed. Watch.
NEO-LIB CLINTONS AGAIN FEELING BLACK SUFFERING AND SOLEMNLY PROMISING UTOPIA
NEO-LIB HILLARY EVER SO CLEVERLY LOVES BLACKS, WHEN SHE DESPERATELY NEEDS TO LURE THEM FOR THEIR VOTES; OTHERWISE THEY ARE WATER BUFFALO WITH NO CIVIL RIGHTS. IT IS A TACTIC THAT HAS ALWAYS WORKED, OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
BUT NOW THERE IS OBAMA WITH NO BLOOD ON HIS HANDS; AND THERE IS RON PAUL, WHO NEVER PLAYS TRICKS AND NEVER TELLS LIES.
GOOGLE: WHO WOULD THE WORLD ELECT
A country gets the leaders it deserves, and when we're ready to rise from the ashes of a fallen empire, we will find the leaders to help us do so. Michael Lutin - 12/06
Bill in the White House with nothing to do but mess around with people? No way!
It is Bill who suggested that Obama is just another crack head from the hood. He is not only promoting racial hatred but also the crack head stereotypes against Black men.
We are talking about experience, experience, experience, and experience! Record, record,record, and more record! Everyone in the white House for the past 16 years has a record alright. Bill, the womanizer and liar, George, the former alcoholic and habitual liar, and Hilary well she is somewhere between all the scandals from Arkansas(Whitewater ect.) We have seen what "experience" has done for us for the past 7 years. This country is so divided against itself that we are dying from the inside out. Who are we kidding! Look at what is going on in the NC. We are focusing on "race" again and it's having a negative effect. Iowa should us the way and we are loosing it again. Bill Clinton is just making matters worst because he thinks this is a game of manipulation and a battle for power and perhaps even make history along the way, and we are so ignorant of his devisiveness that alot of Americans are not going to catch on until it is too late. Let us become what we are known as, "The United States of America" and then and only then can we conquer and problem or situation and that is Obama's message.
Joan Walsh of Salon.com, every the Clinton supporter-as-journalist, is now spinning that the Clintons have been unfairly tarnished as having stoked Southern racial divisions -- just in time for the CA an NY Primaries -- a sophisticated brushing up of the Clintons' Southern Strategy. So, for the record -- Bob Herbert's Op-Ed today reminds us of the TRUTH since Iowa/NH where the Clintons were stunned and VERY secure about their Northern Strategy. If you also add the remarkable SPECTACLE of Bob Johnson comparing Barack to Sidney Poitier in a movie (a United States Senator?) and Hillary Clinton clapping watching the performance, you will realize it Joan Walsh and Salon.com that has left their journalistic credentials. It is not her job of that of any CA feminist journalist to CLEAN UP the Clintons' Southern Strategy ACT, nor is it David Schuster or Chuck Todd's. Also, WHY does it matter how the vote is split in SC, racially? It doesn't. Chuck Todd, African-Americans are equal to White Iowans and rural NH residents. STOP diminishing the African-American votes...or that of women who back Hillary. If Barack WINS, he WINS.
NYTimes.com - 1/26/08
This week, while making the remarkable accusation that the Obama camp was responsible for raising the race issue, Mr. Clinton mentioned Andrew Young as someone who would bear that out. It was an extremely unfortunate reference.
Here’s what Mr. Young, who is black and a former ambassador to the United Nations, had to say last month in an interview posted online: “Bill is every bit as black as Barack. He’s probably gone with more black women than Barack.”
He then went on to make disgusting comments about the way that Bill and Hillary Clinton defended themselves years ago against the fallout from the former president’s womanizing. That’s coming from the Clinton camp!