Fox News Wants War With Iran

If you wondered where Fox News personalities get license to peddle idiotic notions like “terrorist fist jabs” and jokes about assassinating Democratic presidential candidates, you need look no further than their boss, Fox News Executive VP John Moody. In an article written for his Fox Forum blog, titled “How to Defeat Iran… Without Firing a Shot,” Moody makes an unambiguous declaration of war from the comfort of his Fox office suite. The crux of his plan is to exploit Iran’s dependence on foreign oil refineries to deprive them of consumable petroleum products:

“An effective embargo on the delivery of refined petroleum would shut off the lights across Iran within weeks and turn its population – already chafing under Islamic rule, a creaky economy and unpopular gasoline rationing – murderously rebellious.”

Looking a little deeper at the plot that Moody savors for being both “murderous” and “deliciously satisfying,” it should be noted that such an embargo would not only shut off the lights, but the heat, the air conditioning, the water, the food processors and distributors, the hospitals, and pretty much every other service and facility required for humanitarian sustenance.

Moody acknowledges that the plan would be difficult to implement because Iran’s foreign suppliers of refined petroleum are its allies China, Russia, and Venezuela, who have little incentive to participate. So Moody’s answer is to deploy a naval blockade. This, of course, amounts to an act of war that could easily escalate beyond the region if tankers from Iran’s suppliers are attacked.

How does declaring war on Iran and threatening it’s trading partners bring defeat without firing a shot? Mr. Moody does not elucidate. He just squawks his vulturous stupidity from high on his ivory perch, salivating at the thought of the corpses he’ll soon be able to gnaw on.

It should be noted that this is not the ravings of yet another rightist, war-mongering, Fox News pundit. Moody is an executive near the top of the Fox management structure. Therefore, this is not merely an editorial opinion, but an advisory of corporate policy. Moody has just announced that it is the official policy of News Corporation to declare war on Iran. I wasn’t aware that that was an appropriate role for a media company.

Lest this come as a surprise to anyone, this is the same John Moody who issued a consolation memo to his troops after the Democratic Congressional victories of November 2006. The memo contained advice to the dejected Foxies to help them cope with their loss. For example:

“…let’s be on the lookout for any statements from the Iraqi insurgents, who must be thrilled at the prospect of a Dem-controlled congress.”

~~~

“In the House, the newly empowered Dems will shed some fraternal blood before settling in.”

Moody is always looking on the bright side, whether it is recovering from bitter electoral defeats, or advocating for elective World Wars.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

McCain Lies To Fox News About Town Hall Audience

John McCain held a town hall meeting in New York City this evening. It was part of a series of gatherings he has proposed for himself and Barack Obama.

This program, which Obama did not attend, was to be broadcast on Fox News under an unusual agreement that would have Fox provide the cameras, while the McCain campaign would produce the event. On the surface that is a peculiar arrangement because it puts Fox in the position of airing a candidate production. But beneath the surface it got even more peculiar.

At the outset it was announced that the audience would be a politically diverse group that McCain sought to portray as ordinary, undecided voters. But at the conclusion, Fox anchor, Shepard Smith, went on air to reveal that McCain had mislead the network in a rather significant way.

Smith: “I reported at the top of this hour that the campaign had told us at Fox News that the audience would be made up of Republicans, Democrats, and independents. We have now received a clarification from the campaign and I feel I should pass it along to you. The McCain campaign distributed tickets to supporters, Mayor Bloomberg, who of course is a registered Republican, and other independent groups.”

Stop for a moment and take in the magnitude of this deception. John McCain felt it was necessary to lie to Fox News, the propaganda arm of the Republican Party, in order to pull off this charade. Imagine the lengths to which he would go to deceive a network that he did not regard as friendly.

The dishonesty of McCain’s actions put Fox News in the awkward position of having misinformed their audience, something they do with relative frequency anyway, so maybe that’s not too big a deal. Then they had to swallow hard and set the record straight by disclosing the McCain deceit. But by this time considerable damage had been done to McCain’s credibility. He is still trying to persuade Obama to join these forums. Early on in the meeting, McCain made another plea for just that:

“I think this town hall meeting tonight would have been a little bit more interesting tonight if Senator Obama had accepted my request,”

Indeed it would have been more interesting, and not just because McCain by himself is a total snooze-fest. It would have been an ambush where Obama would have encountered an audience that was secretly stacked against him. Certainly Obama would have been able to hold his own in a room full of McCainiacs. But after an evening of questioners who were snuggling up to McCain while putting Obama on the defensive, it could have left the impression that this assembly of supposedly neutral citizens found Obama unappealing.

