From The Hotline Latest Edition for Friday, May 16,2008

THE FIELD

You Talkin To ME?

Fri. May 16, 2008


The Hill's Marre writes, Pres. Bush "achieved from abroad" 5/15 what Dem leaders at home "have failed to do:" bring the Dem Party together "at the tail end of a bruising" WH primary. With his "perceived criticism" of Barack Obama's push for diplomacy "from the floor of the Knesset," Bush "managed to unite" Dems behind Obama.

"Prominent uncommitted" Dems such as Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Maj. Leader Harry Reid and Senate Foreign Relations Cmte Chair Chairman Joe Biden "strongly criticized" Bush "for what is viewed as an attack on Obama" (5/15).

Bush, during his 23-minute speech to Israel's parliament: "Some seem to believe we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. ... We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history" (mult., 5/15).

"Bush did not mention [Obama] by name" and the WH "officially denied that Bush was referring to Obama." The WH "professed not to understand Obama's ire." "There are many who have suggested these types of negotiations with people that the president, President Bush, thinks that we should not talk to," said press secretary Dana Perino. But WH officials "indicated that the criticism applied to Obama" (Issenberg, Boston Globe, 5/16).

The episode placed Bush "squarely in one of the most divisive debates of the campaign to succeed him," as GOPers "try to portray" Obama
"as weak in the fight against terrorism." It also underscored what the WH "has said will be an aggressive effort" by Bush "to use his presidential platform to influence" the WH race (Stolberg/Rutenberg, New York Times, 5/16).

Biden "used an expletive to describe Bush's comment." Biden went on to say: "For this president to leave the country and unleash a political attack on Senator Obama and the Democrats cannot go unanswered. We're not going to tolerate this swiftboating," he said, referring to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign in '04 against Sen. John Kerry (Abramowitz, Washington Post, 5/16).

I Know You Are, But What Am I?

AP's Gearan writes, while Bush "was ruffling the presidential contest with a warning about the 'foolish delusion' of negotiating with terrorists, one of his few Middle East friends was doing just that. Apparently it's not appeasement when your side does it."

The U.S.-backed gov't in Lebanon "retreated in a power struggle with Iranian- and Syrian-backed Hezbollah militants, reversing decisions that had triggered days of bloody conflict with the Hezbollah-led opposition." The gov't "said it wanted to end the fighting and find a way out of an 18-month standoff with Hezbollah."

"Even as he implied that Lebanon is a special case," State Dept. spokesman Sean McCormack "pointed to the virtues of Bush's us-and-them approach." McCormack:"It is worth talking about very clearly how there are bright lines and highlighting those bright lines between one side of the divide in the Middle East and the other" (5/15).

Ahhh, Wes

Washington Times' Pruden writes, "Throw a rock into a congregation of collies, retrievers, poodles, spaniels and assorted other aristocrats and you can be sure the dog yelping in unexpected pain is the one you hit" (5/16).

New York Post: "Judging by the outrage" from Obama, and many other major Dems, "it looks like Bush's barb hit the mark. ... Is Obama so convinced of his powers of persuasion that he thinks he can personally turn Ahmadinejad from Hamas' banker into a flag-waving Zionist? Or does he not understand that to treat with terror is to send the message that bloody-handed murder is a potential path to political success? Naivete? Or lack of depth and understanding? Scant comfort, either way. No wonder Obama was so reflexively defensive" (5/16).

New York Post's Hurt writes, "What is it about the word "appeasement" that got" Obama's "ears ringing?" Dems "are just now figuring out that Obama's position here might leave him open to withering attacks. Well, it's a little late for that. He's their nominee and they've got to go with it" (5/16).

Tsk, Tsk, Tsk

FNC's O'Reilly: "Mr. Bush's statement was provocative. Not disgraceful" ("O'Reilly Factor," 5/15).

NPR's Williams: "Maybe it's Jimmy Carter he's talking about, maybe it's Barack Obama, but I think he lumps them together, and it was a shot across the bow as we begin the fall election" ("Hannity & Colmes," FNC, 5/15).

Roll Call's Kondracke: "I can't believe I'm saying this, but I agree with Nancy Pelosi. This was an outrageous performance on the part of the president" ("Special Report," FNC, 5/15).

CNN's Henry: "For the president to lay out his definition of what an appeaser is, and for that definition to fit into the narrative that Republican operatives are putting out there about the Democratic front-runner, it's a pretty amazing coincidence" ("Situation Room," 5/15).

