Fact-esque

What? You Don't Like "Kill Obama" As A Campaign Theme?

If you're the Goebbels & Braun of the NYT, Adam Nagourney & Liz Bumiller, the best possible spin you can put on the crumbling McC campaign is that "John's message isn't getting across". So here's what they wrote. Together. (It took both of them.)

Again and again, [GOP] leaders said in interviews that while they still believed that Mr. McCain could win over voters in the next 30 days, they were concerned that he and his advisers seemed to be adrift in dealing with an extraordinarily challenging political battleground and a crisis on Wall Street.

The expressions of concern came after a particularly difficult week for Mr. McCain. On Friday night, new questions arose about his choice of Ms. Palin as his running mate after an investigation by the Alaska Legislature concluded that she had abused her power in trying to orchestrate the firing of her former brother-in-law, a state trooper.

“I think you’re seeing a turning point,” said Saul Anuzis, the Republican chairman in Michigan, where Mr. McCain has decided to stop campaigning. “You’re starting to feel real frustration because we are running out of time. Our message, the campaign’s message, isn’t connecting.”

Of course it's connecting. It's just that "Kill the Terrorist Traitor Obama!" is more a comic book than a political message and, like, nobody is on board with it except the 23% who think Bush is Batman and Obama is The Joker.

If McC has a message other than that, then yes, it's not connecting and maybe he ought to spend more time talking about whatever it is than accusing Barack of murdering Bambi and raping Orphan Annie.

Flashback

BUMILLER: I think we were very deferential because…it’s live, it’s very intense, it’s frightening to stand up there. Think about it, you’re standing up on prime-time live TV asking the president of the United States a question when the country’s about to go to war. There was a very serious, somber tone that evening, and no one wanted to get into an argument with the president at this very serious time.

As you all know, Elisabeth Bumiller, famous around here and throughout blogtopia (hail skippy) for being afraid, stuck her neck out with a fairly innocuous question to Hugger McCain about his changing VP stories from 2004.  She got yelled at by Hugger and now her associates (and of course the Right Wing Noise Machine) are throwing her under the bus, with Ana Marie Cox claiming that Bumiller is new to the campaign (unkind nonsense, of course) and that McCain's response wasn't so bad anyway.

I'd like to offer my official sympathies and support to Ms. Bumiller during this difficult time and I'm not kidding.   As we see, the Village can't be a fun place for her right now, dominated as it is by personal relationships, gossip, the Right Wing Noise Machine, and a complete lack of understanding about the world beyond.   In a world ruled by Arielle, Ms. Bumiller is the smarter, nicer sister who turns a blind eye to the mean behavior of her more popular friends because to do otherwise would be rude - it's their party after all.  But every once in a while she breaks the rules, practically by mistake, and acknowledges the fly in the soup, or even the emperor's nakedness, and she pays the price.   I would encourage her to do it more often but as a graduate of middle school, I can remember how high that price can be. 
 

Yay! Ms. Bumiller is Back Very Politely Blowing Smoke on the Campaign Trail

Nobody but nobody can polish the turd in the punch bowl, ignore the elephant in the room or praise the emperor's new clothes better than Elisabeth Bumiller.   Not since she took a break to write a bio of the fabulous Condi (rejected title: Three Terms to Victory!) and we read her last White House Letter, in which she mentioned 82% approval ratings for (Laura) Bush and contrasted the First Lady's willingness to shake up her staff with Dear Leader's resistance to do the same, have we been treated to such a determinedly cheerful collection of misplaced attention, selective memory and willful misrepresentation of reality.   I've missed her so much.

Now that  Hugger McMaverick is the mortal lock for the GOP nomination, the question becomes: exactly where does he tie the albatross that is President CooCooBananas, his Eternal War and his 30% approval rating?   The answer?  Why, anywhere Dear Leader wants!  While getting to that conclusion, Ms. Bumiller avoids any mention of anything that would make this story interesting - nothing about the reason for the 30%, no mention of a certain war or a failing economy.   But we do find out that Reagan didn't campaign a lot for Poppy, Team Hugger has plans to "institutionalize" contact with the White House during the campaign, the mistake of excluding Bill from the Gore campaign will not be repeated and, most humorously, the official self-criticism required from Team Hugger about the events of South Carolina  2000 is complete:  “'We were dyspeptic jerks who held grudges,' Mr. Salter said."   I'm glad that's cleared up.

