Ben Tribbett Nails It!

By: Lowell
Published On: 9/10/2006 7:16:41 AM

It took him a couple days, but Ben Tribbett, aka "Not Larry Sabato," finally has nailed the true story on this "controversy" over Jim Webb's TV ad.  Ben writes, under the headline "NANCY NEVER SAW THE AD!!!!":

It was pointed out to me tonight that I was missing a huge part of the Nancy Reagan story.

Check out this quote from the letter her office sent to Jim Webb (emphasis mine):

"It has come to our attention that your Senatorial campaign in Virginia is using video footage of President Ronald Reagan, his photographs, and/or quotes in campaign materials and political advertisements, some of it very negative."

There is nothing negative in that commercial!!!

It's very clear from that sentence that the people writing Nancy's letter never saw the ad.

I was siding with Reagan's office on this before, because I think all due deference is due to Nancy after Ronald Reagan's death.  However, if Nancy Reagan's office is going to mail out letters without even watching the ad, then nothing else they say can be taken seriously.

Now, I certainly don't always see things the same way as Ben, but I always respect his political judgement and this time I couldn't agree more with his analysis.  Good work, Ben; you've NAILED it this time!
Oh, and by the way, does anyone really give a you-know-what about anything former Reagan Attorney General Ed "Iran Contra Scandal" Meese - who laughably claimed the other day that Webb's ad was "improper, unethical and very possibly illegal" (yeah, Meese would know about those things!!!) has to say?  Can we say "ZERO credibility?" How about, "last person in the WORLD to talk about what's unethical and/or illegal?!?"

As someone who was studying political science, among other things, in college and grad school during the 1980s, I remember Ed Meese's tenure very well.  And they are NOT fond memories, to put it mildly.  Highlights include the Iran-Contra scandal and all the allegations of corruption against Meese.  Frankly, Ed Meese almost makes George W. Bush's Attorneys General - John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales - look good.  And that's NOT good!

P.S.  By the way, I have little patience for complaints from a bunch of people who, as Frank Rich points out in today's New York Times, sold "9/11 photos of the president on Air Force One to [Republican] campaign donors" and "featur[ed] flag-draped remains of the 9/11 dead in political ads."

Lowell Feld is Netroots Coordinator for the Jim Webb for US Senate Campaign.  The ideas expressed here belong to Lowell Feld alone, and do not necessarily represent those of Jim Webb, his advisors, staff, or supporters.


Comments



Tribett (Fred Horn - 9/10/2006 10:00:21 AM)
I really am having trouble understanding this issue. Candidates for public office have always called back to days where there were mentors or other occasions in their political or personal life. Some points are made in Raisingkaine about Allen's picture (posted on his website) with Ronnie boy, Clinton's shot with Kennedy, and I'm sure there are countless other ones available for the taking.

I saw the ad at the recent Webb event opening the Roanoke Election Office. I found nothing that could even be mistaken for impropriety. I am NOT a Reagan fan, and that ad is not something that would persuade me to vote for Mr Webb, though his stance on the issues will cause me to vote for him. However, this ad, as it was intended to, should get the attention of certain voters that may be sitting on the fence.

And who knows? Maybe one day, former FEMA director Brown may decide to run for office, and I would not like for him to be prohibited from using the clip of Bush saying "You're doing a great job, Brownie!"



Revisionism !!! (loboforestal - 9/10/2006 10:30:51 AM)
Next he's going to say Allen never met with Thomas Jefferson in an effort to discredit Felix using an unauthorized endorsement of Jefferson on his website ...

Right.



They can't handle the truth (b crowe - 9/10/2006 11:46:51 AM)
I too think Ben has put his finger on it. True to form the Republicans are being disingenuous. I look at this way, a First Lady's allegiance must be to her country first, and her political party second. And there is nothing in the ad she can object to on a personal basis. Reagan was making a speech as President. That speech belongs to us, our country, our nation, not to Nancy Reagan and not to the Republican Party. Reagan was my President even though I did not vote for him. The ad will prove to be very effective in bringing Republicans and Independents to Webb. It will not alienate Democrats. I agree with those that say the publicity will work in our favor. This controversy is about integrity, truth, and reality. The ad simply tells the truth. The Republicans Can't Handle the Truth!