Washington Post's Milbank: "This is a classic of what the president has done in even numbered years, making extraordinary strong arguments about something that nobody possibly could support. It's the idea of sort of caricaturing your opponents and then ripping that argument down. Clearly, it wasn't done by accident since it was in a written speech to a foreign legislature."

More Milbank: "It's absurd. I mean, some would say the moon is made of green cheese and some would say the earth is flat and some would say that he wasn't referring to Barack Obama" ("Countdown," MSNBC, 5/15).

Fred Thompson, asked if he thought the comments were aimed at Obama: "I think that was an appropriate time to talk about [foreign policy], and I understand that Senator Obama kind of took offense ... at a word or two. My goodness, talk about the reaction to that. I mean, to not mention anybody's name. You know, they really came on strong."

More Thompson: "But it points out something that's very fundamental. That is, that the leader of the free world has to not be a babe in the woods in these areas. He has to have some experience. Has to know what he is doing and has to be not naive in dealing with people who are responsible for the death of a lot of Americans" ("Fox & Friends," FNC, 5/16).

John Edwards: "It is beneath the president of the United States to make these kind of clearly political
accusations, when he is addressing the people of Israel on the 60th anniversary of Israel. It shouldn't have been done. ... From my perspective, it was an obvious reference to Senator Obama. It's just not right" ("Today," NBC, 5/16).

Chris Dodd, asked if Bush's comment was directed at Obama: "I was born at night but not last night. Anybody who thinks that wasn't is living in a never-never land" (MSNBC, 5/16).

What Should Obama Do?

Newt Gingrich: "All Barack Obama had to say was, 'I agree with the president. ... I don't think we should talk with terrorists, I don't think you can negotiate with radicals, and I think that the president made a very good point about 1939, and I don't think you could have talked Adolf Hitler out of being evil.' That's all he had to say. ... What does it tell you about the level of guilt that Senator Obama must feel that he identified a reference to a 1939 isolationist nut cake senator as referring to him? ... What you just saw was a revealing test of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, all of whom were offended by a description of appeasement, isolationism, self-delusion, which they thought must refer to themselves" ("Hannity & Colmes," FNC, 5/15).

Radio talk show host Kevin James, asked whether Bush should have made those comments overseas: "Let me tell you who should have been overseas. Barack Obama should have been overseas and talking to Israel in the Knesset! Barack Obama is the one whose Israel policies are very questionable. Barack Obama is the one who had Robert Malley, a Middle East foreign policy adviser, who just left the Obama campaign because it was discovered that he was secretly ... in confidence with Hamas! Barack Obama's the one who was endorsed by Hamas! Barack Obama's the one who needs to be making good with the people in Israel right now in this election season" ("Hardball," MSNBC, 5/15).

Jack Kemp: "I'm reminded of the famous Shakespearean phrase 'me thinkest the lady protests too much.' They rushed out with Biden and Kerry and all of their surrogates to protest, and he didn't even mention his name, A. B, if it had been a smart move by Barack Obama, he would have said he agreed with President Bush. I think it was a big mistake. It certainly gives the upper hand to John McCain. And very frankly, I think it's going to be a big issue, circa 2008 campaign" ("Hannity & Colmes," FNC, 5/15).

Independent Women's Voice pres. Michelle Bernard, asked whether the foreign policy issue will resonate with voters: "Really the top issue I believe right now that the American public cares about is the economy. But on foreign policy, foreign policy is going to continue to be an issue for Barack Obama. ... I think the American public really wants to understand where he stands on this issue. He has allowed himself to be painted as being quite dovish on foreign policy. And this is an issue he's going to have to deal with and deal with it very well" ("Race for the WH," MSNBC, 5/15).

Ex-Romney nat'l press sec. Kevin Madden: "I think that the way the Democrats and the Obama campaign reacted, so angrily, says more about Barack Obama in this campaign and their worry that they do have this very weak world view when it comes to dealing with these terrorists" ("Situation Room," CNN, 5/15).

Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ): "[Bush] certainly didn't name a specific individual. He did talk about a point of view which is present in the United States. I've heard people say it. And I think it's interesting that most Democrats immediately reacted in such a way that suggested that they, too, first thought of Barack Obama. Why would they think of Barack Obama if, in fact, Obama wasn't one of those people talking like that? ... I'm reminded of Shakespeare -- me think he doth protest too much" ("Situation Room," CNN, 5/15).