So grab a refreshment and find a seat in the shade.  Ms. Bumiller's Campaign Garden Party has begun. 

Quote of the Year - and the Last Seven Years

“I said, ‘What happened in the Palestinian elections?’” Ms. Rice recalled. “And they said, ‘Oh, Hamas won.’ And I thought, ‘Oh my goodness, Hamas won?’”    

I'm not into end-of-the-year stuff but when something so perfectly expresses and explains the tap root of a big ol' tree of poisonous fruit, it deserves special mention.   Plus, it  has a connection to Ms. Bumiller and we know that I can't resist that.   

And I thought, ‘Oh my goodness, Hamas won?’

Faithful readers of this blog know that while the content of Ms. Bumiller's nearly-released and long-anticipated bio of the fabulous Condi has never been in doubt, the title of the work was a matter of frequent speculation around here.

When the news of Ms. Bumiller's leave of absence to write her book broke, I was understandably upset to be losing her contribution to the country's political reporting scene - especially since she wrote the always wonderful White House Letter column, which went on haitus with its creator.  But I dug through the sadness and the Fact-esque archives to come up with a preview of what to expect when the book hit the shelves and, to dull the pain, began to (helpfully) suggest titles for the coming love letter. 

Here are what I came up with:  Condiriffic!;  Devotion: Condi's Story; Condi: A Fabulous Life; (SO close!) and the all-purpose Hero! 

There was Investing in Freedom, the Story of a Girl Diplomat, when she so movingly assured America that Iraq was worth the lives and money that we've "invested" in it. 

Let Me Check with John, when John Negroponte was assigned to be her babysitter at State.

Girl Talk: the True Story of One Woman's Rise to the Heels of Power and What He Meant When He Said That: What it Takes to Stand by Your Man When Your Man is a Moron, when it looked like Marcus Marby would beat Ms. Bumiller to the punch.

And finally, Hiding Truth's Pants: Working in the George W. Bush White House, when yet another Condi bio came out before Ms. Bumiller's - that one snappily entitled Dr. Rice is in the House.

And so after nearly a year of waiting to see what title Ms. Bumiller and her publishers would come up with, you can imagine my crushing disappointment to see that it's Condoleezza Rice: An American Life.   Just awful.  We've already had Reagan: An American Life and Ben Franklin: An American Life.  Madonna even used the cliche.  There is that great radio show This American Life that's been on forever, so that's cool, but I can't shake the fact that when I first read the title of Bumiller's book, all I could think of was that little immigrant mouse, Fievel.  At least he's adorable.

Condoleezza Rice: An American Life doesn't hit the stores until Decemeber 11, but you can get a good idea about what you'll get by reading the adapted excerpts of the book, which ran in the NYT yesterday as news stories just in time to puff both Ms. Bumiller's book and Dear Leader's legacy-seeking Annapolis Peace Talks.  Be charmed as you read about the close friendship between the fabulous Condi and BushCo and how it seems to keep her believing that anyone in the White House pays attention to what she says.  Don't miss the thrilling history of the administration's disastrous handling of the region and how all of the mistakes and calamities have somehow led to Annapolis, where, if the bar is lowered enough and the definition of success completely re-written, a pony will be pulled from the ruins.

Personally, I'm simply hoping that we'll be seeing Ms. Bumiller return to the NYT full time in 2008 in time for the primaries and the general election.   I've missed her.

Hurry, Elisabeth!

Via Blackprof, I see that another book about the fabulous Condi has beaten Ms. Bumiller's alleged work in progress (working title - Hiding Truth's Pants: Working in the George W. Bush White House) to the shelves.  It's called Dr. Rice in the House.   This is from the publisher's site:

We have been bombarded by images of the U.S. Secretary of State as the Great Diplomat, walking onto the tarmac of a foreign country as if she were a rock star, an intellectual giant, and the embodiment of the American dream all rolled into one. Meanwhile, she has spoken out against affirmative action, lied to the 9/11 Commission, defended a disastrous war in Iraq, and been the mouthpiece for an administration at its most shameful moments.

