Another “hugfest” debate …

Today’s Buzz ...

from last night’s debate and analysis:
Obama vs. Clinton: Minimal fireworks and moderate agreement ... with just a touch of sniping to keep things interesting! First-time moderator Campbell Brown at least seemed reasonable comfortable and at ease in her duties – not sure how it would have been had the atmosphere been more contentious. But everyone has to start somewhere. Univision anchor Jorge Ramos and CNN Chief National Correspondent John King were the panelists; I’m not sure I was all that impressed with the subjects that were covered – with the posturing and maneuvering and insertion of talking points, ninety minutes goes fast. Anyway – the topics included foreign diplomacy, economic policy differences, immigration reform, plagiarism, “surge” success, earmarks and the role of superdelegates.







Post-debate analysis: It seemed that the guest panels (David Gergen, Gloria Borger, Jeff Toobin, Donna Brazile, Lisa Caputo, Jamal Simmons and Leslie Sanchez) were in some stage of agreement that there while Barack Obama made no major missteps, Hillary Clinton had no dramatic changes in her standard message. And that it didn’t help her to make any unique “connection” with potential voters or “chip into” the perceived excitement generated at Obama rallies. For better or worse, and I cast no judgment at this moment, it seemed to me that she’s decided to stick with her current message and strategy and either win or lose with it. Which is fine – I just hope that isn’t a lot of second-guessing or Monday morning “quarterbacking” that goes on after the fact, if that’s what’s done and she ends up losing the nomination.




There was also a follow-up report from Dana Bash about the McCain news of an improper relationship with lobbyist Vicki Iseman. John McCain and his wife Cindy held a news conference earlier in the day to state unequivocally that the charges inferred in the NY Times article were simply “not true”. As simple as it sounds to say that and have it all be done with, in the words of Jack Cafferty, “just saying it ain’t true isn’t going to cut it.” We’ll see.




Miles O’Brien was on set to introduce his Broken Government special titled “Scorched Earth”. The topics that he mentioned included a report about scientists who have been “muzzled” by the Bush administration when they have tried to speak out about global warming, and another report involving confusion about endangered species laws among government agencies that end up working against each other’s goals. I admit that after the debate and analysis, I was tired of TV watching for the evening, so I’ll do my best to actually watch the special this weekend!



tonight on Anderson Cooper 360°:


Other News and Notes:

Anderson on 60 Minutes this Sunday: "THE MURDER OF CHAUNCEY BAILEY" - Shot-gunned to death in the course of reporting a story, police say newspaper editor Chauncey Bailey was probably killed to keep that story out of print. CNN's Anderson Cooper reports. Michael Rosenbaum is the producer.



Thanks for visiting - updates posted as needed - have a terrific Friday!

“Full Disclosure” ….

Courtesy of Dictionary.com:

Full (fŏŏl)
–adjective
1. complete; entire; maximum.
2. of the maximum size, amount, extent, volume, etc.

Dis•clo•sure [di-skloh-zher]
–noun
1. the act or an instance of disclosing; exposure; revelation.
2. that which is disclosed; a revelation.

To be discussed later in this post ...

Friday’s Buzz ...




I had the feeling that there would be a substitute anchor on Friday, as this will probably be the last weekend that Anderson will have off before the YouTube debate on November 28th. And so seeing Soledad O’Brien in the anchor chair was no surprise!

More post-debate analysis: I must admit that I did think that Friday’s discussion was a little broader-based, although there was still the underlying “assumption” that Hillary Clinton “won” the debate. The memorable sound bytes from the panel discussion were as follows: Candy Crowley commented that none of the candidates took Hillary to task over her somewhat flippant response and ‘brush-off’ of the negative effects that NAFTA has had on American labor. John King commented about John Edwards, saying that voters are asking “When are we going to hear more about “President Edwards’ and what he will do to help the country, as opposed to Senator Edwards attacking Senator Clinton? And David Gergen commented that Clinton’s opponents missed opportunities to ‘inflict new wounds’ and will now have to spend their time ‘on the ground’ in Iowa trying to circumvent any momentum she has coming out of the debate, since there won’t be a negative ‘bounce’ in the press, as there was post-Philly.



