MEDIA WATCH SPECIAL REPORT: AMONG OTHER THINGS
…CARVILLE WATCH
February 16--17,
2002
"I
noticed Carville was wearing a green jacket which I’m not
sure is one of the “dress for success” colors when it
comes to the area of “projecting authority.”
Since Saturday
night has become a virtual garbage dump of programming, I only
flipped around the dial quickly before resorting to a tape of
Pride and Prejudice….But not before FOX brought me up to
speed on their weekend lineup. I guess I’ve been away
so long that it was news to me that FOX “News” now has
a “Weekend War” extravaganza populated with a bunch of
second-stringers and sporting its own glitzy montage ad. Oh,
I spotted a couple of the non-blonde “newsbreak”
readers that I recognized along with a few new fresh-faced guys
whom I didn’t know.And lo and behold, it looks like Donna
Fiducia is now on the team! Donna, for readers outside the
NYC area, has long been an ace traffic reporter and within the
last couple of years, had moved over to the local Fox AM show, if
I’m not mistaken. How heartening to see a
seasoned and well-versed veteran of traffic tie-ups at the
Lincoln Tunnel now reporting on the international war effort!!
Sunday I tore
myself from supervising the Chihuahuas so I could check out James
Carville on Meet the Press. Rumor has it that James has
gone soft, and since I hadn’t seen him since he had appeared
with Paul Begala on Russert a few weeks ago, I figured it was
time to see if all this talk was indeed true.
But first I
caught the tail end of Colin Powell commenting on condom use.
Russert was using his most innocent “choir boy”
expression as he nodded along with the Secretary of State’s
spew about about “conservative values” but I had to
wonder why Powell decided to talk about condoms in the first
place and why the subject in general has to be such a big deal in
2002 (unless we really HAVE time-traveled back to 1902…).
John McCain then
put in an appearance to talk about the campaign finance reform
bill.
McCain
reiterated that he thinks CFR will get the votes in the Senate,
even though Mitch McConnell says he has the 41 for a filibuster.
McCain looked subdued and washed out. He praised some “very
brave freshman Republicans” in the House.McCain said that he
was confident that “over time we will prevail” so it
seems that he’s resigned to a long fight on this one. McCain
said he didn’t feel “betrayed” by those who voted
against the bill in spite of his campaigning for them (10 out of
25 jumped ship) because he “understands the pressures they
were under.” He hopes that the 40 Republicans who
bolted and voted for CFR can also work on the Patients’ Bill
of Rights and other issues, but frankly, I think he was
paying lip service to the whole idea instead of harboring any
real hope.
Russert then
asked about loopholes in the bill and whether McCain was
concerned. “I’m absolutely certain that there will be
ways found to circumvent the law,” McCain replied and
then he went on to explain how this bill really is just an
attempt to just go back to the laws that had been put into effect
nearly 30 years ago. “There will be smart people who
will find their way around it… and 20 years from now, there
will be two Senators” who will start trying for reform
again. It sure didn’t seem to me that McCain was
getting much “joy” out of this whole business.
On the subject
of Iraq McCain said that the opposition to Saddam had “never
been given real opportunity by Clinton or Bush” to overthrow
the government. McCain still thinks that’s the first way to
proceed now, but he does share Powell’s view that Hussein
poses a danger to the US and agrees that he should go.
Back to
condoms!! McCain agrees with Powell that the emphasis
should be on “faithfulness but with HIV reaching epidemic
proportions, every means should be used. But I do believe
abstinence should be given priority.”
After
questioning McCain about his latest skin surgery, Russert asked
about a Presidential run in 2004. McCain said, “No, I
don’t envisage that…I think the President is doing a
great job running the country.” McCain’s
early exit from the race doesn’t surprise me given the
overall tired and listless appearance and performance
today…even when talking about CFR.
At long last,
Carville and Ed Gillespie were up!
Gillespie said
he expected CFR to pass the Senate. Mmm...this prediction
by the head of the RNC naturally raises my suspicions…..
Russert asked
Carville about David Broder’s column which says the Dems
should “be careful what you wish for” and surmises that
the Repugs will have a tremendous advantage in dollars. Broder
figures that the Dems’ accelerated primary schedules means
they will hit their spending limit in mid-March…and be off
the TV airwaves then until mid-August (!) whereas previously they
had run ads all the way up to the conventions.
Carville seemed
to acknowledge the accuracy of this assessment when he said that
“there’s no way we’ll stop this president” in
the money department anyway because “all he has to do is go
to GOP lobbyists” and because “he’s given favors
and gotten favors in spades.” But Carville tried to put a
good face on it when he said that “Anything that Armey and
Delay are against, there’s got to be something good about
it!” I’ve read analyses, which say that the
Repugs will hold the advantage now, but that in the future the
Dems can benefit…so for now, who really knows how CFR will
play out??
Russert then
brought up the specious and almost now mandatory comment about
how the Dems have gotten a load of Enron money. Carville
delivered his now standard response about “this ludicrous
idea” and dragged out the “73-23 percent split...it is
not a tie…” routine.
Russert then
decided to pick at the “issue” of
“bipartisanship.” He played a tape from LAST
March 9 in South Dakota of Daschle and Bush, with Bush spewing
his love talk. Russert then went on to discuss the
political ads featuring Bush that are now attacking Tim Johnson,
Max Baucus, and Jean Carnahan and a graphic went up showing that
each had supported Bush 71% of the time!! “Why would
Bush run negative ads?” asked Tim with the doe-eyed innocent
of a child as he set the stage for Gillespie’s response.
