“‘What is their Message? What is Going on Here?'”

Surprisingly candid put downs of the Romney campaign and their day of campaigning on Friday, from named and unnamed Repubs in this Washington Post article headlined “Romney’s Campaign Day Lacks Focus,” by Philip Rucker and Karen Tumulty:

“Coming at a moment of international crisis, as U.S. embassies in the Middle East were being beset by anti-American protests, the interview [on “Live” with Kelly Ripa] brought shudders from some Republicans who fear the Romney campaign is running aground in its final stretch.

‘Deaver is turning over in his grave,’ said one prominent Republican strategist, referring to Michael Deaver, the late image-maker for Ronald Reagan. The Republican asked for anonymity, because he did not want to go public with his growing despair over the GOP ticket’s prospects for winning this fall.

‘I can’t get my head around this,’ said John Weaver, a former strategist on Republican John McCain’s presidential campaigns. ‘What is their message? What is going on here?'”

A Glimmer of Hope in PA Voting Rights Case

Helpful article by Dan Froomkin at HuffPost on the Pennsyvlania Supreme Court hearing today, about the state’s voter ID law. With a deadlocked head count of three Repubs and three DEMS, the fear has been that a tie vote will allow a lower court ruling to stand that upheld the onerous law (Froomkin points out that the lower court decision stood on racist precedent from the 19th century). However, he also reports there may be some hope for a bipartisan, fair judgment:

There are some hints that at least one Republican justice could break ranks. At the hearing, Justice Thomas Saylor, a Republican, asked the state’s lawyers whether the law guarantees every registered voter can cast a vote — a question they could only answer in the negative. The Philadelphia Inquirer editorial board raised the possibility that Pennsylvania Chief Justice Ron Castille might ultimately side with the Democrats on this issue.

“[W]hile his brethren might rule along party lines, Castille has a history of flexing his independence,” the paper wrote. “Just eight months ago, it was Castille who distinguished himself in an otherwise partisan 4-3 ruling when the state Supreme Court threw out a redistricted legislative map designed to benefit the GOP.”

I’ve picked up and shared Froomkin‘s excellent reporting before. As I wrote about him in July,

“Dan has long been one of my favorite news aggregators and commentators. I first got to know his work in the early 2000s, when he wrote and edited the must-read, “White House Watch” at washingtonpost.com. WHW was a daily news digest entirely made up of news about the Bush White House, with Dan’s pithy commentaries about the stories he selected for his readers. I used to wait avidly each day until mid-morning when each new column would appear online. If I had a lunch date I had run to, I would print out the pages and take them with me on the subway. This is Dan’s awesome archive of all the WHW columns he did, a valuable record for history in this age of amnesia–plus all the live chats he did–before his employment at the Post was ended in January 2009, one of the worst decisions, among many bad calls, that that newspaper made in the 2000s.

From the lede of Dan’s story today:

“The legal team fighting Pennsylvania’s restrictive new voter identification law asked the state’s Supreme Court on Thursday to at least postpone until after November the measure that could disenfranchise tens of thousands of voters, many of them minorities. ‘There’s too little time, there’s too many people affected and there’s no place in the statute that guarantees that qualified electors can get the ID they need to vote,’ said David P. Gersch, representing the American Civil Liberties Union and other public interest groups.”

What it Takes*

Terrific essay by fellow blogger Lance Mannion at his self-named site. It’s called Shake Every Hand, Kiss Every Baby, and it’s a very readable analysis with much humor of the one-on-one people skills that successful politicians employ in connecting with voters.

His post reminded me of when Kyle and I met Bill Clinton in April ’92, prior to the NY primary, weeks before he had wrapped up the Democratic nomination. This was in lower Manhattan, near Wall Street. First Hillary, then Bill spoke standing on the open bed of a pickup truck, and when they were done, climbed down into the crowd. They met and conversed with everyone there, shook every hand, and campaigned like he was trailing in the polls, not leading. Bill’s hands were soft and big–it felt like shaking hands with a pillow. He looked me in the eye and asked for my vote in the upcoming primary. I then volunteered for his fall campaign against President Bush, joining an ad hoc group in Manhattan called Street Corner Speakers for Clinton. That was a great campaign year.

In considering what makes a successful politician, Lance’s references run the gamut from Dickens’ Hard Times to George McGovern’s early days as a hopeful South Dakota pol. I was glad to see that Andrew Sullivan linked to it this morning at The Dish on the Daily Beast in a share of Lance’s post Andrew called The Handshake Factor.

I recommend you read the whole piece. Here’s a taste of it, the same excerpt as on The Dish.