COMMENT HIDDEN (Jane Oldham - 9/10/2006 12:25:20 PM)


So much wrong in this... (Lowell - 9/10/2006 12:52:47 PM)
so little time to correct it.


webbs response entirely appropriate (accidentalwoman - 9/10/2006 4:31:01 PM)
nancy reagan did not even issue this objection personally but through a third party. if the ad is withdrawn with an apology it will appear that a positive biographical ad was instead something nasty and underhanded. this ad must air or it becomes high test fuel for the allen team. let them do what they like with it once it is on the air. abc is about to air a "docudrama" based on malicious republican fabrication. i don't know how they can support that and criticize a wholly accurate and positive ad.

consistency and sound logic are not familiar ground for the right wing



I'm so glad I'm not alone in feeling this way, Jane (demnan - 9/10/2006 4:45:40 PM)
Here's the way I look at it.  What if Joe Lieberman were to put out an ad for his Independent Senate race with footage of Gore praising him or even the nominating speeches at the Democratic Convention of 2000.  If Gore's voice was used to praise Lieberman wouldn't he be in the political hot seat to renounce these comments now that the candidate has left the political party?  Would you let that stand, if you were Gore?

This is why Jim Webb's campaign is not doing what is right.  You have to be sensitive to the fact that you switched parties.  Why do you need the voice of Reagan anyway.  Anyone who is foolish enough to consider Reagan a God probably won't vote for any Democrat.



you are quite wrong (teacherken - 9/10/2006 5:56:34 PM)
Webb is airing video of someone who appointed him to two high level positions praising his war service to his alma mater.  Whether or not Mrs. Reagan objects, that is part of the public record. 

And Lieberman is equally entitled to air video of when Gore has praised him in the past.  But he would do so with the risk that Gore might decide to create new video explaining why he supports Lamont now. 

I think the ad is terrific, and I expect the Repbs know it which is why they are so desperate to stop it that they tried to trump it with Mrs. Reagan despite their own hypocrisy in using an image of Reagan.

I think Jim's response on it is right on -  he welcomes the Allen campaign going to the Reagan library and finding and using any video they can find of Reagan praising Allen.



gore could not retract his praise of joe lieberman (accidentalwoman - 9/10/2006 6:04:07 PM)
the most he could do is to say that he does not support lieberman's current canidacy. anything else would make gore look like an idiot, which he is not. if those words of praise did not win the primary i doubt that they will be usefull in the general election. furthermore gore's remarks were from a running mate and not from a sitting president.at most a vp but still on record.

if reagan was nothing else he was good with words. wadhams will argue that those words belong to the republican party. i say they belong to history and to jim webb.



this is not a good analogy (mr science - 9/10/2006 6:26:04 PM)
Gore did more for Lieberman than any other politician by naming him as his running mate in 2000. That noteriety is something that still benefits Lieberman today. But also keep in mind, their relationship has become chilly since Gore's endorsement of Dean in '04 over his former running mate. For Lieberman to make special note of Gore would also highlight their subsequent falling out. It just doesn't benefit him, but he's still welcome to try (though don't hold your breath).


Please drop the repub talking point... (Loudoun County Dem - 9/10/2006 6:31:54 PM)
...that the Webb campaign has claimed an endorsement from Reagan, In the video clip Reagan simply lists career achievments that Jim Webb had/has accomplished. Every item listed by Reagan about Webb is absolute and provable fact (although I expect these facts to be swift boated by the miorally bankrupt campaign tactics of Dick Wadham).


"It won't endear him to voters to have ignored an 85 widow of a icon. " (Joan K Nyne - 9/10/2006 6:07:45 PM)
That depends entirely upon the voter in question.


truthiness will set you free (mr science - 9/10/2006 6:09:44 PM)
is that you again Mr. Colbert?


