THIRD EVENING POST:  JULY 30,  2008

Posted at 10:57 p.m. ET

A REAGAN STORY

As I've said here many times, we have an informed, vibrant readership at Urgent Agenda.  And many of our readers have had great experiences.  Last week we published a report by a reader in Afghanistan.  Tonight I thought I'd pass on to you a recollection of Ronald Reagan by a reader who had official status in the White House.  It's a good story.  I think you'll like it:

President Reagan was an inveterate joke teller and practical joker - some of this has been known to the public, and much of the press knew it during his time in office, but they never could get the man right.

A good friend of mine who was in the White House at the same time was an audio-visual specialist and an Air Force master sergeant. He told me this story right after it happened, and repeated it several times:

Every time the president made an address from the Oval Office, wiring had to be temporarily installed from the mixer boxes outside to the microphones on the desk. Reagan worked in the Oval every day and scheduling to get the AV guys in was done by the military aide.  He scheduled the wiring for the times when the President was out and about. A call would come that the office was available, but that it would have to be a fast install, as the boss would only be gone a short while.

So there are Bill and George on their knees running wires and gaffer's tape across the carpet.   George is under the president's desk pulling it tight, and Bill is out by the door hooking wires up to the mixer.   George, still under the desk, feels a sharp pull on the wire and pulls back, thinking that Bill is needing more cable to make his connection.   George pulls back a little to get his loop up under the desk and, in return, the cable gets pulled back again, harder.   George says, "Hey come on - quit screwing around - he's going to back in just a few minutes."  

The cable jerks again and George comes out from under the desk, all fired up, and when he stands he sees - of course - the president of the United States kneeling down with the cable in hand.   The boss says, "Well, I don't know who he is, but you'd better hurry up because he'll be right back," and laughs that big Reagan laugh.   George about dies right there.  The military aide rushes in, and stops dead, because he'd lost track of where everybody was...and did not see the humor. But military aides aren't supposed to have a sense of humor anyway

By the way, I was at the ranch when Reagan made the, "We start bombing Russia in five minutes," air test. THAT caused some consternation, and they put a big ON AIR light up where he couldn't miss it. But Ronald Reagan had been a radio announcer before anybody in the room was born. He knew he had a live mike and he knew exactly what he was saying.  He was a brilliant man and one hell of a tactical politician.

That he was.

July 30, 2008.      Permalink          

SECOND EVENING POST:  JULY 30,  2008

Posted at 7:34 p.m.

NEW POLL

A new CNN poll out in the last hour has Obama up seven. You can be sure much will be made of this, especially on CNN, but please note the details.  The sample is far smaller than in our tracking polls, and it 's a poll among registered, rather than likely voters.  The RV polls tend to exaggerate Obama's strength.

We'll get a clearer picture in the next week or so, as Obama's travels begin to fade from public view.

Frank Luntz, an excellent political commentator, was on TV last night wondering if Obama has reached some kind of plateau.  He can't seem to break beyond about 47 percent of the vote, although the new CNN poll has him at 51, which, compared with other surveys, seems high.  Rasmussen has 48, Gallup 46.

Has Obama peaked?  I can't possibly know.  But it seems to me that, far from being an "unknown" at this point, he may be too well known, and may have started to wear down the voters.  You can only take so much of the messianic style. 

But you can't beat somebody with nobody, so let's see if McCain becomes the necessary somebody.

July 30, 2008.      Permalink          

FIRST EVENING POST:  JULY 30,  2008

Posted at 6:48 p.m. ET

McCAIN ATTACKS

John McCain is stepping up his attacks on Obama, and I think it's having an effect.  Of course, some, like The New York Times, are expressing shock that anyone would criticize the new religious icon, come to save us, but I'm glad McCain isn't deterred.  I haven't, by the way, noticed the Obama people holding their fire.  But, since they're Heavenly, I'm sure their fire is just pixie dust.

The latest McCain assault rings true:

Republican presidential candidate John McCain opened up a new line of attack on Democratic rival Barack Obama on Wednesday, labeling him a celebrity without the strength to bring change to Washington.