This revelation of McCain’s brazen untrustworthiness should be weighed by the Obama camp in any consideration of future candidate encounters. Under no circumstances should the McCain crowd be permitted to manage, unsupervised, any portion of the event. And the media should also apply a stricter level of scrutiny when negotiating press availabilities with McCain and his Double Talk Express.


Yo CNN: Glenn Beck Is Cable’s WORST News Program

That’s right! Glenn Beck is the worst program on cable news. And while the quality of the program, or lack thereof, has certainly earned Beck the award for garbage-caster of the year, that isn’t what I’m talking about today. It’s Beck’s ratings for the month of May 2008, that confirm his place at rock bottom of the prime time cable news pile. One would have to wonder why CNN sticks with Beck who presides over the lowest rated program at any time, on any network, during prime time.

This is nothing new for Beck, whose program has been a perennial loser. The results of the May survey affirm the continuing lackluster performance evident in previous periods. They are so similar to those from last November, that I could just cut and paste the analysis and commentary I posted at that time and it would describe the more recent results perfectly. In fact, I think I will…

When CNN announced the hiring of radio talk jock Glenn Beck almost two years ago, they used words like “cordial,” “conversational” and “not confrontational” to describe him. What they delivered was the polar opposite of that, as has been well documented by Media Matters. Despite CNN’s laughable depiction of Beck as “Miss Congeniality,” they knew exactly the sort of piffle they were peddling. Their programming strategy stated at the time was to…

“…build Beck into the type of TV personality that could siphon viewers from Bill O’Reilly, Joe Scarborough and other conservative hosts.”

They failed.

Beck’s ratings for May 2008 (25-54 demo) reveal a program on life support. At this point the humane thing to do would be to pull the plug and put Beck (and innocent TV viewers) out of their misery. As shown above, Beck loses to all of his competitors in cable news. Both his live show and his repeat come in 4th out of four programs. But that’s not the end of his problems. While Beck is unable to challenge his competition, he is also the weakest link on his own network. The two lowest rated hours on Headline News belong to Beck. He is a TV anchor who is performing like a ship’s anchor and weighing down the network’s line-up.

So what is CNN waiting for? Are they masochistic gluttons for punishment who get pleasure from losing? Are they married to the repulsive and repudiated ideology spewed by Beck? Are they frightened, ineffectual, corporate bootlickers who couldn’t make a proper programming decision without a sackful of surveys and permission from their supervisor? It is just this simple: There is no business case for keeping Beck on the air. His program is a money pit and it’s fiscally harmful to the programs adjacent to it and, therefore, the network as a whole.

The only reason to give Beck a stay of execution would be fealty to the brand of caveman conservatism that he espouses. If CNN doesn’t cancel this stinker they will have settled, once and for all, the speculation as to whether they are a compromised media lapdog with an agenda aimed at placating the powerful and debasing journalism.

It’s time to pull the plug. Let CNN/Headline News know that Glenn Beck has to go. Let them know that you’re on to them and that keeping a loser like Beck reveals their biases. Let them know that you’re more interested in news and honest commentary than shallow contrarianism. Let them know that, although CNN has an obligation to provide diverse viewpoints, they have never had a program hosted by a progressive. And let them know that you have alternatives now (i.e. MSNBC, radio, the Internet, etc.) and you will not continue to watch CNN as long as it fails to provide programming that is honest, ethical and relevant to you, your community and your country.

Returning to the present…A lot has happened in the past few months in Cable Newsland. Most notably the rise of MSNBC, which has more than doubled its viewers year over year, while the other nets struggled to remain even or showed small gains. Programming changes at MSNBC included the cancellation of Tucker Carlson, who was replaced by David Gregory’s Race to the White House. Gregory has significantly improved the time period he took over. The same is true for Keith Olbermann’s Countdown, which added a replay in place of one of the Doc Block hours.