Who is she, and why does she hold such a special place in the national imagination? How does the Right use her to front racist and sexist policies in the U.S. and abroad? Why does the Left repress criticisms and thorough evaluations of one of the most influential people in Washington? Here is a compendium of think pieces, visual art, and imaginative works inspired by Dr. Condoleezza Rice.

Now that's a book I'd like to read.  But I'm sure finding out the color of the fabulous Condi's lucky dress and which of her pals tipped her to the perfect place to find the shoes to match will be fun too. 

Publish or Perish

I know that the Newsweek story about Marcus Marby's coming biography of the fabulous Condi has been exciting electrons all over blogtopia (hail skippy).   People are happy to have proof in print of the embarrassing and dysfunctional relationship between her fabulousness and Dear Leader, which has led to the trainwreck that is American foreign policy these days.  But faithful readers of this blog heard the news of a Marby biography of Condi and thought of only one thing:  What will Elisabeth Bumiller do?!

Good Fact-esque readers know two things: First, I'm nearly always wrong and second, our Ms. Bumiller is on leave from the NYT to write her own biography of the fabulous Miss Rice (working title - Girl Talk: the True Story of One Woman's Rise to the Heels of Power).   But now Marby has done what appears to be the definitive People Magazine-style work up of the woman who finds BushCo's mind to be "incredibly inquisitive."   It looks like he's already examined how the psychological baggage of the fabulous Condi's crush on her boss has crippled her judgment.  Except for that impolite conclusion, that sort of profile is Ms. Bumiller's  stock and trade.   

Of course, I haven't read the whole book, so maybe there's hope for our friend.  Maybe Marby has left out the details of Miss Rice's lunch habits and exercise schedule.  Maybe he didn't work to get interviews with her girlfriends giving us a window into how hard it is to be a powerful woman in Washington.   It's probably my enabling crush on Ms. Bumiller talking here but I'm holding out hope that when her Condi bio comes out (working title - What He Meant When He Said That: What it Takes to Stand by Your Man When Your Man is a Moron)  we'll be treated to a treasure trove of never-before known and vital information about a woman who can only be described as "fabulous."

Too Great a Strain

No time to blog. Work is a nightmare.  But in honor of the loss of the services of this century's version of the Queen of Baghdad, I'd point back to a post I wrote less than a year ago, when Meghan O'Sullivan, flying high, and was the subject of a trademark Bumiller love letter. 

With Stephen J. Hadley, the national security adviser, Ms. O'Sullivan briefs the president in person on Iraq up to several times a week. Over the weekend she helped to prepare the agenda for Mr. Bush's war cabinet meetings on Monday and Tuesday at Camp David and will be on hand throughout the sessions.

Ms. O'Sullivan, who spent more than a year in Baghdad as an aide to L. Paul Bremer III, then the top American civilian administrator in Iraq, also helps to prepare the agenda for the president's weekly National Security Council meetings on Iraq.

She coordinates the political, security and reconstruction efforts for Iraq throughout the agencies of the government. Not least, she briefs the president before all of his phone calls and meetings with Iraqi leaders.

Although Ms. O'Sullivan does not make major decisions — the administration's policy is run by Zalmay Khalilzad, the American ambassador to Iraq, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice — she is important because of her closeness to the president and her role in helping to form his thinking.

According to the pro-war WaPo, she's "leaving optimistic."  I wonder if Ms. O'Sulllivan will ever engage in creating kings again.

All the BushCo Cheerleading That's Fit to Print

If you were stunned by David Ignatius' truly horrible ode to our weary boy-king, then don't miss the NYT's Christmas present to our stressed-out but always resolute and sincere Dear Leader:

President Bush marched into his year-end news conference last week with the usual zip in his step. As always, he professed little worry about his legacy or the polls. As always, he said the United States would win in Iraq. The nation might despair, but not Mr. Bush; his presidential armor seemed firmly intact.

Yet a longtime friend of Mr. Bush’s recently spotted a tiny crack in that armor. “He looked tired, for the first time, which I hadn’t seen before,” this friend said.