“You get out there and you shake as many hands, kiss as many babies, ring as many doorbells as there are minutes in the day every day.  Ideally, before the campaign’s over you’ll have met every voter and asked them for their vote personally.
“Of course the higher up the ladder, the larger the constituency, and the more that ideal becomes an impossibility. So you’re forced to do a lot of it by proxy.  Instead of meeting voters one at a time, you meet them in crowds. Instead of showing up on their doorsteps, you show up on their TVs and computer screens and mobile devices. You spend more time with big donors than with small business owners. And what used to be a matter of just doing your job, going out to listen to constituents tell you their troubles and ask for your help, becomes a photo op. If you worked your way up the political ladder, and you know what’s good for you, you remember what the point was and you keep in mind who deserves your attention when you’re out on the stump. And when you stop standing in front of the crowd and dive into it instead, all the old skills come back.”

* In borrowing this post’s title from Richard Ben Cramer’s great book of the same name, I say thanks to Mr. Cramer.

Great Content from the Public Domain Review

I’m enjoying a website I recently discovered, devoted to sharing works of all kinds in the public domain, from the historical, visual, literary, and musical worlds. It’s called the The Public Domain Review. Here’s a screenshot of what their front page looks like today. H/t Shaun Usher of the great site Letters of Note, who brought the Public Domain Review to my attention.

Sally Kohn, FOX News Contributor, Dismantles Paul Ryan’s Lies/w/ NYT Update

Saturday Update: I shared Sally Kohn’s FOXNews.com scathing demolition of Paul Ryan on Thursday, and am glad to see that her column is continuing to be widely read and shared. Late Thursday, on Facebook Sally wrote that her piece had by then already had 46,000 shares/reads. Today, Charles M. Blow of the NY Times mentioned it up high in his column recapping the RNC. Blow quotes my fave sentence from her piece, the one I also excerpted below: 

Sally Kohn, a contributor to Fox News, said:
“Ryan’s speech was an apparent attempt to set the world record for the greatest number of blatant lies and misrepresentations slipped into a single political speech. On this measure, while it was Romney who ran the Olympics, Ryan earned the gold.”

Evening Update: Along with the critiques of Ryan’s speech that I cited below, Daily Kos has come up with an even more list, readable here. H/t friend and colleague Phil Gaskill.
— 

A number of excellent critiques of Paul Ryan’s acceptance speech have appeared since he gave it last night, such as this one by Jonathan Cohn on the New Republic website and Jonathan Bernstein’s takedown at the Plum Line, and Adele Stan’s at AlterNet.

My fave so far is this excellent column by FOX News contributor and Facebook friend Sally Kohn, itemizing all the lies and self-serving statements in Ryan’s speech. With Sally publishing the piece at FoxNews.com, it’s great to imagine many FOX readers being shocked at their conservative hero being knocked down several pegs. Among Sally’s best lines is this one:

“Ryan’s speech was an apparent attempt to set the world record for the greatest number of blatant lies and misrepresentations slipped into a single political speech. On this measure, while it was  Romney who ran the Olympics, Ryan earned the gold.”

I recommend you read the whole column and share it among your contacts. It’s an excellent rebuttal to the lying Romney/Ryan ticket.

Mitt & his Minions, Sticking it to Coal Miners/w Romenesko update

Second Update, two days later:  At Jim Romenesko’s media site, it’s reported that Murray Energy is suing a reporter in Charleston, WV, Ken Ward, Jr. for supposedly defaming CEO Bob Murray.  Murray is the boss in the two posts below, responsible for docking the pay of workers and who were pushed to attend a pro-Romney rally on Aug. 14. Ken Ward, Jr. had written:
“renegade coal operator Bob Murray played a major role recently in a campaign fundraiser in Wheeling, W.Va., for Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney” and that “the question for Governor Romney, of course, is whether he thinks criminal behavior by coal companies, especially when it kills workers and damages the environment, is acceptable. If not, why is he buddies with Bob Murray?”
H/t Jim Romenesko 


I posted the story below at about 2PM this afternoon, and see this evening that ThinkProgress has already pushed the story beyond what I knew earlier. Bob Murray, the CEO of Murray Energy, the coal company that in some fashion compelled their employees to attend an Aug. 14 rally for Mitt Romney, and then docked workers’ pay for the day, is a prolific denialist of climate change, someone who claims that scientists are trying to make money off climate change.  That’s rich–a guy who’s made his own fortune digging and shipping coal is accusing other folks of trying to cash in on cleaning up his mess. 

You may have recently seen this photo, taken near a coal mine in Beallsville, Ohio, with a story on Mitt Romney bashing President Obama’s energy policy.  Turns out, according to a segment broadcast by West Virginia radio show host David  Blomquist and a report by Sabrina Eaton in the Cleveland Plain Dealer, those miners were docked a day’s pay when the mine closed for the day so their employer, Murray Energy, could hand over their facility to the Republican candidate for the day. What’s more, the miners may have been compelled by their employer to attend the pro-Romney event–Blomquist heard from miners who told him this, while  the company denied it with a perfectly Orwellian statement: “Chief Financial Officer Rob Moore . . .told Blomquist that managers ‘communicated to our workforce that the attendance at the Romney event was mandatory, but no one was forced to attend.’ He said the company did not penalize no-shows.”

