"Swift-boating" Obama? Sorry, but that ship has sailed

In the past two weeks, Barack Obama's campaign has unleashed two angry email campaigns to mobilize supporters against a Chicago radio host they claimed was smearing Obama. News stories covering the controversy have repeated the campaign's contention that they were merely being vigilant against any and all attempts to "swift-boat" their candidate. The noun that's become a verb is used as shorthand, both by politicos and the press, to describe any non-issue-related attack on a Democrat.

If that's really true, then he couldn't have picked a more inappropriate target.

Obama didn't go after Rush Limbaugh or Jerry Agar or Glenn Beck or Mark Levin or any number of other right-wing radio hosts (as featured in the terrific book Shock Jocks by my colleague Rory O'Connor). No, he went after WGN Radio's Milt Rosenberg -- a genial University of Chicago professor who for 35 years has hosted possibly the most civilized two hours of commercial radio anywhere in America, "Extension 720."

Few people have exposed more authors to more readers in that time than Milt Rosenberg has. Barack Obama should know. He was a guest on "Extension 720" in 1995 ... when he had a book to promote.

Rosenberg's crime? Interviewing two journalists, Stanley Kurtz and David Freddoso, who have written critically about Obama's political, social and financial connections.

I, too, have been on "Extension 720," a show I've listened to since college days. Ten years ago, Milt added me to a TV critics' panel of Phil Rosenthal (then at the Sun-Times) and Steve Johnson of the Trib, after I sent him my TV book and, to my delight, he read it. That night, three TV critics learned how little Milt watched or cared for television. He pronounced the name of the "Tonight Show" host "Leano." He read approvingly the old quote from Groucho Marx about how educational TV is, because every time someone turned it on, Groucho went into another room and opened a book. One suspected that Milt did that a lot, too.

He's a conservative (as a quick skim of his blog reveals), but more than that, he's curious. He enjoys the exchange of ideas -- more than a lot of public radio hosts seem to -- and so does his faithful audience.

Recently, however, that audience has had to deal with a pile of gate-crashers, spurred on by something called the "Obama Action Wire." This mailing list, which goes out to thousands of volunteer truth-squadders, sends them email alerts whenever action is needed to counter the media's coverage of their candidate.

"The Obama Action Wire is a grassroots rapid response group for supporters to fight smears, spread the truth, push back on misleading media, and take positive action," says the campaign in an email.

On Aug. 26, author Stanley Kurtz was booked on "Extension 720" to discuss his work investigating Obama's "lost years," the period from 1995 to 2004 when he was seemingly just another Illinois politician. It's a time, Kurtz claims, that Obama is reluctant to discuss now that he's running for president because (a) it would underscore how closely he worked with Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and other lightning rods and (b) it would expose Obama as the rather ordinary liberal his critics say he would be as president.

Rosenberg's producer Zack Christenson contacted the Obama communications office the morning after Kurtz was booked to ask for someone who could provide a rebuttal. The Obama rep demanded the name of WGN's program manager ... and after he got it, he hung up. Later in the day, the campaign sent out an "Obama Action Wire" which I quote in part:

It is absolutely unacceptable that WGN would give a slimy character assassin like Kurtz time for his divisive, destructive ranting on our public airwaves. At the very least, they should offer sane, honest rebuttal to every one of Kurtz's lies.

In the next few hours, we have a crucial opportunity to fight one of the most cynical and offensive smears ever launched against Barack.

Tonight, WGN radio is giving right-wing hatchet man Stanley Kurtz a forum to air his baseless, fear-mongering terrorist smears. He's currently scheduled to spend a solid two-hour block from 9:00 to 11:00 p.m. pushing lies, distortions, and manipulations about Barack and University of Illinois professor William Ayers.

Tell WGN that by providing Kurtz with airtime, they are legitimizing baseless attacks from a smear-merchant and lowering the standards of political discourse.

But as we now know, the Obama camp lied in its email when it claimed that WGN had refused to "offer sane, honest rebuttal" to Kurtz. OK, so politicians lie, even "candidates of change" lie. But just as bad is the assertion that it was "unacceptable" for WGN to use "our public airwaves" to air the program. If ever there was a pre-announcement of how an Obama Administration would regulate "our public airwaves," that was it.

Obama should be delighted that Kurtz was featured on "Extension 720," where cross-examination comes not just from the host but the callers. Instead, he hit the flagship radio station of the teetering Tribune empire with a barrage of hostility that its host called unprecedented. About 45 minutes into the program, Rosenberg finally learned the source of the deluge was the campaign itself. And then, sounding a little flustered, he told his listeners what happened and added that such an orchestrated campaign was

"the first time in my experience of over 30 years doing this program -- which is and always has been, up until this moment, an oasis in the desert of perhaps media excess. We try to run a dignified, thoughtful, intelligent program." And then, with a laugh, he said, "I think at last I'm in the big time," and thanked his guest for making it possible.