Fox News has also changed their line-up. They canceled John Gibson’s not-so Big Story, and, more recently, they bumped E.D. “Terrorist Fist Jab” Hill. They also added Karl Rove, scheduled a new show for O’Reilly fill-in, Laura Ingraham, and just today announced that failed Republican presidential candidate, Gov. Mike Huckabee, would be their newest political contributor.

While these networks are altering their fare, the only things CNN has done is move Lou Dobbs an hour later and swap Paula Zahn for Campbell Brown (Republican operative Dan Senor’s wife). Perhaps this would be a good time to reevaluate their strategy. Perhaps it might benefit the network, and its viewers, if they dumped the dead weight and showed some real diversity. Maybe they could recognize where the growth is in this market and consider giving someone like Ed Schultz, Randi Rhodes, Thom Hartmann, Rachel Maddow, Stephanie Miller, Sam Seder, Jim Hightower, Laura Flanders, Harry Shearer, or any other of the many distinguished progressive commentators, a chance to show what they can do in Beck’s time slot. They could even draft their own Jack Cafferty who has developed a cult following on The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer. Anyone but Beck!

Contact CNN and help them see the light.
CNN General Comments Form
Headline News General Comments Form


John McCain: The Opacity Of NOPE!

In this historic election year, the people have a choice of unprecedented clarity. The presidential candidates for 2008 offer a uniquely stark contrast of policy and vision. One has embraced a theme of hope that is inspiring millions and setting a new course for national renewal and unity. He has ignited a grassroots revolution of citizen activists committed to bringing change to an arrogant, unaccountable, dishonest, and incompetent government.

The other is John McCain.

T-Shirts and Stickers Now Available

In contrast to Barack Obama’s campaign of optimism and hope, McCain offers a vision that is squarely focused on obstacles. Its opaque negativity fairly precludes it from even being described as a vision at all. It might be more accurately expressed as The Opacity NOPE!

Peace? Nope. Health care? Nope. Fair trade? Nope. Tax equity? Nope. Choice? Nope. Environment? Nope. Get the idea?

McCain’s concentration on what CAN’T be done poses a challenge for his candidacy. A recent poll by the Pew Research Center shows that McCain trails Obama on most of the issues that voters rank as their top priorities. That may explain why the poll also shows that 75% those who have an unfavorable opinion of McCain, do so because of his political views. Only 54% cite that reason for Obama. McCain has saddled himself with a campaign that touts his alleged foreign policy experience in an election year where majorities of Democrats (65%), Independents (61%), and even Republicans (57%), want the next president to focus on domestic issues, a category that favors Obama. Even on the war in Iraq, voters are swinging toward Obama, who has gained eight points in just one month, moving into a statistical tie with McCain.

The negativity of McCain’s record of public service stands as affirmation of the tenor of his present pursuit of the presidency. Documented examples of an acutely abusive temperment include encounters such as the following:

  • “Fuck you…This is chickenshit stuff.” Directed at Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) in an immigration debate.”
  • “Only an asshole would put together a budget like this…I wouldn’t call you an asshole unless you really were an asshole.” Directed at Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) while marking up legislation.
  • Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) to McCain during a debate on MIA’s: “Are you calling me stupid?” McCain: “No. I’m calling you a fucking jerk!”

That’s how McCain treats fellow Republicans. However, if you are the teenage daughter of a Democratic president, expect to be treated with something McCain regards as humor:

“Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno.”

In one masterful stroke, McCain insulted an innocent and impressionable young girl, the Attorney General, the First Lady, and the President. This should not surprise anyone, because McCain frequently describes himself as “the worst nightmare” of Democrats, as well as many others:

The problem for America, should John McCain become president, is that his self-identification will become a self-fulfilling prophesy; that McCain will manifest the nightmare he is so fond of invoking. And with his comments in the public record indicating that he is “fine with” keeping troops in Iraq for a hundred years, and that he thinks it would be fun to “bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran,” it isn’t much of a leap to presume that his commitment to a national bad dream is genuine.

Therefore, it is incumbent upon the American people to take up the call that John McCain so generously volunteers. We must rally around the anthem that defines the course of true progress. When McCain comes calling for our votes we must reflect back on him the only answer that will deliver us from the dreadful future he promises. We must summon our courage, steady our resolve, and stare into the face of pessimism and futility, and in a certain, unyielding voice – Just Say NOPE!