Joe Johns also had a KTH segment that reviewed Governor Richardson’s debate claims about the positive effects that have been realized in New Mexico since they began issuing driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants – namely a decrease from 33% to 11% in the number of uninsured motorists, and the fact that traffic fatalities have decreased. Personally, I’m not clear about what one has to with the other, but OK … they’re both positive trends, and that’s a good thing. But critics point out that many times, fake documents are used to get these ID’s, as in the case of the 9/11 hijackers. And that’s (one of) the basic logical points that I’m certainly always concerned about!

A teen suicide: The second main story of the evening was a segment handled exquisitely well and with tremendous sensitivity by Gary Tuchman. It was about the suicide of Megan Meier, a teen with a MySpace page, who thought she’d found a possible “love” online named “Josh Evans”, and when the relationship turned nasty and she felt rejected by “Josh”, she hung herself using a belt inside her closet. It turns out that “Josh” was the creation of a neighborhood mother of another teenage girl, who allegedly wanted to find out why her daughter and Megan were having some kind of ‘dispute’. This mother (and I use the term loosely) created a MySpace account solely to communicate with Megan Meier, and it turned into a horrible cycle of cyber-bullying by this woman. She told Megan (using the ‘Josh Evans’ identity) that “the world would be better off without you.” Oh yeah – and she also went to Megan’s funeral, and was ‘relieved’ to learn that Megan had a number of other issues that she was dealing with – I assume so she could deny any blame that might be cast her way because of what happened. I can’t even write what I’d like to call her – just assume that it’s 100% unprintable.

As a follow-up, Soledad interviewed both Jeff Toobin and Dr. Drew Pinsky. Jeff and Soledad had quite an exchange, as Jeff was explaining that there isn’t enough of a causal factor to bring criminal charges against this woman. And even in a civil suit, there would probably be only a partial percentage of ‘blame’ assigned, as the defense would be that Megan had so many other problems, the MySpace bullying couldn’t be the sole cause of the suicide.

I was horrified at the ultimate reply received by Megan’s parents (Ron & Tina Meier), when Gary asked them if they’d had any contact with this other family. They had contact, but preferred not to repeat most of what was said. Can’t say I blame them for that. But the overall response they got is what mortified me and makes me furious beyond words – these grieving parents were told to “give it a rest”.

There actually are times on this blog when I don’t ‘fully disclose’ my feelings about a story. This isn’t going to be one of them. If there’s any justice in the universe, I hope this woman is dealt with appropriately at final judgment time. For eternity. Period.





Moving on ...

Wow - talk about debate “backlash” …

Could some of it be because Thursday’s debate was the most watched one yet? With over 4 million viewers?

There are more than a few people that are, for lack of a better term, “hackled off” because they feel that: (1) the debate was handled sloppily, and/or (2) the post-debate analysis was simply a collection of Clinton mouthpieces glorifying her redemption.

BTW – here’s my ‘full disclosure’ – I’m not a Clinton supporter, at least not yet. So you’ll understand my bias as I write this ... ;-)

Regarding point # 1 – yes, the candidates took advantage of Wolf – that’s not in dispute. And the crowd should have been controlled better. I don’t recall hearing that level of booing allowed at other debates. I think the best ‘set-up’ so far was the PBS debates moderated by Tavis Smiley. Each candidate was allowed 90 seconds to answer each question, and the first person allowed to answer rotated according to their stage position. If that had been done on Thursday, Joe Biden would have answered the first question, and then everyone else, in turn, would have had time to answer the same question. Bill Richardson would have been the first one to answer the second question, and so on. I don’t remember if there was a mike ‘cut-off’ provision at the PBS debates, but I’m all for it! That should eliminate a good deal of the jockeying and posturing that goes on before and during the debate.

Regarding point # 2 – (remember my bias) … I do think that the discussion was at least slightly skewed towards Clinton support. I don’t like saying that, as I truly would have preferred a more critical examination of the event. But I do take issue with this massive petty whining about CNN not giving ‘full disclosure’ of James Carville’s support of Hillary Clinton’s candidacy. For heaven's sake - if anyone doesn't already know that Carville is going to be inclined to praise Hillary Clinton whenever possible - that person has been living under a rock for the past 15 years!! Does his "loyalty" have to be disclosed ad nauseum each and every time that he appears on CNN? I certainly hope not!!

You can read a number of interesting articles about this topic that have been published over the past couple of days via a simple Google search – but one of the more interesting is from the LA Times – generally regarded as part of the ‘liberal media’, but not-so-kind to Senator Clinton in this debate instance.

