October 25, 2008
Houses in Detroit are selling for $1000, according to the Guardian UK. Then you could fly to Manhattan every day…
What can you buy in America for $1,000? A flat-screen television, perhaps. A weekend break in the sun. Or a three-bedroom suburban home with stripped wood floors and a garage in the country’s motor capital.
October 25, 2008
October 25, 2008
By Ray LeMoine
Here’s a selection of photos I took at the Democratic National Convention. Yes, it’s a few months late, but I’m lazy. I did take some pictures of Obama, but these pictures omit the star and instead show the 80,000-man scene.
The stage is set for Obama and I’m sitting in the last row.
They had a bunch of “regular” people give speeches on the Jumbotrons. Of course, none were black. Most looked like this confused white guy, Obama’s target demo…
The Colorado sky at sunset streaked by a Homeland Security chopper.
“Take em and wave em!” said an Obama volunteer handing out flags and “CHANGE” signs.
T-minus 2 minutes to Obama…
JumbObama.
CNN glow…
Indie filmmaker.
After the speech, the Greco set goes boom.
They even has a floating camera, just like the NFL.
Tears of joy 1.
Tears of joy 2.
Walking out.
The end…
October 22, 2008
By Ray LeMoine
Obama’s Closing Strategy? Focus on Narrative and Attacks
David Axelrod pic by Chip Somedivilla
David Axelrod, Obama’s chief strategist, is running the finest political campaign of my lifetime. The campaign just raised $150 million in a month, bringing Obama’s total to $600 million, the most ever. Nothing’s been more important in 2008 than “the narrative,” or specifically, the candidates’ “personal narratives.” And no one is better at spinning a “great story” about a candidate than Axelrod, a Chicago Tribune journalist turned ad man cum strategist. Born in New York, Axelrod’s conception of politics comes down to selling the candidate in the final weeks with a barrage of advertising. As TNR reported yesterday (in an ass-kissng, exhaustive profile):
Unlike many consultants, who impose their own messages and buzzwords on candidates–so much so that their clients all begin to sound alike–Axelrod is known for crafting campaigns that are centered on, and uniquely suited to, his candidates’ biographies.
And TNR points out Axelrod’s especially good at selling black candidates, like Deval Patrick when he ran for Mass Governor:
Like most Axelrod campaigns, Patrick’s focused more on the candidate’s biography than policy: Patrick’s most effective TV ad dwelled on his life story–“raised by a single mother,” “worked his way up from poverty to Harvard Law”–while giving short shrift to, as it described them, Patrick’s “honest ideas to lift our state.”
With literally hundreds of millions on hand, Axelrod’s getting to apply his methods virtually uncontested (Obama’s outspending McCain on ads by 4-1).
But the emphasis on personal narrative is not really a good thing, since it removes issues in favor of “great stories.” As Joan Didion writes this week in the NYRB:
For at least some months it had been clear that we were living in a different America, one that had moved from feeling rich to feeling poor. Many had seen a mandate for political change. Yet in the end the old notes had been struck, the old language used. The prospect for any given figure had been evaluated, now as before, by his or her “story.” She has “a wonderful story” we had heard about Condoleezza Rice during her 2005 confirmation hearings. “We all admire her story.” “I think she’s formidable,” Senator Biden said about Governor Palin a few weeks ago. “She has a great story. She has a great family.”
Senator Biden himself was said to have “a great story,” the one that revolved around the death of his first wife and child and taking the train from Washington to Wilmington to be with his surviving children. Senator McCain, everyone agreed, had “a great story.” Now as then, the “story” worked to “humanize” the figure under discussion, which is to say to downplay his or her potential for trouble. Condoleezza Rice’s “story,” for example, had come down to her “doing an excellent job as provost of Stanford” (this had kept getting mentioned, as if everyone at Fox News had come straight off the provost beat) and being “an accomplished concert pianist.”
But in the same issue of the Review, Paul Krugman notes that in the last few weeks Obama’s shifted from rhetoric and narrative to attack:
But all of that has changed in the past few weeks. Part of what has changed is, of course, the intensification of the financial crisis—the fall of Lehman, the panic in the markets, and the Bush administration’s admission that a huge government bailout was necessary—which has focused the electorate’s mind. But some credit should also be given to Obama, who responded to his sagging poll numbers by becoming much more effective at delivering the Democratic economic message. These days, Obama doesn’t try to place blame equally on right and left, he denounces “an economic philosophy that says we should give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyone else,” and describes the crisis as “a final verdict on this failed philosophy.” He sounds, in other words, a lot like Bill Clinton in 1992.
And that’s a good thing.So the election will be a referendum on conservative economic policies after all. And while nothing in politics is certain, the odds are that this referendum will indeed produce a big victory for Obama and his party. What they’ll do with that victory is another question, but for now, at least, the prospects for a new New Deal are looking bright again.