Any notion that the Obama campaign had second thoughts about laying into Rosenberg were dispelled this week, when he had on David Freddoso, author of a New York Times best-selling book that raises many questions about Obama's personal and political ties. Once again, "Extension 720" became the target of a take-no-prisoners "Obama Action Wire" blitz that recycled the line about "the right-wing smear machine" and provoked another firestorm on the public airwaves.

This time, Zack the producer had been able to book an on-air critic of Freddoso, progressive activist Dan Johnson-Weinberger. I talked on Wednesday with Johnson-Weinberger, who confirmed he had been booked well in advance of the show. He had nothing but praise for Rosenberg, on whose show he's often appeared.

"Longtime listeners know that Milt is now a very conservative guy, but he used to be a pretty progressive guy," Johnson-Weinberger said. "Look, I appreciate the opportunity to appear on the show when the author of a hatchet job's on, too. I think Milt probably should've had someone on the show when that other guy was on, and that they made their best effort -- Zack should've called me! -- but you know, I don't think it was malicious by any stretch. They should've had someone on to say, OK, half of what you're saying is factually correct, but half of what you say are lies."

On the one hand, you have to tip your hat to the Obama campaign for making the counterpunch seem so effortless. After the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth had been dogging John Kerry for three weeks in August of 2004, the campaign finally started to fight back. Maureen Dowd wrote scornfully in the New York Times that the candidate "should have had a response ready, since the Nixon tool John O'Neill has dogged him since '71." But, Dowd noted, Democrats "always seem caught off guard when the third parties show up to rip their throats out."

Not always. Team Clinton I in 1992 had a rapid-response crew ready to pounce on perceived smears. In hindsight, when you consider how much baggage Bubba was carrying around, they did an outstanding job.

"Swift-boating" is little more than a myth propagated in the aftermath of the 2004 election to make Democrats feel better about backing Kerry, an incompetent campaigner who was never able to shake off the stigma of voting for the war he now opposed. It's a buzz phrase that losing candidates can use to dispel those nagging thoughts among supporters that they were too slow and too ineffectual in responding to their enemies.

And it's utterly irrelevant now that Barry's team is playing offense. If anything, Obama 08 is more effective, more responsive, more ruthless in its policing of the media than Clinton 92 was. And those are all good things. Professionalism, efficiency and responsiveness are all qualities you want from whoever's running the show, especially these days. From the moment they devised the 50-states strategy that wound up winning the nomination, Team Obama has always looked like the best-prepared political team on the block.

But this crusade against Rosenberg was complete overkill. Campaigning is not governance, and I must admit, I'm now a lot more worried than I was a month ago about how Obama will deal with criticism from the right should he be elected, because they ain't going away.

Obama says he will change Washington. That he will govern in a bipartisan way and get Congress unstuck. I want to believe him. But I think that this current wave of criticism is practice for the years ahead, and I am not encouraged by the Obama campaign's instinct to dump a pile of bricks on anyone who won't engage them on their terms. I mean, wasn't one reason Democrats liked Obama was that he represented a break from the partisan rancor of the Clinton years?

I also found troubling Obama's refusal to take part in any town hall meetings with John McCain over the summer. Judging from the comments I'm already getting, it's apparent that nothing drives Obama-ites nuts quite like McCain hammering their man on the whole town-hall subject. And admittedly it's a dubious excuse for the GOP to run every spurious TV ad its henchmen can think of -- so you don't want to discuss my 12-point energy plan? OK, then I'll just spend three weeks comparing you to Paris Hilton!! -- but you know what? You don't reap what you don't sow. Obama's poll numbers were moribund all summer long and worked his party into a panic. Had he taken up McCain's challenge, he would've had a chance to separate himself from his challenger before the conventions. Besides, running from debate belies Obama's stated desire to have open discussions of the issues and move America beyond sound bites and attack ads.

And based on his behavior toward critics in the past two weeks, I'm starting to think that anti-swift-boat measures make up the entirety of Obama's plan for so-called media reform. No new ideas, just a reinstatement of old ones, like the Fairness Doctrine, but with more teeth.

"It is a little disconcerting," Rosenberg said at the end of his second night of dealing with the onslaught of pro-Obama calls and emails. "I am used to somewhat more thoughtful discourse than that. On the other hand, freedom of speech extends to the Obama campaign as well, and thus they are free to email their supporters with any message they choose."

(By the way, if you want to hear some mind-blowing audio, check out Milt's 35-year audio archive. He interviewed Arianna Huffington on feminism -- in 1974. Malachi Martin and Jerry Rubin debated demon possession on "Extension 720" in 1976 ... you can't make this stuff up!)

Previously on TV Barn: I've written often about MSNBC and its hit show "Countdown with Keith Olbermann," but I also thought the network went too far giving Keith the anchor's seat for its political coverage. I also noted how journalists have disappeared from presidential debates and argued that Sarah Palin had more to worry about from Jay Leno than Tina Fey.