McCain's campaign launched a new television advertisement to run in key battleground states called "Celeb" that uses images of Britney Spears and Paris Hilton and Obama's speech in Berlin last week to accuse Obama of being all talk and little action.

"Is he ready to lead?" it asks.

The answer is no.  How can a man lead when no one knows exactly what he believes?

At the same time, McCain described himself as an independent-minded politician with a history of bucking authority and said Obama has shown little more than strong speaking skills.

"The bottom line is that Senator Obama's words, for all their eloquence and passion, don't mean all that much, and that's the problem with Washington," McCain said.

McCain took direct aim at Obama's chief selling point, that he represents change Americans are searching for ahead of the November 4 election.

"Sen. Obama doesn't have the strength to speak openly and directly about he will address the serious challenges that confront America. How will he be strong enough to really change Washington?" he said.

Perfectly legitimate question.  Judging from last week's overseas performance, Senator Obama seems more interested in changing the world, or maybe even the universe.

McCain's negative turn came as his campaign senses a chink in Obama's armor following the Democrat's European tour, which did not appear to give Obama a noticeable bounce in the polls, despite drawing a crowd of 200,000 in Berlin.

No, no, they don't poll the crowd in Berlin.  Y'see, they don't vote in American elections, although Obama may try to change that, too.

Go John.  You can win this.

July 30,  2008.      Permalink          

SECOND AFTERNOON POST:  JULY 30,  2008

Posted at 3:52 p.m. ET

L.A. LAW

Reader Ken Braithwaite alerts us to a ridiculous story out of Los Angeles, source of many ridiculous stories. The City Council, ever mindful of the need to protect the citizens from all enemies foreign and domestic, has taken a stand that will inspire men down through the ages:

The City Council voted unanimously Tuesday to place a moratorium on new fast food restaurants in an impoverished swath of the city with a proliferation of such eateries and above average rates of obesity.

The yearlong moratorium is intended to give the city time to attract restaurants that serve healthier food. The action, which the mayor must still sign into law, is believed to be the first of its kind by a major city to protect public health.

"Our communities have an extreme shortage of quality foods," City Councilman Bernard Parks said.

Can you imagine Churchill on this:  "No matter what Burger King does to us, we shall never give in.  We shall fight them in the kitchens.  We shall fight them at the fries counter..."

Oh, the moments of greatness.

Representatives of fast-food chains said they support the goal of better diets but believe they are being unfairly targeted. They say they already offer healthier food items on their menus.

"It's not where you eat, it's what you eat," said Andrew Puzder, president and chief executive of CKE Restaurants, parent company of Carl's Jr. "We were willing to work with the city on that, but they obviously weren't interested."

Why would they be interested when the trick is to find someone to blame.  Blame the parents?  They're oppressed.  Blame the teenagers who spend their cash for fat foods?  They're used by the system.  Blame anyone but those little fingers that shove down the groceries.

Get this one:

The moratorium, which can be extended up to a year, only affects standalone restaurants, not eateries located in malls or strip shopping centers. It defines fast-food restaurants as those that do not offer table service and provide a limited menu of pre-prepared or quickly heated food in disposable wrapping.

Table service?  Is that what they're after?  Table service?  Can you just imagine the mentality of the people who voted for this?  Talk about elitism.  Many of the people in the affected communities are poor or financially marginal.  They can't afford table service.  But I'm sure, in the next year, members of the City Council will instruct them in the finer points of French cuisine.  And do remember the wine.

July 30, 2008.      Permalink          

AFTERNOON POST:  JULY 30,  2008

Posted at 2:11 p.m. ET

TRACKERS

Bounce?  Do you remember a bounce?  So Barack Obama traveled to all those countries, broke out all those new shirts, had to perform at a big rally in Berlin, and was forced to act interested in a meeting with the British prime minister.  And what does he get?

Nothing.

It's just so unfair.  This is not change he can believe in.

Both our standard trackers for the day are out.  Rasmussen, as Snippeted below, has Obama up two.  Gallup, which had him up nine over the weekend, now has him settling back to four.  That's an average of three, pretty much where Obama was before the American Express tour. 

We still must note that neither tracker has had McCain in the lead in recent memory.  But Obama's inability to make the sale may not portend well for the convention bounce he'd be expected to receive after he makes his acceptance speech.