In the TNR piece, Axelrod’s people and the story’s writer, Jason Zengerle, deny that they’re using attacks to take down McCain:
“There are certain things we’re not going to say in ads,” explains John Del Cecato, a partner in Axelrod’s firm who is a media adviser to Obama’s campaign. “I think sometimes people don’t understand our strategy: They think it’s either go for the jugular or you’re treating them with kid gloves. There is an in-between.”
Again and again, the ads that the Obama campaign has unveiled at the race’s most critical moments–on the eve of the Iowa caucus, in the aftermath of the global financial meltdown–have featured the candidate talking in an informal manner directly to the camera, much like John Street did in Philadelphia. By doing so, Obama has tried to show that he’s relatable and reasonable–not the radical figure white voters may have read about on the Internet and nothing like their worst images of black politicians.
Not so fast guys. Anyone watching TV the last few days, at least here in NY, where we see the prime time buys—NFL, MLB, MSNBC Hardball, etc—knows Obama’s biggest commercial is a direct attack on McCain, tieing him to Bush “90% of the time.” It’s a bold and brutal ad, effective too.
So, which is it? Is Obama using the final to weeks to sell himself, as TNR and Axelrod would like you to believe, or are they going on the offensive as Krugman and reality suggest? According to Tribune reporter David Mendell’s excellent biography, Obama: Promise to Power, Axelrod closes his campaigns with a mix of narrative and attack. Mendell considers both Axelrod and Obama to be at their best in the last two weeks of a campaign. It should be fun to watch it unfold on a national stage…especially in the form of a 30-minute prime time special to air on all the major networks October 29th.
October 20, 2008
By Ray LeMoine
I love the McCain campaign’s attempts to call Obama a socialist. Wait, didn’t Bush just nationalize the mortgage, banking, and insurance industries? But who cares what socialism actually means—or the fact that your party is practicing it—when you can just revisit the 50s! Joe McCarthy would be proud:
When reporters arrived at the rally, one speaker – it was unclear who it was, and he was already midway through his speech — was describing the upcoming presidential election as “a referendum on socialism,’’ echoing a charge that some Republicans have made in recent days suggesting that Mr. Obama’s tax cut plan was quasi-socialist.
Meanwhile, John Updike fears America’s returned to the 50s socially (not socialism) in his latest novel, The Widows of Eastwick, a sequel to the Cher movie The Witches of Eastwick:
And the younger people, the age we were when we were here — ssso tiresome, just from the look of them, toned-up young mothers driving their overweight boys in overweight S.U.V.’s to hockey practice 20 miles away, the young fathers castrated namby-pambies helping itty-bitty wifey with the housekeeping, spending all Saturday fussing around the lovely home. It’s the ’50s all over again, without the Russians as an excuse.
The burbs sure are boring, yes. But fear not, change is on the way. If the iBanker is dead, as NYmag reports today, then the Burb Dude is next. The last class of McMansion bros are already signed up, mortgage arms fixed. Sadly that model—big house, big car, all paid on credit—is over for the moment. Maybe someday we’ll return to our $500k house with nothing down ways. The economic crisis and subsequent nationalization spasm were GOP policy—though admittedly deregulation was Bill Clinton’s policy as well. Nonetheless, Obama is hardly a socialist. His health care plan was to the right of Hillary Clinton, so don’t buy into the GOP Red Scare. To ammend Updike’s quote, It’s the 50s all over again, but with McCain impersonating McCarthy.
But if this is the 50s, it’s good to remember that JFK and the 60s—America’s most revolutionary postwar decade–were next. Still, unlike the 50s we’re in a major economic downturn. Would the hippies have been able to flourish without riches earned by their 50s raised parents?
October 20, 2008
By Ray LeMoine
TNR runs a “Photo of the Day” of Palin holding her down syndrome baby Trig, the quarterback kid (named so because he’s tossed around like a football), at a rally in PA. But the baby wasn’t the best part of the pic. Rather, it’s the boots she’s wearing. So Death’s Head chic!
October 18, 2008
This being the post in which I call the election for Obama
The NYT, WaPost, and Drudge all lead with some varaition of this picture of Obama in front of what looks to be 100,000 people in St Louis today. Wow. The Times also reported that Obama is outspending McCain 4 to 1 on advertising. This week, Obama’s set to eclipse Bush’s record 2004 ad expedenture, $188 million. Obama’s spending has already increased to $30 million a week. His ad buys have been as high $6.5 million a day. (That total was purchased during football games last Sunday.) Add the $100 million the campaign raised last month and it’s looking really good for him. So good I’m saying he’s going win.