Media Is Changing. Get used To It!

The National Conference on Media Reform is presently underway in Minneapolis, MN. If you are fortunate enough to attend you will encounter an inspiring array of media professionals, critics, activists, and others who recognize both the threat and the potential of the modern media infrastructure. If you cannot attend, stay informed by visiting the Conference website.

The mission of the Conference, and its sponsor FreePress, is to build a movement to recreate media as an institution that serves the interests of the people, not the powerful. Such a movement will generate some blowback, as evidenced by Howard Rosenberg’s column in today’s Los Angeles Times. Rosenberg’s article inadvertantly exposes the tender underbelly of his generation’s dismay toward the transforming media landscape. Tucked into a piece that is, on the surface, a critique of Keith Olbermann’s Countdown, it is really an unveiling of the fears of a passing era of journalism.

Rosenberg starts by characterizing the Olbermann model, which he calls a “snide act,” as consisting primarily of smug histrionics, relentless needling, and shameless self-puffery. He also lays into Bill O’Reilly, but contends that the difference between them, in terms of the threat they pose to journalism, is that there will only ever be one Bill O’Reilly, while another Olbermann can be reproduced by anyone with a fairish sense of humor. [Note to Rosenberg: If you think O’Reilly is unique, you might want to do some further study on the subject paying particular attention to Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, Michael Savage, Ann Coulter, Hugh Hewitt, etc.] But the real message in Rosenberg’s column is summed up in a single paragraph that is dripping with the lament of one who senses that his time is past.

“Is this to be the standard during this period of media transition? What do we have, a few years at best, maybe 10 before news goes all Internet all the time and moves to fingernail-sized screens that we read with a magnifying glass? Technology-driven change is transforming news media, and news consumers, at warp speed. How many years before newspapers like this one are available in present form only as antiquities, like the illuminated manuscripts on display under glass at the Getty Center?”

Yes, Rosenberg is afraid that the Internet will soon make obsolete the media environment in which he has grown so comfortable. He is suspicious of a transformation that is moving too fast for his liking. He fears that he and his kind will be relegated to the musty corridors of museums. And he even shudders at the notion of a news platform that strains his aging and failing eyesight.

Get used to it, Mr. Rosenberg. Media is changing. Those with influence in the past will find their power waning. New generations of news makers and consumers will define the next phase of journalism. There will be bumps in the road but, if we’re smart and strong, it will result in more honest, more diverse, and more democratic reporting. It will expand perspective and access. And it will diminish the role of giant, nation-less, corporate enterprises, more beholden to profit and their benefactors in government, than they are to their readers, listeners, viewers, and the public good.

Media reform is essential to the progress of every other social movement. No matter what issue ranks highest for you personally, you will need an ability to educate and inform the world as to your goals. Consequently, if you hope to be successful, you must devote at least part of your time to shaping the media into a useful, unbiased, and accessible tool for change.


Tax Cheats: Bill O’Reilly And Roger Ailes

The anti-Keith Olbermann blog OlbermannWatch has been pounding the pavement with a bogus story of tax evasion on the part of MSNBC’s star host. Now the Associated Press has picked up the item citing OW as its source. The network responded to the allegation prior to the AP’s report:

“MSNBC spokesman Jeremy Gaines called it a bookkeeping disagreement between Olbermann’s accountants and the state and said it was resolved months ago.”

That didn’t stop the AP from going forward with the dubiously sourced story. And it certainly hasn’t put an end to OW’s squawking. But I have to wonder whether either will follow up their accounts with the news that Fox News chairman Roger Ailes also has a warrant that was issued three years ago for his Ailes Communications, and is still unsatisfied. Not only that, but Ailes’ star bloviator, Bill O’Reilly, had a warrant issued in July of 2002 that was not resolved until April of 2004. For the record, Olbermann’s tax dispute was concluded in less than one year. And then there’s O’Reilly’s favorite guest, Fox News commentator Dick Morris, who owes a whopping $280,000, and is on the Connecticut Department of Revenue Services’ top 10 list of tax delinquents.