Is there something wrong?

Yes, I'd say there's something very wrong in Obama's campaign, which observers have given high marks for organization and efficiency.  The candidate is wrong.  He's gone way over the top in rhetoric and pomposity, culminating in yesterday's Grand Tour of the nation's capital as presumptive president.  Americans don't like this. 

The Obama people are too smart to let this keep happening.  Look for a Nixon moment, a modern-day Checkers speech.  There is no shame in Obamaland.

July 30, 2008.      Permalink          

WEDNESDAY:  JULY 30,  2008

Posted at 7:30 a.m. ET

MILBANK

The juiciest of the juicy.  We don't normally depend on the Washington Post to take a major swing at liberals, but the paper does have its glorious moments.  Today Dana Milbank breaks the silence and finally says what many of us have been thinking - that Barack Obama is a spoiled child with an out-of-control ego, and that even those who have jumped through burning hoops for him are getting disgusted. 

Barack Obama has long been his party's presumptive nominee. Now he's becoming its presumptuous nominee.

Lovely, just lovely.

Fresh from his presidential-style world tour, during which foreign leaders and American generals lined up to show him affection, Obama settled down to some presidential-style business in Washington yesterday. He ordered up a teleconference with the (current president's) Treasury secretary, granted an audience to the Pakistani prime minister and had his staff arrange for the chairman of the Federal Reserve to give him a briefing. Then, he went up to Capitol Hill to be adored by House Democrats in a presidential-style pep rally.

Along the way, he traveled in a bubble more insulating than the actual president's. Traffic was shut down for him as he zoomed about town in a long, presidential-style motorcade, while the public and most of the press were kept in the dark about his activities...

The Chosen One favored the Capitol as one destination.

Capitol Police cleared the halls -- just as they do for the actual president. The Secret Service hustled him in through a side door -- just as they do for the actual president.

Inside, according to a witness, he told the House members, "This is the moment . . . that the world is waiting for," adding: "I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions."

Today America, tomorrow the world!

Some say the supremely confident Obama -- nearly 100 days from the election, he pronounces that "the odds of us winning are very good" -- has become a president-in-waiting. But in truth, he doesn't need to wait: He has already amassed the trappings of the office, without those pesky decisions.

And...

The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder reported last week that Obama has directed his staff to begin planning for his transition to the White House, causing Republicans to howl about premature drape measuring.

And more ego:

The Project for Excellence in Journalism reported yesterday that Obama dominated the news media's attention for a seventh straight week. But there are signs that the Obama campaign's arrogance has begun to anger reporters.

In the latest issue of the New Republic, Gabriel Sherman found reporters complaining that Obama's campaign was "acting like the Prom Queen" and being more secretive than Bush. The magazine quoted the New York Times' Adam Nagourney's reaction to the Obama campaign's memo attacking one of his stories: "I've never had an experience like this, with this campaign or others."

The supreme candidate permitted the prime minister of Pakistan to meet with him:

Later, Obama's aides issued an official-sounding statement, borrowing the language of White House communiques: "I had a productive and wide-ranging discussion. . . . I look forward to working with the democratically elected government of Pakistan."

Isn't there a formality in November?  I thought I'd heard.

"I think this can be an incredible election," Obama said later. "I look forward to collaborating with everybody here to win the election."

Win the election? Didn't he do that already?

I hope this Milbank piece opens the floodgates.  Who does Obama think he is?  His behavior is disgraceful, entirely inappropriate.  In 1948 one Thomas E. Dewey also acted as if the election were a formality, and wound up making a concession speech.  May history repeat itself.

July 30, 2008.      Permalink          

BY THE GALLON

Well, Mr. Milbank certainly hasn't impressed The New York Times.  They're drinking so much Kool-Aid over there that the delivery trucks can't keep up.  Today, as if proving to a legal standard how in the tank for Barack they remain, The Times tut tutted Senator McCain for, of all things, criticizing the Selected One:

On July 3, news reports said Senator John McCain, worried that he might lose the election before it truly started, opened his doors to disciples of Karl Rove from the 2004 campaign and the Bush White House. Less than a month later, the results are on full display. The candidate who started out talking about high-minded, civil debate has wholeheartedly adopted Mr. Rove’s low-minded and uncivil playbook.