Bill Richardson: "Senator Obama should engage him and basically say, 'No, we don't negotiate with terrorists, but we do negotiate with Iran and Syria. To deal with Iraq, to deal with the Middle East situation" ("Morning Joe," MSNBC, 5/16).

Obama's Jewish Problem

CNN's Henry, on what the comments mean for Obama: "What's going on specifically is that by delivering these remarks at the Knesset in Israel, that could raise concerns among Jewish-American voters about Barack Obama" ("American Morning," 5/16).

Air America's Green: "It was bad enough when John McCain used this sleazy guilt by association of Obama and Hamas. Now comes President Bush using guilt by analogy, that somehow, Obama is Chamberlain. ... I wish the Republicans would argue on the merits and not engage in McCarthyite guilt by association or analogy. They're doing it because their candidate is weak, Obama is strong with a lot of Americans, and the Jewish community has overwhelmingly voted for Democrats in the past" ("Hardball," MSNBC, 5/15).

Bill Richardson: "I think the president showed bad form in criticizing a presidential candidate on
foreign soil. ... Obviously, President Bush wanted to score with Jewish voters that are very important" ("Morning Joe," MSNBC, 5/16).

Alley-Oop!

New Republic's Crowley: "Bush uses the word terrorists. Obama is not talking about going out to bin Laden's mountain cave and having tea with him. So, I think the way Bush frames it is quite misleading. I think, actually, McCain's attack, substantively, is somewhat more defensible, when he talks specifically about Iran and Ahmadinejad. ... Obama would welcome a fight with George Bush. Where it gets complicated is when McCain comes in. That's not as clean a shot for him" ("Election Center," CNN, 5/15).

MSNBC's Matthews, on McCain's reaction to Bush's comments: "Well, it seems like it's the alley-oop play in the NBA. ... The president threw the ball under the basket, and John McCain put it in" ("Hardball," 5/15).

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA): "It's almost sad. It's a repeat of their tactics of 2004, and frankly their tactics for the last 25, 30 years, which is raise the flag and wave fear. And what they're trying to do is just brand people and scare people. ... To use that platform rather than to try to advance peace and to make peace and to make Israel more secure, to play politics back here at home, is literally outrageous and insulting. ... What George Bush said over there, and what John McCain is now saying, is frankly -- it's -- it's almost sophomoric. It's dumb. It really is" ("Situation Room," CNN, 5/15).

Newsweek's Alter, asked what problems McCain could have "politically" as a result of the Bush comments: "The problem that McCain has politically, if you want to focus on the politics ... is that he's in danger in several of different areas of being seen as a hypocrite. I mean here he is, he's supporting the idea of Gates and Rice reaching out to Iran to talk to them, to try to make some progress in terms of what's going on in Iraq. He's for that kind of diplomacy out of one side of the mouth. And out of the other side of his mouth, he's comparing Obama to Neville Chamberlain" ("Verdict," MSNBC, 5/16).

CNBC's Harwood: "I think this is a very deliberate strategic move on behalf of the John McCain campaign and the White House helping the John McCain campaign. I think they're trying to draw a line. ... I think it's a legitimate issue for them to use" ("Morning Joe," MSNBC, 5/16).

"Brothers And Sisters" Previewed Last Weekend

In an "historic ruling" on 5/15, the CA Sup. Ct. affirmed "the right of same-sex couples to marry." The ruling "is certain to inject the issue into the" '08 race and "could help" GOPers "by serving up a red-meat issue to rally conservative voters."

Concerned Women for America policy dir. Matt Barber: "The California Supreme Court has just given Republicans an early Christmas gift." More: "This will be at the top of the list of issues in the 2008 race, and it comes during a time when Republicans are in desperate need of something that will invigorate the base."

In '04, 13 states passed ballot measures "to ban same-sex marriage." The issue is not one Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama "would prefer to see front and center:" polls show the public trusts Dems "more on key issues like health care and the economy."

Columbia Univ. prof. Nathaniel Persily: "It certainly doesn't help them. Right when everyone is thinking about a foreign policy disaster and the economy in ruins, you don't want them thinking about these other types of questions."

McCain, meanwhile, "seemed eager to court the right." Yesterday he released a statement that "criticized" the CA ruling "and appeared to endorse a proposed state initiative to amend the Constitution to outlaw same-sex marriage." The McCain statement read: "John McCain supports the right of the people of California to recognize marriage as a unique institution sanctioning the union between a man and a woman, just as he did in his home state of Arizona. ... John McCain doesn't believe judges should be making these decisions."