The truth is that, with the exception of Morris, all of these are non-stories. These sort of disputes arise routinely in business as accountants wrangle over tax law interpretation and taxpayers seek to minimize their burden. But if the media is going to report on any of it, they should get the whole story and not rely on obviously biased sources with an agenda to peddle.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Rupert Murdoch To Fire Roger Ailes?

If Gawker is to believed, News Corp CEO Rupert Murdoch, and his longtime Fox News chief Roger Ailes, have had a falling out that may cost Ailes his job.

The alleged spat arose from the controversial near publication of O.J. Simpson’s confessional book, “If I Did It.” The backlash from what may have been the most nauseating literary endeavor ever, resulted in the very same people responsible for the deal running as far away from it as they could. It also caused the termination of Judith Regan, who put the revolting package together for her Regan Books subsidiary of HarperCollins. The project included a televised interview of Simpson to be broadcast on the Fox network.

Now, the recent departure as HarperCollins CEO, Jane Friedman, has people talking again. According to Gawker, a former News Corp. insider says that…

“Friedman got canned, in my view, for being anti-Regan. Rupert wanted the Simpson book out, and he also was taken in by Ailes, who orchestrated both the anti If I Did It campaign [against the OJ Simpson book] and the anti-Semitism campaign (this is fact), who will soon be shitcanned for the same reasons.”

The notion that Murdoch is contemplating the dismissal of the man who founded and built Fox News is, to say the least, far fetched. Their business relationship, and ideological consonance seem far to deep to be torn apart by a single disagreement. And if Murdoch is really upset that the Simpson book was scuttled, he didn’t say so at the time:

“I and senior management agree with the American public that this was an ill-considered project. We are sorry for any pain that this has caused the families of Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson.”

In all likelihood, Murdoch did want the book to be released. It fits perfectly the tabloid trashiness of his media philosophy. Then Ailes, the former campaign consultant with political instincts, stepped in and saved Murdoch’s butt by killing the deal. Whereupon Murdoch issues a thoroughly disingenuous apology designed only to save face. So even if Murdoch harbored some resentment that his morbidly exploitive, sensationalistic score was shelved, he was still in Ailes’ debt for averting the public scorn the project produced. In other words…Ailes isn’t going anywhere.


The Rise Up Of Countdown

Another month, another dismal performance by Fox News who, once again, wins the trophy for “Slowest Growing Cable News Network.” The redundancy of this news compels me to search for some other ratings story so as not to bore myself. Fortunately, I’ve found a couple.

Countdown Rise Up

For most of the past half dozen years, Fox has enjoyed an almost uncontested dominance in the presentation of what is generously called news. Much of the credit goes to the bombastic pedagogy of Bill O’Reilly whose patented brand of obnoxiousness nevertheless found its audience. But in the past year the bloom has fallen from the amorphophallus titanum. The Factor is now showing both age and fatigue.

In the past year, Keith Olbermann’s Countdown has more than doubled its audience, growing 112%. O’Reilly eked out a pitiful 13% gain despite this being an election year that normally draws viewers in droves. Factor defenders routinely dismiss talk of growth percentages as not reflecting realities in the market. So if they want to talk about actual numbers of viewers, the past year also shows that O’Reilly, who used to beat Olbermann by a whopping 113%, is now only 13% ahead. This places Countdown squarely in contention for ratings victories that used to be considered fantasies. In fact, Countdown did beat the Factor six times in May. On several occasions it was the highest rated program on any cable news network in all of prime time.

What’s left of O’Reilly’s audience is still a sizable chunk of viewers. But if you take a closer look at the composition of the “Folks,” the myth of the Factor being some sort of TV phenomenon is indisputably busted. The portion of his audience that is in the 25-54 year old demographic preferred by advertisers is 21%. Fully four out of five of O’Reilly viewers are considered to be of little value to the advertisers that determine whether a show remains on the air. That compares to 38% for Countdown. So while Countdown still has fewer total viewers than the Factor (for now), it is a richer source for the most highly prized sector of the audience. It’s also interesting to note that O’Reilly’s demographic weakness is even worse than Fox News overall, whose total day draw of 25-54 year olds is 25% (38%, same as Countdown, for MSNBC).