October 16, 2008
By Ray LeMoine
The Final Debate: McCain, Obama Dodge Questions and Point/Wag Fingers on Economy and War
Londonderry, NH: women look on at an Obama rally today.
24. That’s how many mentions “Joe the Plumber” got last night. Joe’s a real guy, from Ohio, who would be among the 1% of Americans affected by Obama’s tax increase among those who make over $250k per year.
Yup, that’s about the least important thing ever to be discussed in a political debate during times of economic collapse and war. Disgusting: Worrying about the top one percent of Americans when unemployment is expected to hit 9 or 10% by year’s end. Even if all 100% of the top 1% lost their jobs, that’s still 8-9% of the nation (who aren’t rich) out of work. Why didn’t John McCain address them last night? He could have mentioned how wages have decreased, when adjusted for inflation, over the past 5 years. Instead, McCain feigned like he didn’t care about “washed up terrorist” Bill Ayers even though his campaign has spent millions on ads linking said “terrorist” to Obama.
Obama, for his part, was pure class. He was a tad boring, but he outplayed McCain on every level save tax-raise fear mongering. In his answers, Obama was aloof and nuanced and charming—a cynical presidential mix for a cynical time. I’m sure the clip of Obama setting the facts straight on his relationship to ex-Weatherman Bill Ayers is being watched by a lot of people today. Unfortunately, Obama used a lot of the same language manipulation tactics (avoiding answering questions with facts and policy proposals, changing topics at random) as McCain. A few Brits I was watching with commented on how sad American politics is. It’s true: the lack of substance last was stunning.
After two dozen plus debates this election season, and almost two years of campaigning, Obama’s proving to be the greatest political talent of my lifetime. He’s caught some lucky breaks, yes, but O’s more of a natural than Bill Clinton. After all, Obama’s overcome not just his race but the Clintons themselves!
Sitting on a double digit poll lead with three weeks to go, Obama is so close to the White House. But I’m not sure it’s over. Both convetional wisdom and polling—the two most prominent tools used to guage a political race—have been ineffective this years. Polls were off all primary season. And since this year us unprecedented, with a black nominee, “conventional” thinking is unreliable. Nonetheless, Obama has a big cash advantage over McCain. The most visible effect of which will be Obama’s 30-minute prime time special to air on all networks on October 29th. If done correctly, the ad could propel Obama to victory…
October 10, 2008
By Ray LeMoine
Last month I worked production on a film about Sarah Palin in Alaska. It aired in the UK last week and was later placed on YouTube, receiving 8000 hits in a few days. Today the film was mysteriously taken off YouTube. I was told that if there was a copyright violation (there wasn’t—and all characters signed release forms), YouTube would contact us. They didn’t. So I tried to call them from the Contact Us page at the number below.
Our Address
You can contact YouTube at the address below.YouTube, LLC
901 Cherry Ave.
San Bruno, CA 94066
USA
Phone: +1 650-253-0000
Fax: +1 650-253-0001
But the Google/YouTube service recording said they “do not at this time provide customer service representatives.” I then made a formal press inquiry (see below) but have yet to hear back.
RE: Removal of Sarah Palin film
From: Ray LeMoine (Editor’s note: personal email address removed)
Sent: Sat 10/11/08 1:34 AM
To: press@youtube.com
Cc: (Editor’s note: again, personal email adress removed)Hello,
I am a journalist who worked production on a film about Sarah Palin in Alaska. The film aired in the UK. We placed it on YouTube and received some 8000 hits in a few days. Then today the film was yanked off YouTube. The film did not violate copyright and its characters all signed release forms. I was wondering who I can speak to for a comment on what happened. I also cced both the correspondent and director who worked on the film.
Here’s the link to the removed film:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1126074661319289940&ei=N9LrSJjqHYHCjgL1kJCcBg&q=journeyman+palin&vt=lfThanks,
Ray LeMoine
Oddly enough, the Palin film in question is about censorship. Specifically: Palin’s alleged attempts as mayor of Wasilla, AL, to remove the book “Pastor, I’m Gay” (really) from a public library in the mid-90s. If anyone knows about YouTube and this kind of hacker censorship, please contact me. I’m wondering if our First Amendment rights have been violated by a Palin pirate—and if this is a widespread campaign. If so, the layers of irony are endless. And would YouTube prosecute these hackers like kid who guessed Palin’s email password?
Anyway, the film is back on YouTube here.
October 10, 2008
By Ray LeMoine
Right now, the federal government owns partial stakes in America’s banks (though it’s still under negotiation), the insurance industry, the two biggest housing lenders’ “mortgage backed securities,” and has engineered the dissolution of traditional investment banking. And socialism is “a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership”. What exactly are economists asking about? Yes, Republican administration has effectively nationalized ourfreest markets. The question mark on the end of the Washington Post headline above should be erased.
Shiite Happens 