Frankly... (Nick Stump - 9/10/2006 6:39:23 PM)
Jane, I think you're way off base with this post.  Jim Webb has every right to use this Reagan video.  Like everything he's done in his life--he earned it though his hard work and dedication to the country.  When in the hell did real Democrats gave a diddley damn about what Nancy Reagan says.  No offense but isn't she the same woman who tried the run the country with an astrologer whispering into her ear.  Wasn't she the same woman whose answers to the drug problem was, Just Say No?  Good Lord, Nancy Reagan makes one comment and Democrats start shaking in their boots.  It's time this party grew some guts. 

And yes, we do need Republicans to win this race.  At lot of those Republicans used to be Democrats and left the party after Vietnam and during the Reagan Administration.  Those Democrats helped elect Ronald Reagan twice and this commercial is going to tell those same "Reagan" Democrats who Jim Webb is, what kind of man he has been his whole life. His whole career has been based on Duty, Honor and Country, principles he learned in the Marine Corps.  They have guided his actions from Annapolis to this Senate run.

  Hopefully the ad will help separate Jim from the weak-kneed candidates we've been losing elections with for the last decade. 

I say run that ad until every Voter has it memorized.  And for Dems who hated Reagan, they need to grow up and get over it.  Jim Webb served America when Ronald Reagan was President, and when he felt like the Republicans over him were gutting the Navy, he resigned his office over principle not politics. So big deal--he worked for Reagan.  The only people who are bothered about that are scared neocons and bone-headed Dems who can't get over the eighties.  It's now the 21st Century and anyone who thinks Nancy Reagan is gonna affect the election in Virgina need to rethink their opinion.
If the neocons big gotcha is that Jim Webb was praised by Ronald Reagan for his service--then by all means let them throw Jim in briar patch. 

Too many Democrats are so used to losing, they've forgotten what it takes to win.  We will have to fight to win this country back, and if I know Jim, he's not gonna back down now.  He needs to use every weapon at hand and that includes praise from Reagan.  This ad is a knife in the heart of George Allen.  Why do you thing they're squawking so much.  This ad is killing Allen.  Dick Wadhams knows it. And the more they talk about, the more people will watch the ad.  It's like have a book banned in Boston.  No better way to guarantee a best-seller.  Let them bitch.  Let the pundits turn it over every which way.  The message still gets out there.  And the message is: Jim Webb is an American Hero.  He served this country with honor and integrity.  And every time the neocons try to make it a bad thing, they have to show the ad and the ad helps Jim. 

The ad does nothing but take the high road.  It's a good ad.  It says nothing but good about Reagan and nothing but good about Webb.  Best of all, there's a lot of information in the ad that a lot of voters are hearing for the first time.

And, just my opinion, you're not doing anything here but repeating the Republican talking points. 



Brilliant. This paragraph should be a mantra (Lowell - 9/10/2006 8:28:31 PM)
...for Democrats everywhere.  Fight, fight, fight!  And never, EVER back down to these Allen/Wad(hams) liars.

Too many Democrats are so used to losing, they've forgotten what it takes to win.  We will have to fight to win this country back, and if I know Jim, he's not gonna back down now.  He needs to use every weapon at hand and that includes praise from Reagan.  This ad is a knife in the heart of George Allen.  Why do you thing they're squawking so much.  This ad is killing Allen.  Dick Wadhams knows it. And the more they talk about, the more people will watch the ad.  It's like have a book banned in Boston.  No better way to guarantee a best-seller.  Let them bitch.  Let the pundits turn it over every which way.  The message still gets out there.  And the message is: Jim Webb is an American Hero.  He served this country with honor and integrity.  And every time the neocons try to make it a bad thing, they have to show the ad and the ad helps Jim.


COMMENT HIDDEN (I.Publius - 9/10/2006 12:42:11 PM)


Why do you always make outlandish (Lowell - 9/10/2006 12:50:58 PM)
assertions without ever presenting any evidence to back them up?  Is this typical of the right-wing mindset?  Or it it just you?