Obama, meanwhile, released a "carefully worded statement," saying: "Barack Obama has always believed that same-sex couples should enjoy equal rights under the law, and he will continue to fight for civil unions as president." More: "He respects the decision of the California Supreme Court, and continues to believe that states should make their own decisions when it comes to the issue of marriage."

The Clinton camp "did not respond to requests for comment" (Coile, San Francisco Chronicle, 5/16).

Here's The Word

In their 4-3 opinion that "overturned a voter-approved ban on gay marriage," the CA SC wrote: "Our state now recognizes that an individual's capacity to establish a loving and long-term committed relationship with another person and responsibly care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual's sexual orientation." Six of the seven members of the CA SC are GOPers (Hay Brown, "The Swamp," Chicago Tribune, 5/15)

Let's Get This Thing Passed

A "coalition of religious and conservative activists" has submitted 1.1M signatures to qualify a 11/08 constitutional amendment for the CA ballot. The amendment says: "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." In 6/08, the CA Sec/State "is expected to announce whether, as expected, the groups collected the 763,790 valid signatures necessary to qualify the measure" for the 11/08 ballot.

UC Berkeley prof. Bruce Cain: "It's a situation that makes it really hard for a Republican who wants to compete for the middle and at the same time hold onto the base." More: "McCain is going to be asked over and over again, 'Where are you on this issue?' Then it seems he either has to abandon the 'straight talk express' and change his view, or live with the consequence of not giving the Christian right what they want" (Willon/McGreevy, Los Angeles Times, 5/16).

Which Way Is The Wind Blowing?

It seems "questionable if voters are going to find" the gay marriage issue "compelling this year, at a time when the country is facing a prolonged war, an ailing economy and skyrocketing gasoline prices." Ex-Bush camp strategist Matthew Dowd: "At best, it doesn't move voters, and at worst for Republicans, it moves them against them." More Dowd: "Not so much on the issue, but it becomes, 'Why are we having a discussion on this issue when we should talking about things that matter, like the economy, or health care, or the war?'"

A Pew Research Center survey in 10/07 found that 55% of respondents "said same-sex marriage would be not at all important or not too important to their decision of whom to support for president;" 43% "said it would be somewhat important or very important." But with issues like gas prices now more salient, the CA SC ruling "may have created a laboratory to test once and for all just how powerful this issue really is" (Nagourney, New York Times, 5/16).

He's An Expert On Marriage, Remember

"It was a pretty good day for" San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom. Speaking on the steps of City Hall in San Francisco, Newsom shouted: "What a day in San Francisco, what a day for America."

Four years ago, "national politicians lambasted the young, upstart mayor for sanctioning gay marriage, an act that some of his own political mentors openly criticized." But on 5/14, "basking in the limelight" after what he "said was a near-sleepless night of anticipation, Newsom certainly acted like a man on a comeback." California State Univ.-Sacramento prof. Barbara O'Connor: "He has resurrected from the coffin that we put him in" (Ostrom, San Jose Mercury News, 5/16).

What's Arnold Going To Do?

On 5/14, CA Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) "reiterated his position that he will not support a constitutional ban on gay marriage." Schwarzenegger: "It's a big mistake." But other CA GOPers said "that they would actively campaign for such an amendment" (San Jose Mercury News, 5/16).

Thought We Had It Under Control

The gay marriage ruling "will spark a fresh push to add a nationwide ban to the U.S. Constitution."
Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX): "I do expect it'll generate some more debate, and I'll be happy to contribute to it." More Cornyn: "It's certainly surprising. Many of us thought that the efforts to overturn the tradition marriage laws would be confined just to Massachusetts" (Gillman, Dallas Morning News, 5/15).

It'll Be Just Like '67

CA joins MA "as the second state to legalize gay marriage." But unlike in MA, "nothing prevents out-of-state same-sex couples from coming to" CA "to get married." Pepperdine University law prof. Douglas Kmiec: "The invitation is going to be a kind of come one, come all, and that's going to produce a large number of [gay] marriages. They will then return to their home communities and will insist the states recognize their marriages as valid" (Arnoldy, Christian Science Monitor, 5/16).

More Kmiec: "This is an engine that will produce a large number of marriage licenses" (Page/Biskupic, USA Today, 5/16).