And it goes on from there, the author, Stohlberg, doing her best imitation of our Ms. Bumiller (currently on leave to write a biography of the Fabulous Condi - working title: Investing in Freedom, the Story of a Girl Diplomat). She even quotes People magazine as she hits all the same notes of concern that Ignatius does for our brave leader, who is now fighting alone the illegal war he started. Alone, that is, if you don't count the thousands of people actually doing the killing and the dying.

The difference? Ignatius' piece was on the op-ed page. The NYT put their love letter in the news.

How Were We Supposed to Ask?

Alt Hippo schooled Dana Milbank, whose journamalistic sense of honor was wounded by Helen Thomas' accurate portrayal of the Washington Press Corpse as obsequious in the run-up to BushCo's War on Iraq.   MIlbank tried to prove Thomas wrong by taking quotes from the infamous pre-war press conference which was marked by obsequious questions and no follow-up of the ones that were ignored because they weren't obsequious enough.  The Hippo rightly takes Milbank to task for using parts of questions that would be exposed as obsequious if he had used the whole question.  Bad journamalist.  Good blogger.  But here's what caught my eye in the Milbank whine:

But the press was hardly the only institution caught napping on the story of weapons of mass destruction (congressional oversight committees, Democratic leaders and a lethargic public come to mind).

They weren't alone in their servility!  Congress was prone too - and they saw the same intelligence that BushCo did.  And anyway, everyone thought they had WMD.   The French thought so.  The Russians thought so!  Everyone thought so!   So lay off, Thomas.  (Seriously - that crack about the lethargic public is enough to make want to devote six hours a day to mocking Dana Milbank in cyberspace.  What a lout.)

Anyway, Milbank's injured pride reminded me of the favorite justifications of the much-missed and always frightened, Elisabeth Bumiller (look for her biography of Condoleezza Rice, Condi: Fabulous Secretary of State or The Most Fabulous Secretary of State?, in stores soon).   Do you remember this from her interview with Martha Kumar?

 

There was such tension and anger in the country right before that war started and it all came out on us.  I think we were very deferential because in the East Room press conference it's live. It's very intense. It's frightening to stand up there.

 

I mean think about it, you're standing up on prime time live televsion asking the President of the United States a question and when the country is about to go to war. There was a very serious, somber tone that evening and I think it made, you know, nobody wanted to get into an argument with the president at this serious time. It had a very heavy feeling of history to it, that press conference.

 

Is there confusion about what role the press has? People criticize the press in a sense as if the press is the opposition. So that in a lot of ways the BWH has benefited from not having a very effective opposition for a large part of their presidency.

 

Right, I mean now there's less of that obviously because they've got a really strong opposition in Kerry, but yes, especially for the war. John Kerry voted for the war. Congress was largely behind the president for that war. So people who were angry about the war felt that ... they beat up on us: "Why aren't you stopping this?" It's not my role. [My role is to dig underneath the official pronouncements and speeches and Press Conferences and try and tell my readers what is the motivation, what is the White House really doing? What are our elected leaders really doing behind the public facade?] Believe me, I've seen what happens when you come on too strong with a politician on television.

or this from a C-SPAN interview about media coverage of the '04 election?

 

... [W]hat interested me the most was how Ms. Bumiller answered a question about the way the corporate press abdicated its responsiblities during the rush to war in Iraq. Here's what Ms. Bumiller said:  

 

I'm glad you think that we have so much power that we could have stopped the war. She went on to admit that the NYT coverage "was deficient in this area" and that the NYT was singled out for attention because they "basically apologized" for it, drawing attention to themselves.  She said, I think we also wrote a lot of skeptical stories. She asked the man to promise to go back and read a "terrific" series by Michael Gordon about how we got into Iraq and what went wrong. It ran two or three weeks ago.  She said that the editor of the NYT has said that, one way to go forward is just to do really good journalism.  And a few words later: Just bear in mind that we didn't start the war. Alright? Sometimes people forget that.

It's good to see that the proud and honorable Washington Press Corpse can agree on the important stuff: It's not their fault.  If only Dana could have made the point with puppets.