COMMENT HIDDEN (I.Publius - 9/10/2006 12:58:31 PM)


I'm not affliated with the campaign (Ben - 9/10/2006 4:17:11 PM)
Nor did anyone from the campaign feed me this story.  Actually, it was a Democratic activist from Mt. Vernon named Chris Ambrose who came up last night at a party and asked if I had noticed that line in the letter.  Credit should go to him, I totally had missed it.


I can assure that Ben is NOT affiliated with the (Lowell - 9/10/2006 5:24:15 PM)
Webb campaign.  Evidence?  Look at his harsh criticisms of Steve Jarding and Jessica Vanden Berg over the past few months.  Do you seriously think that they would hire someone who speaks of them that way?  Puh-leeze.


For Ms. Jane Oldham (Bubby - 9/10/2006 1:54:01 PM)
February 23, 1988

Dear Jim:

It is with regret that I accept your resignation as Secretary of the Navy, effective February 22, 1988.

During the past four years, you have served our country with honor and courage, just as you have throughout your distinguished career. As my first Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, you played a major role in revitalizing the reserve components of our Armed Forces. You were instrumental in restoring confidence and pride in one of our most noble national traditions — the concept of the American citizen-soldier.

Since taking the helm a year ago as Secretary of the Navy, you continued to press forward the highest standards of excellence throughout the Navy and Marine Corps. From the most remote outposts to the lecture halls of Annapolis, your commitment to the quality of our military capability and the well-being of our men and women in uniform has been undivided.

As your service to this Administration comes to a close, I want to thank you for the selflessness and loyalty that you have always personified. In the end, it is these qualities that will ensure that freedom endures in this generation and in every generation to come.

Godspeed in all your endeavors.

Sincerely,

Ronald Reagan

Again, my favorite part:

Since taking the helm a year ago as Secretary of the Navy, you continued to press forward the highest standards of excellence throughout the Navy and Marine Corps. From the most remote outposts to the lecture halls of Annapolis, your commitment to the quality of our military capability and the well-being of our men and women in uniform has been undivided.

I fail to see where the opinion of the unelected former First Lady has any bearing on a conversation between the President and his Secretary of the Navy.  None.



I've said it before, and I've said it again (DanG - 9/10/2006 3:11:44 PM)
Jim Webb needs to personally contact Nancy Reagan's office and let her know his side of the story.


i think that he will attempt to do that (accidentalwoman - 9/10/2006 4:41:04 PM)
if he attempts to contact her and speaks to her personally i think they may find common ground. if not then i think that they must respectfully and regretably disagree. i doubt that she wants to be portrayed as a frail old widow. it seems inconsistent with her personality.

if she dictated or reviewed and approved the letter why didn't she sign it ?



I hope so (libra - 9/10/2006 11:39:44 PM)
accidentalwoman,

I sincerely hope Jim will try to contact someone -- either Ron Jr or Nancy -- and straighten out the whole thing. As for lack of signature? I suspect that she no more saw the letter than she saw the ad. But it won't matter, unless we can get a -- signed! -- reversal



Rather meaningless that Reagan once liked Webb........... (Jane Oldham - 9/11/2006 1:06:13 AM)
Democrats once like Joe Leiberman too. 

The fact that Nancy has asked the campaign to stop, and the request has been ignored, is what voters will remember.  Webb needs to address her concerns, like a gentleman.  If he doesn't, we can expect Allen to be in an ad with Mrs. Reagan, with a protective arm around her, while she chastises Webb, and praises Allen.  We will hear how much Reagan loved Allen and how he came to distrust Webb when Webb turned against him. We will also hear that the former President would be very upset to know that his image was being used in a campaign for a democrat after his frail little wife asked them to stop.  Webb will end up looking like a bully, one who never even addressed Mrs. Reagan's concerns and showed no respect for her husband, and for her wishes. 