By all accounts, the rise of Countdown has been extraordinary and its competitors have taken notice. The controversy that erupted last month between Fox executives and their NBC/GE counterparts is one example of how the theater of battle has expanded. Another example is the perplexing behavior of O’Reilly during his interview of former Bush press secretary, Scott McClellan. O’Reilly spent a majority of the time ignoring questions about McClellan’s controversial new bestseller, in favor of probing partisan reactions to the book in the press and McClellan’s decision to appear on other news programs before the Factor. O’Reilly battered McClellan with assertions that he was just a dupe of the left, he called McClellan “crazy,” and then put forth this inquiry:

“I watched you last week promoting the book on some of the most notorious Bush haters in the country. And you were on their programs. And I — didn’t it make your skin crawl?”

The only venue wherein that could be considered a serious question is safely huddled in the hearth of O’Reilly’s dementia. The real purpose of O’Reilly’s absurd line of questioning is to try to discredit his perceived enemies – aka, his competition. Notorious Bush haters is O’Reilly-ish for Keith Olbermann. It’s notable that whenever Olbermann casts aspersions on O’Reilly, he does it with a wink and a smile. But O’Reilly is so deadly serious about the hate America lefties that he seems to be ready to spontaneously combust. It is a classic exhibition of the symptoms of acute desperation and paranoia.

The problem for O’Reilly now is that everything he does to retard his decline just makes him look more retarded. The end is nearing, but he will never be able to admit that to himself. And when they carry him out of the studio insisting that he is still important, half the nation will be giggling, and the other half will be saying, “Bill who?”

Update 6/10/08: An MSNBC press release states that “MSNBC continued its ratings surge last week, with viewers flocking out of the “No Spin Zone” and to “The Place for Politics.” For the first time ever, MSNBC’s “Countdown with Keith Olbermann” was the #1 show at 8 p.m., out-drawing Fox News’s “O’Reilly Factor” head-to-head among Adults 25-54.” That 1st place milestone is for the whole week. Countdown has topped the Factor an several occasions this year on a nightly basis.


Murdoch Unleashes O’Reilly, NY Post On Keith Olberman

The ongoing melodrama featuring MSNBC and Fox News is heating up again and reaffirming Fox’s status as the scum suckers of news.

Two weeks ago, Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post gave readers an insiders view of the conflict that centers around the blood feud between Keith Olbermann and Bill O’Reilly. The battle lines have extended all the way up to News Corp. executive offices, including Rupert Murdoch’s. In the Kurtz column he quoted Fox chief Roger Ailes threatening his counterpart, Jeff Zucker, at NBC:

“Ailes warned that if Olbermann didn’t stop such attacks against Fox, he would unleash O’Reilly against NBC and would use the New York Post as well.”

Since then, as promised, Bill O’Reilly has devoted his Talking Points Memo to an assault on NBC/GE, calling them biased, dishonest, disgraceful, and responsible for the deaths of American soldiers in Iraq. Without a hint of irony, he said that NBC “has violated just about every journalistic standard.”

The New York Post has also been answering the call. On May 19, their Page 6 gossip monger, Richard Johnson, asked if Olbermann was “on the verge of yet another professional meltdown?” Today the same Ailes apple polisher flatly asserts that Olbermann has not paid his taxes. Johnson’s source is the utterly disreputable attack dog site, OlbermannWatch. This allegedly factual assertion is made despite the fact that it is contradicted a few lines down in the very same paragraph. But that doesn’t stop Johnson from raising additional questions about other similarly resolved tax disputes. The only purpose imaginable here is to slander with innuendo and outright falsehoods.

What’s worse is that Johnson took the opportunity to engage in an act so despicable it even reflects badly on a rag like the NYPost. Without any justification or connection to the bogus tax story, Johnson published what appears to be Olbermann’s home address. The irrelevance to the rest of the column is so stark that it jumps off the page in a fit of superfluosity. This can only be regarded as an intentional and hostile attempt to bring discomfort, and perhaps harm, to Olbermann. And coming so soon after the Ailes threat, it is difficult to arrive at any other conclusion.

