Kerry Staffer's Attack 'On Background' Backfires

[demdave]

Sen. John F. Kerry's campaign spokeswoman is deeply unhappy with the New York Times' chief political correspondent for quoting her criticism of Howard Dean.
The reason? The Massachusetts Democrat's team made the attack in an e-mail to reporters that contained a note asking that it be treated on "background," attributed only to a Democratic campaign. Adam Nagourney refused to go along.

After the capture of Saddam Hussein, Kerry campaign press secretary Stephanie Cutter listed past Dean statements in arguing that his opposition to the war in Iraq was "politically driven." Nagourney, ignoring the not-for-attribution request, wrote that this reflected campaign aides' concern that they not be viewed as politically exploiting a foreign policy victory.

Nagourney, who previously outed "background" e-mails from aides to Sens. Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.), John Edwards (N.C.) and Bob Graham (Fla.), said: "If someone wants to go off the record, call me up, and I'll be glad to negotiate. But you cannot do it preemptively. I will not let someone attack someone else anonymously, which is what the Kerry campaign is trying to do."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A6146-2003Dec16?language=printer

[Robb]

1. Fair point

I seem to recall in every movie the shady person says "Is this off the record?" and before they go on, the reporter nods her head.

Just sending stuff in and saying "don't quote me on this, but..." is a cheap way to use a reporter as a press release tool.

:shrug:

[Patriot_Spear]

2. Nice.

I guess if you work around republicans long enough, you start to pick up elements of their bad character- even voting for their terrible policies.

For the record I like John Kerry and consider him a good Senator- however this kind of activity by his campaign manager is dissappointing, if not surprising.

[LeftCoast]

3. The sad stench of desperation and scorched earth...

It's almost as if some of the candidates, seeing the hand-writing on the wall have decided, if they can't be President then neither can Dean. Sad, sad, sad...

[Patriot_Spear]

5. Very possibly true...

'Better to reign in Hell than to serve in Heaven'?

I hope that's not the case, but we'll see. Kerry's a millionaire, he'll come out better than us working stiffs.

[PATRICK]

4. Strategy

Or lack thereof. Of course this never would have happened to Rove whether the intrepid reporter was on a casual address book or not. And he had done it before which shows there is no astute staffer doing any of the required semi-paranoid checking which is vital in the poisoned media atmosphere.

Might I repeat again for the umpteenth time that "leaks" by Dems against Dems always are made to hurt the party the most. The "professionals" always stroll into the ambush with targets strapped on their backs. Apparently Kerry hasn't fired enough people yet.

So, indignation aside, the real question is do any of our champions get the situation correctly yet? Each flaw that the WH practices daily to the most diabolical level will be made to stand out like tar on a saintly white robe. You can be wiley and clever without being a monster. but you can't stray into the bad guys moral territory like a country bumpkin.

[mitchtv]

6. I have supported Kerry for a long time....

No more, he is off my short list. The negative campaigning is working , .. against him.

[Patriot_Spear]

7. Well Said. n/t

[Debi]

9. That should be the standard for all candidates

It's one thing to say "I disagree with that candidate" or "that candidates record differs from their comments" but to try to do blind 'did you hear such-n-such about so-n-so?' is WRONG and hey, aren't reporters supposed to dig up their own dirt??

[Old and In the Way]

8. Wondering if Nagourney has ever published administration

views "off the recod" without attribution. If not. OK. If so, he's a whore.