I still don't see how this helps the Webb campaign.  Whose votes will he gain by running this ad?  Certainly not any voters who liked Reagan and still like his wife.  No one wants to see her beat up over a Senate campaign.  I've never been a big fan of Nancy's, but her requests should be honored.  If not, it's going to come back to haunt Webb.  Sometime around mid-October we should see the airwaves plastered with Mrs. Reagan's image.  That should go far to get republicans to the polls, for Allen.  :( 



Calm down (Bubby - 9/11/2006 1:05:07 PM)
Whose votes will he gain by running this ad?

People who voted for Reagan, or thought he was their kind of guy.

People that never connected with his be-jewelled wife, or her Hollywood astrologer friends.

People that like a man who can deliver the fight directly, and not back down. 

Veterans that cherish service to Country and value the honors that have come to James Webb.

Little people that like to dream that their family might go from sharecropper to Secretary of the Navy in 3 generations.

Mine.



COMMENT HIDDEN (I.Publius - 9/11/2006 2:16:11 PM)


HA! (LT - 9/11/2006 6:08:19 PM)
An excellent description of good ol' Felix. Be careful what you say, Pub, words have a way of coming back and biting your rear off.


Don't let's exaggerate... (libra - 9/11/2006 1:58:12 AM)
Jane wrote:
Webb needs to address her concerns, like a gentleman.  If he doesn't, we can expect Allen to be in an ad with Mrs. Reagan, with a protective arm around her, while she chastises Webb, and praises Allen.
================

Mrs Reagan may be a frail old lady, but she's not *that* frail mentally, or not that I've heard. I think you're seeing WMDs in Iraq...



COMMENT HIDDEN (I.Publius - 9/11/2006 8:52:20 AM)


double plus ungood (loboforestal - 9/11/2006 10:50:30 AM)
Well, Pubs, at least you read something in high school.  Very promising use of allusion there.  You might make it through junior college.  Best of luck to you!!!


COMMENT HIDDEN (I.Publius - 9/11/2006 10:55:34 AM)


Why don't you ever listen when people talk to you? (phriendlyjaime - 9/11/2006 11:02:06 AM)
It has been made explicitly clear that when comments garner enough troll ratings, that comment becomes "hidden" and all of the replies attached to it are then hidden as well.

YOU DON'T LISTEN.  This has been explained countless times, yet you always bring it up again.  So what is it, IPub?  Do you not listen, do you have NO memory, or do you just not care? 



Again, I ask... (Lowell - 9/11/2006 11:03:19 AM)
is I. Publius REALLY this stupid or is he just pretending?  How, after all this time, can he STILL not understand how a community blog works?  Is it really THAT difficult a concept to understand?


No, it's not. (phriendlyjaime - 9/11/2006 11:06:07 AM)
He/She likes the attention.  It's so boring.


Why not ban him permanently? (LT - 9/11/2006 6:05:46 PM)
This man/woman/being has been nothing but an agitator and a stone-headed troll with nothing better to do. Why not block him permanently? Unless, of course the site doesn't permit that.


ipub is our barometer... (Loudoun County Dem - 9/11/2006 6:22:21 PM)
...the more ipub whines and cries and the more poop ipub throws, the more afraid we know the Felix crowd is... By the next polls he will be browning his shorts something fierce.


That would be public info. (phriendlyjaime - 9/11/2006 11:07:44 AM)
If you think Ben is on the payroll, call the office and ask.  Stop attacking Ben and others just bc your candidate is running a horrible campaign and can't get above 50% approval.


It would also be on FEC reports (Lowell - 9/11/2006 11:21:18 AM)
This would all just be silliness, except that these people are trying to waste our time and distract us from the main issue at hand:  George Bush and George Allen's incompetence, cluelessness, arrogance, and flagrant disregard for our system of checks and balances.


Silliness (Teddy - 9/11/2006 11:53:56 AM)
Some Republican complains about some Democrat and the Democrats immediately become defensive. Not a good idea, and this whole brouhaha is exactly that, a Ha-ha-ha. Mr. Webb should NOT repeat not contact anyone in the republican campaign about anything he does, authorizes, or says. Period. All this liberal hand wringing angst is pathetic.