There’s been one more favorable article published about Anderson’s speech at Claremont College this past Tuesday – from Tony Krickl at the Claremont Courier:

“Anderson Cooper shares experience, knowledge"

CNN personality and award-winning journalist Anderson Cooper regaled a crowd of Claremont McKenna College students with tales of war reporting, government failure and his rise to becoming the new face of journalism.

To relate with the young audience, Mr. Cooper began his address by discussing a post high school trip he took throughout southern Africa, an adventure which he said “really opened my eyes and quickened my pulse.”

After college, Mr. Cooper became interested in becoming a foreign correspondent but didn’t know quite how to go about doing it. So he came up with a plan and armed himself with a video camera and a fake press pass made on a friend’s computer.

“My plan was to start going to wars,” he explained. “And I figured if I went to places where most people were too scared to go, I wouldn’t have much competition.”
He first visited Burma, also known as Myanmar, to cover the national revolution that began in the late 1980s demanding democracy in the repressive state. In recent months, Myanmar’s military government has again cracked down on widespread protests and calls for democracy.

Mr. Cooper also visited Somalia in 1992 during the early stages of famine that gripped the African nation and Rwanda during the genocide that wiped out nearly one million people in a matter of 100 days.

“I may have gone to Yale but I feel like I was educated in the streets of Somalia, Sarajevo, and South Africa and Rwanda and the places where the boundaries aren’t clear, where the dark parts of the human heart are open for all to see,” he said.
“In Rwanda, I learned that all of us are really capable of anything. We’re capable of terrible acts of horror and brutality but also acts of compassion and kindness,” he added. “In wars, you see those as well. The choice, I learned, is really up to each of us. We can choose how we want to react to a situation.”

He also shared his views on Iraq, which he described as the “most challenging assignment there is today.” After 4 visits to the country, he believes the government has a long way to go before any internal stability can be sustained.
“While the violence is down and there are certainly hopeful signs and military progress, political progress - which everyone admits is the key to stability - has not occurred,” he said.

Mr. Cooper also got some laughs from the crowd while discussing a recent democratic presidential candidate debate that he hosted over YouTube and candidates’ attempts to get called on for questions.

He described Hilary Clinton’s look as a “teacher who knows you forgot your homework,” John Edward’s subtle finger motions and Dennis Kucinich’s frantic arm waving. He will also host a YouTube Republican candidate debate on November 28.

Speaking on Hurricane Katrina, Mr. Cooper told personalized stories of tragedy and loss. He also criticized the response from the government after witnessing the devastation firsthand.

“Every night in my ear, I would hear politicians thanking one another and talking about the tremendous relief effort that was underway and the unprecedented and unpredictable disaster this was,” he said. “And it was stunning because this may have been unprecedented but it certainly wasn’t unpredicted. And when you spend all day seeing bodies and destruction and there are no armies or national guardsman in site, to hear them praising one another was pretty infuriating.”

Believing strongly in the importance of objective journalism, he criticized opinionated news anchors and slanted coverage by reporters.

“As a newscaster, I believe in facts, I don’t believe in opinion … I think that viewers want facts and information and armed with that, they’re smart enough to make up their own minds.”

Mr. Cooper is the host of “Anderson Cooper 360” on CNN and last year became a correspondent for the CBS show 60 Minutes. His memoirs, Dispatches from the Edge, topped the New York Times bestseller list in June 2006.

Some of his awards include an Emmy for his coverage of Princess Diana’s funeral, a Silver Plaque from the Chicago International Film Festival for coverage of the Bosnian civil war and was voted media person of the year in 2005 in an annual online poll.

Mr. Cooper ended his talk by urging the student audience to “follow your bliss,” a piece of advice his mother gave him upon graduating from college.

“It's only when you figure out what you’re truly passionate about that you are going to be able to be a success in that,” he said.

Thanks for visiting - hope you enjoyed the weekend!!

The Hill is “redeemed” …

Today's Buzz ...


Or so say the pundits.

The more debates I see with this many participants, the less I pay attention. And why is Hillary Clinton still getting a “free pass” on so many of her claims of what she’s accomplished and how much experience she has?? I’m still baffled by this. For example – “I think that the American people know where I've stood for 35 years. I've been fighting for issues affecting women and children, workers and families. I've been fighting for universal health care.” Really, Senator? The American people knew where you “stood” when Bill was “Governor Clinton”? In Arkansas? Interesting ...