Got that? “Attendance. . . was mandatory, but no one was forced to attend.” Aren’t people embarrassed to say stuff like this? According to Blomquist’s interview with Moore, which you can hear via this link to the show on radio station WWVA, the executive seems to want people to believe that after the event the company decided they wouldn’t enforce the rule, and would let any no-shows off the hook. Mitt and his minions commit crimes against language as handily as they exploit workers.

Eaton’s Plain Dealer article ends with this telling piece of information:

“Records compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics show that Murray Energy has contributed more than $900,000 to Republican candidates in the last two years.”

Please share this story widely as possible among your social networks–it’s emblematic of the whole campaign and why the fate of the middle class is at stake in this year’s election.

 

 

Open Letter to Ann Romney from the MOMocrats

Wow, a woman named Karoli has written and posted a terrific letter to Ann Romney slamming her attitude and refusal to release the couple’s tax returns. I urge you to read the whole letter via this link or in the screenshot I’ve placed in this post and share it with your friends and contacts, and anyone you know in the media. Here’s how it begins:

Dear Ann Romney,
I don’t like your attitude very much. It seems very entitled and imperious. You say you have done everything legally required, and there will be no more tax returns. Not only do you say it, you say it with a snarl, as if those you’re asking to vote for your husband are simply too stupid to understand what a tax return filed by a Very Wealthy Couple looks like. As if you’re saying “we’ve given all you people need to know.”
Oh wait. You actually said that.

The MOMocrats also have a cool website, where this letter was first posted. Karoli’s letter deserves to go viral, big-time.

Ann on the Romneys’ Taxes–“There’s Nothing We’re Hiding”

“Ann Romney stroked the nose of Magic, a Welsh pony. ‘You’re so pretty, Magic,’ said Mrs. Romney. . . . When pressed. . . Mrs. Romney stood her ground. ‘We have been very transparent to what’s legally required of us,’ she said. ‘There’s going to be no more tax releases given.’ Mrs. Romney said if they release any more information, ‘it will only give them more ammunition.’ In regards to their finances, she said ‘there’s nothing we’re hiding.’ **

There’s a lot to unpack in this brief segment from the interview Ann Romney has recently done with NBC.

1) Notwithstanding the implication she would prefer to be taken away from her claim, the Romney campaign hasn’t yet released even one full year of tax information. Though most taxpayer’s 2011 returns have long since been filed, they haven’t yet released the most recent year. I don’t know what they’re waiting for. Moreover, for 2010–the one year they claim to have released–it was incomplete, as it lacked key filings the Romneys would have been obligated to make about their foreign bank accounts. The media should be making the point that claims aside, far from releasing two years, they haven’t even done one yet.

I noticed that Paul Ryan tried doing the same thing in his 60 Minutes interview Sunday night–speaking about Mitt’s two years of tax info in the past tense, as though they had already been released. Most of the attention for that part of the interview was paid to Ryan’s admission he’d provided “several years” of returns for vetting by the Romney campaign; equally significant was the sleight-of-hand he tried on Mitt’s taxes.

The media should be making the point that false claims aside, far from releasing two years, the Romneys haven’t even released one yet.

2) Her claims of transparency are belied by the facts. Mitt has been opaque about everything from his years as governor of Massachusetts–at the end of which, he instructed staff to purchase and destroy the hard drives on their office computers–to the sealing of Salt Lake City Olympics records to their personal finances.

3) As a matter of logic, how can the voting public reliably ascertain that she and Mitt aren’t “hiding” anything if they refuse to release more info? The Romney campaign has cited the supposed example of John McCain who as a presidential candidate released just two years of tax returns, but as a member of the Senate for many years, McCain had been filing detailed personal financial disclosures for a long time, and so an adequate paper trail already was available about him.

4) By stating that the release of more than two years of tax returns “will only give” the Obama campaign “more ammunition,” Ann Romney makes it sound as if she and her husband are helpless weaklings unable to protect themselves from the schoolyard bullies in the Obama camp. Come on, Ann, that’s what you’ve got your own bulwark of a campaign for! Buck up and deal with it. This is similar to Mitt’s appeals to the refs (i.e., the moderators) during the Republican primary debates–when he felt stung by an opponent’s criticism he’d ask the moderator– Wolf Blitzer in one instance–to intervene, claiming someone had violated debate rules. Observing this cowardly conduct, I thought at the time, “What a wuss!”

The Romneys are clearly hoping for credulous media to give them a pass on all their bait & switch tactics. One of the reasons I write this blog is to remind readers of mine who are also members of the media that they should not permit auto-pilot reporting to disguise this naked spin. Ann Romney puts up a gauzy front, shedding tears over the lovely Welsh pony Magic, but it’s just an act in service of her husband’s mendacious dissembling.

**If the subject of the Romneys’ horses interests you, please see my earlier post on the topic, All the Romneys’ Horses.
Note: The credit for the photo accompanying this post belongs to the publication Chronicle of the Horse.