AP interview: Obama talks about the negative attacks and their effect on his family

[maximusveritas]

Good little interview via the AP:
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/12/21/america/Obama-AP-Interview.php

"So far, I think, attempts to go negative in a way that's not policy-based have backfired on the people who have gone in that direction," Obama said during a brief interview with The Associated Press after a town hall-style meeting at an American Legion hall.

"I would distinguish between ads that I would say maybe mischaracterize my positions but had to do with policy, versus personal attacks or attempts to go at my character or those things. In which case, I will answer them swiftly and truthfully if they're false and trust in the voters," Obama said.

In the case of Iowa voters, I don't think they're going to let him down.

When his daughters have seen any negative coverage, Obama said the girls go straight to him or their mother, Michelle.

"We've got a great relationship with our girls where if something bothers them, they ask us. They ask us questions about that. We don't want to stoke their fears about this stuff, but we want to make sure anything that comes up, they come and they talk to us about it," he said.

That part encourages me. I had been worried about how his girls were dealing with all the attention on their father. But it sounds like Barack and Michelle have done a great job of handling it.

[MADem]

1. He'd be well advised to follow the lead of other candidates and keep the kids OUT OF IT.

Once you start using them, they become fair game. Look at the thrashing poor Amy Carter got. Hell, even Chelsea Clinton, who was kept out of the spotlight, got crapped on.

If he's smart, he'll establish ground rules EARLY.

[bigdarryl]

2. You sound like a fuckin Clinton lapdog

[MADem]

3. Well, I am not, but what would make you come to that ASININE conclusion, pray tell?

I note that he should keep his kids away from the mangy media, and that makes me a Clintonista?

Where the fuck did you learn logic? K Mart University?

:eyes:

[Catherine Vincent]

19. Wow!

[MNDemNY]

28. If you'd pull tour head out of BHO's ass, you could hear more clearly.

[BeyondGeography]

6. Why do you automatically assume that he brought up the kids?

His teenaged drug use has been under the microscope and it's an obvious question for a reporter to ask.

[MADem]

15. Why do YOU automatically assume I even THINK he brought them up?

My advice is GENERIC. It applies to anyone with kids in this race.

Man, there are a lot of fucking hypersensitive people around this place lately--so ANXIOUS to take perceived OFFENSE.

My advice is the exact same for Chris Dodd--and I'd dish it out to him too, only HE didn't get a fancy-schmanzy AP interview, now, did he?

Where are the Doddites, anxious to leap down my throat in "outrage?"

Jesus H. Christ.

The level of discourse here fucking SUCKS of late.

[BeyondGeography]

18. Here's what you wrote

"He'd be well advised to follow the lead of other candidates and keep the kids OUT OF IT."

That suggests he brought them up, doesn't it?

[MADem]

20. It only suggests that to a nitwit who cannot read or write english for comprehension.

Here, let me shake it out with a simple little EXAMPLE for the clueless and slow witted amongst us:

Reporter: Let's talk about your kids.

Obama: I want to leave my kids out of this effort. They're young, and I don't want them exposed to the negative aspects of the campaign.

Reporter: Oh, OK, cool. Moving on, your plans for the economy in 2009?

Now see, in that example, Obama didn't bring up the kids, now, did he? The REPORTER did. Gee--such a concept, that Obama can RESPOND without being the "instigator!" Accordingly, my statement SUGGESTED ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

You need to get over yourself, and stop ASS-uming what you THINK people think. Because you're ALWAYS, ALWAYS WRONG, and your wrongness is getting tiresome. You are OVEREAGER to find insult. That shit is in YOUR head, pal, and it really is unbecoming.

It makes you look like a jerk, a fool and a blowhard, and you're not any of those things.

So stop acting in that fashion. And stop crapping on people who want to discuss things in context.

[BeyondGeography]

21. When's the last time you heard a decent reporter say "OK, cool?"

I'll ignore the rest of your post because I like you, too.

[MADem]

22. You'd be surprised.

I've dealt with the press in my former life, more than I'll cop to if questioned aggressively for official purposes, and plenty of them are pretty mellow when you are speaking "on background" or "off the record" or "not for direct attribution." They aren't shy about buying you drinks to persuade you to loosen up and chit chat, too.

Some of them will even read back your quotes to you, to make sure that you expressed yourself clearly and that what you said is what you meant--that your quote provides the plain "truth" of your assertion. Some will even let you decide how you want to be identified--are you a "Senior military official" or a "Source close to the investigation" or a "DOD representative" or something else entirely?

And yeah, they've used the 'cool' word. Really.

The good ones are VERY good. The hacks are what they are. But I've been fortunate to know a few good ones.

[BeyondGeography]

24. I work with reporters

it's the business mag press but we have some good daily guys who are in withdrawal from the newspaper grind. If they depend on long-term relationships with sources they'll play along as you described. The day-to-day copy demands of a campaign that will likely be over in six weeks probably make for a less civilized atmosphere.