And the softball question about whether or not she’s trying to play the “gender” card ... who’s kidding who at this point? For example – “And I don't mind taking hits on my record on issues, but when somebody starts throwing mud, at least we can hope that it's both accurate and not right out of the Republican playbook.” If Senator Clinton thinks that that the Republican machine isn’t ready to totally annihilate her by any means possible, then no, she isn’t ready to take the oath of office of President of the United States. If her camp thinks Guiliani will be a tough opponent, then she has no business facing Hugo Chavez, Kim Jong Il or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, regardless of how much she attempts to claim that she’s ‘ready’.

Here was the ‘cringe’ line for me – “And this pantsuit, it's asbestos tonight.” Senator Clinton is going to need the titanium steel one – just for the Rudy Guiliani match-up.

The most interesting series of quotes (for me) came from Senator Joe Biden – as it resonated for many Americans across the socio-economic horizon – “The American people don't give a darn about any of this stuff that's going on up here. They're sitting down at their tables at night, they put their kids to bed, and they're worried about whether or not their child is going to run into a drug dealer on the way to school. They're worried about whether or not they're going to be able to pay for their mortgage because, even if they didn't have one of those subprime mortgages, things are looking bad for them. They're worrying about whether they're going to keep their job. And they're worried about whether their son in the National Guard's going to get killed in Iraq. This is not about experience. It's not about change. It's about action.”

A very interesting debate summary can be found at “American Thinker” – here’s an excerpt: “When it was all over, these things were clear: Joe Biden has been a Senator since the Grant Administration. Chris Dodd speaks Spanish. Dennis Kucinich is an angry man. Bill Richardson has a plan for everything except eradicating tooth decay and up-grading the rest area on Highway 70 between Alamogordo and Las Cruces, NM—today it’s a gravel pull-off with two port-a-potties and a dumpster (true). John Edwards doesn’t like trial lawyer slams and won’t be inviting Dennis to his next birthday party. Barak Obama remains a serious contender for the Democrat nomination, and delivered his best overall performance yet, despite Gergen’s Clinton-biased analysis (he imagines himself back in the WH, too). But, Hillary Clinton still sits at the head of the class.”

And as a break from my cynicism, and because I don't want to waste my "screen cap efforts" for the evening, here are a few of the CNN participants:







As for the analysis on AC360°, the “quotes” that I’ll remember are from Suzanne Malveaux, who assisted with audience questions during the second part of the debate – she stated that: “I got a sense from this audience that there was a lot of mistrust here, that they felt like, when it came to the woman whose own son had fulfilled three tours of duty in Iraq. And she's worried about Iran. I mean, there is definitely a sense that they don't know what to think. They don't know what to make of Iraq, the situation there, and they're quite worried, quite scared about things.” Hmmm ... sounds like that potential voter may end up casting her ballot for Rudy next November?



And two memorable “sound bytes” from David Gergen – one about a subject touched on in this blog on Wednesday – “And, very importantly, she (Clinton) got -- she put pressure on Governor Spitzer in New York to drop that driver's license deal before the debate. And, so, tonight, when -- when the driver's license issue came up, she was able to, you know, get out of it with a one-word answer. There was no discussion. So, she was able to pivot out of what had been an issue that could have dragged her down again. And, so, I -- I think a lot of the preparation that went into the game plan actually paid off for them pretty well tonight.”

And “sound byte” number two (and much more important to me) – “I think the hard question is can the winner govern? Can the winner lead? That's going to be really, really tough.

And, you know, what we're looking for now is ... can someone emerge who has the integrity of judgment and the capacity to bring us together? And that is a much, much harder question. I don't think we know that yet.”



To that point, and in closing, I made an observation after taking a second look at the recording of this debate. When the candidates were being introduced, the first one on the stage was John Edwards. Big smile, big wave to the crowd, etc. Second was Chris Dodd. Big smile, big wave to the crowd, etc. And then a warm handshake with John Edwards. Third was Barack Obama. Big smile, big wave to the crowd, etc. And then a warm handshake with Chris Dodd. Fourth out was Hillary Clinton. Big smile, big wave to the crowd, etc. But not only did she not shake hands with anyone, she didn’t even make visual contact with any of her opponents. I know this seems like a very minor observation on my part, but sometimes the little things are what tell you a lot about a person.

Thanks for visiting - updates posted as needed - not sure when I'll blog over the weekend, so enjoy any relaxation you can fit in!