Let Johnson and the Post know that this is unacceptable from both journalistic and moral perspectives:

NYPost email:
Page Six: Richard Johnson
Letters to the Editor


John McCain’s Bottomless Pit Of Lobbyists

Maverick McCainIt hardly seems that a day goes by without a new revelation of lobbyists in John McCain’s campaign. Last week I reported that, so far this year, five tainted staffers have had to resign. Still on the McCain wagon are uber-lobbyists Charlie Black and campaign manager Rick Davis. Media Matters has compiled a superb list of even more tainted McCain staffers

Now the Washington Post is reporting another unethical, and perhaps illegal, McCain relationship with a political benefactor. Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) has a long history with McCain. They have endorsed his candidacy for president, heralded him as a “Taxpayer Hero” and contributed $11,000 to his campaign. The Post article describes an even deeper partnership that potentially violates election law prohibiting coordination between campaigns and independent advocacy groups:

“For weeks, Republican presidential candidate John McCain had been hammered for supporting the Air Force’s February decision to award a $40 billion contract for refueling tankers to Northrop Grumman and its European partner. Democrats, labor unions and others blamed the senator for a deal they say could move tens of thousands of jobs abroad.

McCain’s advisers wanted to strike back against key Democratic critics. But they did not mount an expensive advertising campaign to defend the candidate’s position. They called a tax-exempt nonprofit closely aligned with the senator from Arizona, seeking information and help.

Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) partnered with Northrop and one of its consultants to produce a vitriolic advertising campaign defending the tanker deal.”

In addition to the rash of lobbyists fleeing McCain’s campaign, two of his closest allies, Sens. Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham, were forced to resign their board posts at Vets for Freedom, a 527 political organization. The resignations accompanied McCain’s announcement of his campaign’s policy toward such groups:

“No person with a McCain campaign title or position may participate in a 527 or other independent entity that makes public communications that support or oppose any presidential candidate.”

On the board of CAGW, which has endorsed McCain, is his campaign’s Veterans Liaison, Orson Swindle. Swindle is a long-time friend and associate of McCain. They met as cell mates in a North Vietnamese prisoner of war camp where Swindle says that he and McCain “slept side-by-side for almost two years.” Politicians in bed with lobbyists? That’s nothing new. In fact CAGW has had problems of it’s own with one of lobbydom’s premier figures:

“CAGW has been criticized for accepting donations from organizations that benefit from its advocacy. Two years ago, investigators probing the activities of convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff for the Senate Finance Committee examined whether CAGW advocated on behalf of Abramoff clients, including the Magazine Publishers of America, in exchange for donations. The committee concluded: ‘The e-mails show a pattern of CAGW producing public relations materials favorable to Mr. Abramoff’s clients.'”

But as far as compromised associates go, Swindle is a two-fer. In addition to being a 527 operative he is also a Senior Policy Advisor at the lobbying firm of Hunton & Williams. His specific charge is within the firm’s Center for Information Policy Leadership, which was founded to “develop innovative, pragmatic approaches to privacy and information security issues from a business-process perspective while respecting the privacy interests of individuals.” Their clients include dedicated privacy rights activists like American Express, Eli Lilly, GE, Microsoft, and Wal-Mart.

If nothing else, this election season is shaping up to be a masters course in media priorities. After weeks of perpetually looping video of Barack Obama’s former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, the hysteria appeared to be on the wane. Now, as if on cue, another minister has been catapulted to stardom by news broadcasters across the land. The only talent requisite for such fame is the ability to embarrass Sen. Obama, regardless of how tenuous your connection to him.

Hiding in the wings is Sen. McCain who has had his own problems with God’s messengers. He recently had to reject the support of bigoted Revs. Hagee and Parsley, whose endorsements he had actively pursued.

The media obsession with religion is characteristically shallow. It demonstrates a tendency to cling to tabloid sensationalism rather than to provide information about matters relevant to public service. With that principle in mind, broadcasters can relentlessly hype Obama’s crazy preachers while virtually ignoring McCain’s dubious connections to the real political power players that have infested his campaign. The difference between the two is that McCain’s associates would be very likely to have real influence over policy in his administration. They would end up in cabinet positions and other appointed regulatory offices. And, of course, they would still have their lobbying portfolio which would extend all the way up to the White House.

But expect the media to continue to put the spotlight on the sideshow because, let’s face it, we’ll never have video of corrupt lobbyists prancing and wailing the way crazy preachers do.