Obama might have played it the way you suggest; not a bad idea at all. He's more the type to deal with stuff and move on; his answer was harmless enough and shouldn't elicit any follow-ups. One could also say that putting a wall around the kids would get someone to write about the evident stress that this is placing on the newbie. His answer won't allow for that angle to play out either.

[MADem]

25. The ones who cover DOD are there for the long haul, year in, year out.

Those were the ones I knew.

If they treat you fairly, you pass your relief on to them. If they treat you like shit, you cut them off and warn others as well.

There are many good ones on that beat. They're smart enough not to cut off their noses to spite their faces.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

4. What a joke. Have his daughters seen any negative coverage? Of course they haven't!

Nobody has.

There have been no overt attacks on his character.

The only thing he could conceivably be worried bout his small children seeing would be drug discussions, but that's something he raised himself talking to kids, so it's not something he's uncomfortable with.

Are we supposed to think his daughters are likely to be traumatized by someone saying his health care plan doesn't include mandates? (or whatever other pedestrian politics people are claiming as a personal attack these days)

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

5. What's with the "negative attacks" buzz word these days. Are there positive attacks?

[maximusveritas]

Why don't you ask yourself?

You used the phrase earlier today:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3867527
Along with the phrase "ugly negativity". Is there such a thing as pretty negativity?

Whatever. As long as you realize you're in the minority of people who likes this kind of campaigning.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

9. You're right. I'm busted.

But ugly can reasonably modify negativity. I wouldn't call everything John Kerry ever said about Bush "ugly" though it was properly negative.

But negative attack really is redundant. Even when I use it.

As for "liking" this kind of campaigning, I don't think that's my feeling. Nobody likes it. I cringe at it, but it's an inevitable part of the political dynamic, and not entirely without value.

[sjdnb]

14. Reminds me of a ridiculous reason I was given when one of my kid's

teachers explained why none of the kids read aloud ... "It might embarrass someone"

Well, heck, if you're gonna run for President of the USA, on would think you'd have the skin and knowledge enough to take a few hits on your record or opinions.

If not, maybe you should not get in the game.

[AtomicKitten]

7. On a lighter note ...

his girls are precious

[annie1]

12. :D. Super cute

[goclark]

30. Adorable and smart !

Those two apples don't far too far from the TREES that birth them.

[sjdnb]

8. I hate when candidates use their family in an attempt to garner sympathy

If he didn't realize other candidates would amplify his negatives to their advantage, this dude has no place in a General Election.

He put his family here, it should come as no surprise that, sometimes, campaigns get rough.

For him to now play the 'victim card', using his children, only tells me that either he is not ready to be the President OR is being disingenuous. Either way, given the cold shoulder he gave that poor lady in NH, with this latest 'ploy' he's proven to me that he is not anywhere close enough to being prepared, experienced, or knowledgeable to get my vote.

[annie1]

11. it was probably in response to a very specific question

[sjdnb]

17. So what? Fact is when you start using your kids

to garner sympathy for/promote your agenda/poll numbers, no matter WHAT the question, it becomes apparent that you put your own ambitions above anything else. Or, you'd have taken this into consideration before jumping into such a contest.

[Catherine Vincent]

10. Oh dear.

I hope that Obama doesn't bring his precious daughters into this mess. Please leave them out of it. I beg of you.

[maximusveritas]

13. They've always been a part of it

Obama can no more bring them into it than he keep them out of it.
This article talks about the other candidate's children:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2004008656_kids12.html

They're a part of the campaign and you're going to be asked about them as a candidate.

[Catherine Vincent]

16. Let's hope this is the only time he'll mention the effect of the campaign on his daughters.

Traveling with him is one thing. Hopefully he will keep it at that. Edwards too.

[FredScuttle]

23. It's a shame Obama wasn't concerned about daughters across the land when he hired an "ex-gay" clown

to insult gays and lesbians

[ruggerson]

26. Gays can't be victims

only presidential candidates who write about cocaine use and then get upset when someone else references it.

[FredScuttle]

27. Natch

Also a victim - a presidential candidate who co-opts the right-wing framing of the Social Security "crisis", gets called to task for it by a prominent columnist and the candidate's supporters attack....the columnist. :eyes:

[BenDavid]

29. so obama talks about negative ads and then brings his

children into the conversation without being asked about his children.....

As for the Hannah Montana comment. I doubt serious that Billy Ray Cyrus will endorse any candidate this go round, knowing his daughter Miley is viewed in republican, democratic and independent households, but I do know Billy Ray supported WJC in 96 and was aboard the train with Chelsea and Bill, and Bill back in 96 paid tribute to Billy Ray's dad at one of their stops....

Ben David