Muscle, Tussle, and Kerfluffle

Less than twenty four hours after Wisconsin, Washington and Hawai'i weighed in on the Amazing Race of 2008, an impressive spate of new endorsements, attacks, responses, clarifications and revelations have got me a little giddy. If you love politics, it doesn't get any better than this. So forgive my insouciant tone as I catalogue the latest muscle, tussle and kerfluffle.

Let's begin with the Muscle. The Teamsters, one of the oldest and most powerful unions in America endorsed Barack Obama. This is more bad 'constituency-erosion' news for Hillary. The fact that seven of the most politically energized large unions in America--including SEIU and now, the Teamsters--are lined up for Obama gives him serious street cred with the blue-collar worker. The endorsement also makes us nervous for R. Thomas Buffenbarger, the President of The International Association of Machinists. It seems that Buffenbarger (clench your teeth when you say that one, Park Avenue) described Obama supporters as "Prius-driving" and "latte-sipping" at a Clinton Rally in Ohio. Now, you'd think a guy named Buffenbarger wouldn't go there. But he did, and word is, the Teamsters weren't too happy about the characterization. Having worked in show business, I know first hand that the one union you do not, repeat, do not mess with, is the Teamsters. So, the "Buffy" watch is officially on. We hope he can muster a clarification. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21teamsters.html?ref=politics

What a segue! Speaking of clarifications...Michelle Obama did a judicious backtrack of her now-famous, "I've never been proud" speech. As Dudley Moore's title character in the movie "Arthur" drunkenly proclaimed, "Ah may be craazy, but ah'm not stoopid". And Michelle proved she is certainly not stupid. I think she said something very clarifying like...'of course...I've been...proud...of my country...so proud...that it seems...like it wasn't all that much...pride...really, to be called real...pride or...most proud...y'know?...sort of...yeah. Love your outfit. Next question?' Now, I suppose I could try to interpret the patriotic parts of her original "I've never been proud" speech , but, seriously, it just gives me a headache. Not as big as the one it gave the Obama campaign, of course. But anyway, can we move on? We'll hear about this again in the fall anyway...

The tussles... where do we begin? Hillary, after admitting on Tuesday that words do matter (make up your mind already), cuffed Obama for not using his own. Fair enough. But then she did the Clinton Burger King ('have it both ways') when she stated that, “We need to keep dreaming; dreaming keeps us hopeful. Without dreams we can’t aspire to be great, but without action we cannot turn those dreams into reality.” Ok: if she's going to borrow Obama's lines and then butcher them, she should at least give him credit. Or Deval Patrick. Somebody. Obama lashed back with, ...“it’s a choice between a politics that offers more of the same divisions and distractions that didn’t work in South Carolina and didn’t work in Wisconsin and will not work in Texas, or a new politics of common sense, of common purpose, of shared sacrifice and shared prosperity.” Great phraseology, which inspired an idea for a business: a discount speechwriting service from which any candidate can steal good lines. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21campaign.html?ref=politics

More tussles...John McCain took a break from deriding Obama for his 'bomb Pakistan' comments (from last autumn), to scold him again for not unequivocally holding to his 'pledge' to accept public campaign funds (from last autumn). Obama tried to use his words (or somebody's) in an op-ed piece in USA Today to weasel out--I mean, to explain his stance more fully. http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/02/opposing-view-3.html#more Of course, McCain was having none of it, simply saying "What's there to talk about?...he signed a piece of paper saying he would do it..." You get the idea.

But then, a funny thing happened on the way to the nomination...a kerfluffle! The NY Times finally ran a piece they had been sitting on for more than 2 months about McCain's 'relationship' with Vicki Iseman, a lobbyist for Paxson Entertainment (Pax TV). Though everyone has seized on the innnuendo of a possible liason dangereuse with the comely Ms. Iseman, the article actually paints a less spectacular but more disturbing picture about McCain's legislative work on behalf of private telecomm companies. It also rehashes the embarrassing Keating Five debacle.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21mccain.html?hp
In a game press conference this morning, the McCains set the record straight by setting a new record for the use of the word 'dissappointing" by one couple in public. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/21/mccain/index.html#cnnSTCVideo
Everything was going well in the categorical denials department until a reporter contradicted Mac about speaking to the NY Times about the article. Mac calmly said that he had forgotten about one conversation with editorial chief Bill Keller and apologized for not remembering. As someone who can't remember his phone when he leaves the house, I would personally give him a pass on that one. But his straightforward denials to straightforward questions ("did John Weaver ever speak to you about staying away from Ms. Iseman?", "No") makes this a very open and shut story. If he's telling the truth, it will be a done deal; if he's lying about anything, it'll bite him. The good news for McCaniacs is that some have said the only two things that can save John McCain's candidacy are Hillary Clinton and the NY Times. Hello, Times Square! So maybe this will help unite the arch conservatives behind him. The bad news is this story knocks McCain off of his sanctimonial perch a bit and gives Obama a second to catch his breath before the debate tonight.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: you can't make this stuff up.

Question: Is the NY Times the devil, as conservatives say it is? Talk about this or anything else by clicking on 'comments' and bypassing Google and hitting the nickname or anonymous button