In recent weeks, Mr. McCain has been waving the flag of fear (Senator Barack Obama wants to “lose” in Iraq), and issuing attacks that are sophomoric (suggesting that Mr. Obama is a socialist) and false (the presumptive Democratic nominee turned his back on wounded soldiers).

Memo to The Times:  1) If Obama's ideas had been followed, the war in Iraq would be lost;  2) Some of Obama's positions border on socialism;  3) He didn't visit wounded soldiers in Germany, and a visit could surely have been arranged.

So much for accuracy.

And Mr. McCain has not stopped there. Taking a page straight from Mr. Bush and Mr. Rove, Mr. McCain has been trying to distract voters from his support for an unending war in Iraq by portraying Mr. Obama as unpatriotic and weak. This line of attack reached a crescendo last week when Mr. McCain fumed and fussed and went to places with European-sounding names while Mr. Obama traveled abroad.

When did he fume and fuss?  And why is the Iraq War unending?  We seem to be winning.  Anyone go to journalism school there?

Obviously, Mr. Obama is untested as a commander in chief and his trip was intended to reassure voters. But Mr. McCain is as untested in this area as Mr. Obama, and it is hard to imagine a worse role model than the one Mr. McCain seems to be adopting: President Bush.

Wait.  Did I read that correctly?  John McCain is as untested in military command as Barack Obama?  You know, it must've been a computer glitch at The Times.  Words just floated in.  Don't blame the scholar/journalists. 

Now you know why The Times is no longer called "the newspaper of record."  The newspaper of racket might be more like it.

July 30, 2008.       Permalink          

WOMEN FOR OBAMA?

That's what the luncheon invitation said. But Carol Martin of the Chicago Sun-Times reports that the women attending a big Chicago fundraiser for the saint aren't the women his campaign needs.  In fact, he has a woman problem:

You wouldn't have known it from this mostly well-dressed, mostly well-heeled crowd. Many of the women, black and white, young and old, were early donors who gave money back when Barack Obama was a long shot, and they were gladly giving again now. A lovely lunch of organic chicken prepared by a renowned chef, Alice Waters, brought in somewhere between $400,000 and $700,000 for the Obama Victory fund.

But the women Obama needs right now are the ones who do not dine downtown. They're the ones who can't afford organic anything, forced to choose between a gallon of gas and a gallon of milk because they can't buy both on the same day.

Oh, but those who know must guide the little people.  Isn't that right?

A few hours after leaving the "Women for Obama" luncheon, I ran into Sarah, not her real name. I've known her for a few years. A single mom, she free-lances, working as many jobs as she can to support two growing boys. She dreams of a permanent gig with benefits, but it's still just a dream.

A 37-year-old Democrat, she is also a college grad and a news junkie who has watched this campaign like a hawk. She surprised me with her anger Tuesday, saying she's voting for McCain.

To Sarah, Barack Obama is like the organic chicken at lunch. Sleek, elegant, beautifully prepared. Too cool.

Send Sarah the Dana Milbank column.  Have her distribute it.

The Obama campaign, always swift, is on the case.  They're trying, first of all, to appease the Hillary crowd, but it may not be enough...because that's not where the problem lies.  The problem is much more basic:

The Obamas, for their part, have in recent weeks spoken warmly and respectfully of Hillary Clinton and she of them. On Monday, Mrs. Obama called Sen. Clinton an "extraordinary woman" and added she was "thrilled to welcome Dana Singiser to the campaign as our new senior adviser for women."

Singiser, who worked for Clinton's campaign and Senate office before that, told me Tuesday by phone, "We're working really hard for all women voters and leaving no stone unturned."

They may need to try offering more macaroni and cheese.

Yup.  That's right.  It's what they used to call in politics the "lunch pail" issue.  And Obama's super-elite crowd doesn't seem to get it.

Some observers just assume that Obama will have the women's vote because he's so "attractive."  Rethink that.  The same assumption was made about Kennedy and the women's vote in 1960.  But Nixon, who may not have won female hearts, won the majority of their votes. 

July 30, 2008.      Permalink