It Must Be The Weather

FL supporters of that state's proposed same-sex marriage ban -- the third one on being proposed along with CA's and AZ's -- "said they're hopeful" that the CA ruling "will help galvanize support for their measure." Florida4Marriage.org Chair John Stemberger: "It's Exhibit A why Florida needs a marriage amendment" (Fineout, Miami Herald, 5/15).

Some Analysis

•AP's Sidoti writes, the CA ruling "injects an element of uncertainty into a presidential race in which the Iraq war and the sputtering economy have largely overshadowed social issues" (5/15).

•Wall Street Journal's ed board writes, the GOP "certainly hasn't done anything to deserve such luck." More: "Judges invent wedge issues. Always have." They continue: "Most of all, the gay community wants social acceptance." But it should "look to what followed from Roe v. Wade: unending bitterness. A wise course in 21st-century America is to trust the democratic process" (5/16).

Listening To The Generals

"After launching their candidacies with opposite positions on the Iraq war," McCain and Obama "seem to be edging toward a middle ground between them" in preparation for the general election.

McCain "has long denounced timetables for withdrawal, but said for the first time" 5/14 "that he would like to see most U.S. troops out of Iraq by a specific date: 2013."

Obama "has emphasized his plan to withdraw all combat brigades within 16 months of taking office, but also has carefully hedged, leaving the option of taking more time -- and leaving more troops -- if events require."

"McCain has bowed to the political reality that American impatience with the war is growing, and Obama to the fact that a poorly executed exit would risk damage to other vital U.S. interests." Analyst Stuart Rothenberg: "It's one thing to stake out a relatively uncompromising position early in the presidential process. But when the idea that you might move into the Oval Office hits you squarely between the eyes, it reminds you that there's a time to be pragmatic about these things" (Richter, Los Angeles Times, 5/16).

Big Farma

"Although neither" WH candidate "showed up" for 5/15's vote on the farm bill, McCain "called it 'a bloated piece of legislation that will do more harm than good for most farmers and consumers.' ... McCain has consistently opposed the system of farm subsidies."

Obama "came out in favor" of the bill "after failing to vote on a previous version when it passed" in Nov. Obama: "I applaud the Senate's passage today of the farm bill, which will provide America's hard-working farmers and ranchers with more support and more predictability."

That statement "was a departure from Obama's comments" in Dec., "when he said of the farm bill, 'Once again the lobbyists stepped in to make sure that big agribusinesses got the multimillion-dollar giveaways that they've come to count on.' Asked to reconcile those sentiments," Obama spokesperson Tommy Vietor "said the candidate was referring to the failure to cap subsidy payments.

Obama: "This bill is far from perfect. But with so much at stake, we cannot make the perfect the enemy of the good" (Dilanian, USA Today, 5/16).

Will Red and Black Make Blue?

"The sharp surge in black turnout" that Obama "has helped to generate in recent primaries and Congressional races could signal a threat this fall to the longtime [GOP] dominance of the South."

Obama "would still have to struggle for white swing voters in the South and in border states" like WV, "where more than three-fourths of white voters chose" Hillary Clinton and 20% of the white voters "said the race of the candidate mattered in their choice."

"But in Southern states with large black populations," like AL, MS, and VA, "an energized black electorate could create a countervailing force, particularly if conservative white voters choose not to flock" to McCain (Nossiter/Scott, New York Times, 5/16).

Picking The Other Guy's Running Mate

Slate's Dickerson writes, "The quickest way to understand the emerging foreign-policy debate" between McCain and Obama "is to look at the unpopular world leader each is trying to turn into the other's running mate. McCain has picked Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for Obama, and Obama has selected George W. Bush for McCain."

"The benefit of the boogeyman strategy for both Obama and McCain is that it allows each to tie his opponent to a highly unpopular man who can be counted on to regularly say unpopular things."

"When asked to respond to McCain's charge about Ahmadinejad, one of Obama's senior advisers simply forwarded" comments made by Defense Sec. Robert Gates on 5/14. Gates: "We need to figure out a way to develop some leverage ... and then sit down and talk with [Iran]. If there is going to be a discussion, then they need something, too. We can't go to a discussion and be completely the demander, with them not feeling that they need anything from us."

"That's Obama position, articulated by Bush's defense secretary, say his aides."

"The similarities in the guilt-by-association strategies go only so far, obviously. Obama is nowhere near Ahmadinejad, and on many issues McCain is quite close to Bush. That should make it easy for Obama to wriggle free, whereas the pictures of McCain hugging Bush will be omnipresent and harder to escape" (5/15).

  •  
  •