I am of the opinion Little Miss Nancy never saw the ad for herself, that George Allen or Wadhams contacted Ed Meese (who has plenty of Iran Contra and other unsavory skeletons of his own in his spacious closet)crying "help! help!" and Ed Meese, good republican operative that he is, responded. Miss Nancy did not sign the letter. Fine, the letter has been sent and received. End of chapter.

There is nothing negative in Mr. Webb's ad, and, unlike typical republican ads it contains no distortions, misrepresentations, or other falsehoods. It is using items of public record and no one could mistake that use for an endorsement by a long dead white man who was President at the time--- President of the entire country, by the wa, not just of Republicans. As Mr. Webb remarked, let George Allen comb through the records and find something good about George that Ronnie said, if he can, and use it himself (instead of simply borrowing a photo of Regan and another of Thomas Jefferson's portrait and plastering them unauthorized on his web site). Godspeed, Jim Webb.

Moving on, don't keep donating to the republicans any more free publicity or traction with their assinine whining.



agreed (accidentalwoman - 9/11/2006 2:33:26 PM)


COMMENT HIDDEN (I.Publius - 9/11/2006 3:04:28 PM)


Welcome to George Allen's Nightmare! (Bubby - 9/11/2006 3:15:29 PM)
Don't piss the bed son.


COMMENT HIDDEN (I.Publius - 9/11/2006 3:37:31 PM)


Reagan did endorse Webb (Bubby - 9/11/2006 3:51:22 PM)
And he was very much alive. Heh.

How's that search for Reagan endorsing Allen going? No luck yet?



No it isn't. (phriendlyjaime - 9/11/2006 3:19:54 PM)
Coverage today is 911 coverage re: the anniversary and the "movie" on ABC, but it doesn't surprise me that you don't care about the victims of the tragedy.  I just did a google news search, and the news about Webb today is the fact that Allen is no longer the lead in the race.  The commercial is not the controvery you would like it to be.  Ha.  Ha.  HA.


Who do you think it sounds like? (Eric - 9/11/2006 3:41:42 PM)
Go have a listen.  No need to tell us because we know what your public answer will be.  This is for your own edification.  Or education if you prefer.


hey, You Pubic (libra - 9/12/2006 12:20:20 AM)
All the media -- including your MSNBC -- got their info from the same source (Allen's campaign, in case you haven't yet realised it). As did Mrs Reagan.

And, consistent with their "do as I tell you, not as I do", they didn't wait to check the facts (the ad itself) before they spoke. Somewhat ironic, when you remember how y'all *howled* at our doing the same thing with the ABC's Tortured Path. Even though the Tortured Path *lied*, blatantly, while there's nothing but truth in Webb's ad.

PS I'm new to this blog (about a week) and didn't realise that  persistent trolls (and the responses to same) could be deleted. I think it's a mistake; irritating as they may be, we need to know what they think and how they frame their "arguments", just so we can learn how to refute them better. Hiding our heads in the sand and pretending the other side doesn't exist is not going to help us any.



Trolls are not deleted here. (Lowell - 9/12/2006 5:33:55 AM)
As with most community blogs, their comments can be "hidden" if enough members of the community "troll rate" them.  In that case, only "trusted users" - people with enough positive ratings themselves - can view them.  Basically, it's community policing, and I think it works fairly well overall at Daily Kos, MyDD, etc., etc.

By the way, welcome to RK!



Whose votes are the ad supposed to attract? (Jane Oldham - 9/12/2006 12:42:15 AM)
I am still confused.  I saw the ad.  Is the ad supposed to attract republican voters?  Or democrats?  Since most democrats I know hate Reagan, I doubt it's going to impress democrats.  Now republicans are pissed that Webb is using Reagan, especially since Mrs. Reagan asked them not to use her husband. Who is this supposed to appeal to? 
Thanks all,
Janie