Campaign Video of the Day -- November 16, 2007

Today we have three videos for your consideration. The first is called "Chances I Had" and is Barack Obama's brand new New Hampshire ad about education and parental responsibility. It is very good.

The second is from a show moderated by Jonathan Rugman called Suzanne Goldenberg - Is America ready for Hillary? In it Suzanne Goldbenberg of the Guardian shares her views about Hillary and Bill with a British audience. She has some very good insights.

The third is from Hillary's campaign about caucusing and is called Caucusing Is Easy. It is today's winner because it features a kind of self-deprecation not normally associated with the Clinton campaign. Hill and Bill poking fun at themselves is exactly what her campaign needs. Frankly, I like the the video a lot.




If you encounter a video you would like to nominate, please email a link to proctoring.congress@gmail.com subject Campaign Video of the Day.

Oh, you might be wondering why I haven't picked video from last night's debate. I watched the debate and thought it was pretty good. Everybody behaved as you might expect. Nothing really newsworthy emerged. John Edwards needs to dial back just a bit, but other than that not much.

The real story coming out of last night's debate, however, is the way Wolf Blitzer and the CNN team asked questions obviously intended to make Hillary look good and everybody else look bad. If that kind of homer officiating occurred in an NFL game the officials would be gone the next week.

I was taken by the underlying pessimism of many of Wolf's questions. Why is it our politicians can't lead us to repair or restore American greatness? Why do we have to assume the Republicans are right when they take positions that assume America's best days are behind her and Americans can no longer solve problems.

More after the break.

Two of Wolf's lines of inquiry were particularly troubling. First, his questions forcing a choice between supporting democracy and human rights and American national security. Historically such choices have been made to protect American corporate interests tied to entrenched gangs of thieves trying to fight off democracy movements. Anyone remember Pinochet? The choice wasn't valid then and it isn't valid now. Ultimately supporting democracy and human rights leads to strong stable countries. If your goal is to keep other countries weak and unstable, supporting dictatorial regimes opposed human rights is just the ticket. Ultimately you end up with Pakistan--a nuclear power teetering on the brink of anarchy.

The second troubling line is the even uglier choice between the Constitution and the personal safety of Americans. That is the underlying assumption of everybody associated with the neo-cons, RNC and the Wolf Blitzer school of corporate media shills. For reasons known only to them the beltway gang seems to want to strip us of our freedom. Scaring us into surrendering our liberties is more likely to succeed than ripping them out of our cold dead hands. No one has ever demonstrated that we are any safer when we surrender our personal liberties. Do you really trust Dick Cheney when he says "I am from the government, I am here to protect you?"

Finally, after the debate Anderson Cooper's gang of Hillary supporters and Republicans left me spinning. I wondered if their segment was taped before the debate. It is pretty clear none of them watched it. Maybe somebody had to catch an airplane.

God, I long for real reporters. This CNN bunch of corporate shills really sucks.