Gillespie tore
right in—“Of course, that’s the Senatorial
committee, not the RNC or Bush running the ads….There’s
nothing inaccurate about those ads… Johnson did oppose the
bill for tax relief, he walked away from it…let’s face
the facts—Daschle has decided to stop moving forward, his
decision to run for President so soon has affected the
agenda….”
So, Russert
turns to Carville and serves up-- “Daschle did block the
stimulus package and equated it to Enron…” Carville
said, “Not really, it’s way more serious than
Enron…But let’s go back and talk about this
bipartisanship…Daschle, an air force vet who they tried to
kill with anthrax, being compared to Saddam Hussein…This
Bush budget was put together by a French skating
judge….it’s made the recession worse and $2
trillion has been taken out of the Social Security trust fund.
We’re way too moderate on this…”
Russert appeared
shocked that Carville was saying the tax cut had made the
recession worse. “It made the recession worse?? It
passed in July!” Carville glossed over the tax cut
issue and hit on Social Security again…”The truth is
they’ve raided the Social Security trust fund, given up hope
of ever reforming Social Security, and when it’s needed,
they’re going to want to get rid of Social Security.”
Gillespie
countered that the Dems had “nothing to offer…and they
just want to create an issue.” Carville retorted that the
Congressional Budget office had said the Bush plans was “the
most ineffective stimulus package” that could be presented.
The truth is
Carville was not as sharp as usual and the whole conversation was
degenerating into a mish-mash of sound bites. I noticed Carville
was wearing a green jacket which I’m not sure is one of the
“dress for success” colors when it comes to the area of
“projecting authority.”
Russert then had
to bring up Al Gore somehow, so he accomplished his task by
saying that both Gore and Bush had pledged not to tap into the
Social Security surplus. Russert noted that Bush is doing
just that, but no Dems have talked about rescinding the tax cut.
Carville lamely responded that some have questioned it, but
Russert said no one “official” has, meaning
Daschle or, in Russert’s corrupted brain, possibly Gore.
Carville decided
to fall back on Social Security AGAIN, by trotting out the $2
trillion figure...”You haven’t seen nothing yet, wait
‘til Americans see the numbers keep coming in….”
But Russert
wouldn’t let it die. He asked if “Tim
Johnson with an ad bragging about voting for a tax cut and Zell
Miller” should be out there while you’re talking about
the tax cut and the effect on Social Security? (I thought
Gillespie had said Johnson had voted against the bill, but
Russert said he did vote for it, so what’s going on?? Nothing
like being confused by a “news” show!) (Author’s Note:
According to Johnson’s web site, he was one of 14 Dems who
voted FOR the tax cut, but then he voted AGAINST the final budget
resolution. Obviously, Gillespie had "misspoken, but Russert
let it go by the first time!)
Carville was way
off stride. He said Sen. Johnson and Miller were “both great
men” but that they were wrong, trying to contain the
discrepancy to just a couple of senators. Good luck, James,
on this one!!! The GOP will have every Dem Senator and Rep
lined up before the firing squad…so I guess is doesn’t
matter HOW Johnson voted…
Meanwhile
Gillespie tried to use spending on the war and homeland defense
as an escape hatch on the problem with the budget. Russert
countered, “But that’s not over 10
years…” Gillespie tried to say that “Tax
cuts will stimulate economic growth, that’s what happened in
the 90’s…That’s why the Democrats won’t
campaign against it….”
Carville chided
using war as an excuse and cited “page 415 of Bush’s
own Budget. The country is going to wake up and see that this is
the most colossal mistake made in years.”
Russert wound up
the discussion by asking which would be the most important issue
in 2002.
Carville said that in 2002 “Somebody has to stand up for people” and cited the “breaking of promises to the poor people in Nevada,” referring to the nuke waste issue, and how the Administration is “running wild…It stands up for industry against people at every juncture and has taken $ 2 trillion out of Social Security….”
Russert picked
up on Nevada—“those 4 electoral votes, if they had gone
to Al Gore. Has Bush damaged his credibility?” Gillespie
said “This is in the public's interest—I don’t
think he thought about the Electoral College.” Oh,
please, Ed!
Carville
responded, “He didn’t think about the electoral votes
when he said he wouldn’t do it?? This is a classic example
of someone saying he would do something to get votes then turning
around. They never had had any intention of him keeping his
word…it’s about people vs. power.” “People
vs. power”-- which sounds an awful like Gore’s populist
campaign, which has been dismissed as being a mistake by much of
the Dem leadership…
Finally, it was
time for a 2002 election prediction. Russert intoned the 73%
Bush popularity number and asked if the GOP would expand their
margin in the House and take back the Senate. Carville looked a
little uncertain and at a loss, but managed to say that he’s
“very encouraged, we just have to make our point and
we’ll be fine.”Question: WHICH POINT???Gillespie
didn’t get a chance to say anything as Russert did the
cutaway to commercial and the upcoming Meet the Press minute.
The Meet the
Press minute was a clip of Carl Sandburg from 1957 commenting on
Abraham Lincoln. The thought crossed my mind about how Carl
Sandburg would react to being a "Meet the Press” minute
in 2002 and what he would think of the likes of Shrub in the
Presidency. Then I wondered about what Abe Lincoln would
think about Shrub parked in the White House, for that
matter…Then I realized wondering about wondering was getting
me nowhere since we’re stuck in 2002 with Shrub and a public
that does NO wondering unless it’s about the three
S’s—feeding the stomach, sex, and sports.
No wonder I
watch Pride and Prejudice for therapy….
Copyright 2002, Gloria R. Lalumia
More Stuff at: http://www.zianet.com/insightanalytical