Break In At Obama’s Place

Drudge has it on his front page, though pretty far down the left side. The AP wrote it up nicely. A bit of trouble Friday night at Obama Headquarters in Iowa.

(AP) DAVENPORT, Iowa The Davenport, Iowa, campaign headquarters for presidential candidate Barack Obama was burglarized Friday evening.

Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor says two laptop computers and some campaign literature were taken. A campaign worker discovered the burglary this morning, and a report was filed with Davenport police.

Vietor says that it doesn’t appear that it was anything sensitive or irreplaceable was taken.

Hmmm…. where have I heard this before? Here’s the opening ‘graph’ of a story from the New York Times, June 17, 1972.

WASHINGTON, June 17 — Five men, said to have been carrying cameras, electronic surveillance equipment and burglary tools, were arrested shortly after 2 A.M. today after a floor-by-floor search that led to the executive quarters of the National Democratic Committee here.

Here’s a copy of the actual story that ran on page 30 in the Times and the text of the story that was on the front page of the Washington Post. Remember, we knew nothing else except there was a burglary in Larry O’Brien’s office at the Watergate (The image of the front page on the left is from two days later, June 19, 1972).

I doubt last night’s burglary was anything more than a burglary. The stolen laptops were probably the target.

On the other hand, Watergate also seemed like a meaningless burglary. Nixon was way ahead at the polls. He would end up winning the presidential election with 60% of the popular vote and nearly 97% of the Electoral College.

Why would CREEP (Committee to Re-Elect the President) even care what O’Brien did or did not know?

Just for a second, let’s make believe there was something politically evil going on Friday night in Iowa. Are there still Woodwards and Bernsteins in journalism? Are there Ben Bradlees and Katherine Grahams who would allow reporters to spend days and days pursuing leads which probably weren’t going to pan out? Few thought Watergate would be anything more than the 2-bit burglary it was.

I’m afraid I know the answer.

Corporate journalism, where publishers (and TV managers) answer to stockholders, not individual owners and where the cost of debt service has entered into the daily decision making process, has changed journalism in profound ways.

If 1972 happened in 2007, how much would we know?

Manchurian Candidate

“Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life.” That is the line, recited word-for-word by each man who served with Shaw, which piqued Frank Sinatra’s curiosity in the original Manchurian Candidate. The fact that they all said it, while still remembering Shaw was totally unlikeable, was only part of their subconscious conflict.

Today, my curiosity piqued, I went to see the new version (not a remake, as much of the detail of the story has been changed) with Helaine. It’s a great movie. That not withstanding, I’m sorry I brought Helaine along. It is violent, suspenseful, very intense and not what she wanted to see.

In the original movie, Raymond Shaw (Laurence Harvey) is captured along with members of his unit, fighting in Korea. It is the Chinese (hence the title) who brainwash them all, sending Raymond home to assassinate a presidential candidate, allowing his stepfather to run in his place.

Angela Lansbury, as Raymond’s mother, plays one of the most evil and believable villains I’ve ever seen on the screen. The sexual tension between mother and son makes the whole thing even more disturbing.

Having this much respect for the original I went today expecting to be disappointed. I was wrong. The movie scores on nearly every level.

Liev Schreiber as Shaw brings the same distant, cold, aloof feel as Laurence Harvey’s original portrayal. He was brought up with privilege and power and no connection to the common man. He is devoid of warmth or compassion.

Denzel Washington is Major Ben Marco, the Frank Sinatra role from the original movie. You’ve seen Denzel playing this part before; the honorable man in a troubling situation. It works here.

Meryl Streep is not Angela Lansbury. I guess it’s unfair to even make the comparison because Lansbury’s original portrayal was so amazing – something I’ve never seen her come close to replicating.

Still, the role is intense and evil. And, the scene where she and her son come perilously close to a passionate kiss is as unnerving as similar imagery from the original.

I’ve heard a lot of people (including my wife) say that Streep’s role was modeled on Hillary Clinton. I actually didn’t see that – though I wasn’t particularly watching for it.

The interesting twist here is the center of the evil, originally Communist China, is now replaced by a multinational company which looks very much like Halliburton. There is no doubt that director Jonathan Demme went out of his way to make a number of analogies to our current administration. We’re not at the Oliver Stone level here, but approaching it.

The end of the movie, the portion past the actual climax, confused me. But, by then, the movie had made its points. Without it, Denzel Washington’s character would be dead, and I don’t think the producers wanted that.

The bottom line is, I recommend this movie… but with a huge proviso. There were a number of intense, sometimes gory scenes that I looked away from. If that kind of movie troubles you, stay away.

The Presidential Elections

I’m not sure why, but I asked my father if he had seen many TV commercials for the presidential candidates yet. Here in Connecticut, other than those we see nationally from CNN, Fox and MSNBC, there have been none. It’s a different story in Florida, or so says my dad.

He began to describe some ads he’s seen. It was immediately obvious to me that I hadn’t seen them here.

It’s April and he’s already sick of the candidates’ spots… both candidates.

Why should a presidential candidate buy time on Connecticut TV stations? This state is pretty much a lock for John Kerry. On the other hand, Florida (as made clear in the last election – remember the hanging chads) is somewhat up in the air.

The ability to easily ‘zone’ your advertising buy has turned our presidential elections from a nation contest to 50 individual contests… some conceded early on. There have been nuances along this line before, but it’s only now when money can be spent with razor sharp accuracy, that picking your battles has become so effective.

Unfortunately, it leaves states like Connecticut on the short end. Certainly an incumbent who doesn’t feel he’ll win Connecticut won’t promise us anything… but neither will a challenger who already feels we’re in his back pocket.

Rumors have been swirling about the possible closing the the Groton Sub Base. Would the question have even been floated if we were in play?

It will be interesting to see how this plays out after the conventions, when the political rhetoric and fervor pick up. My suspicion is, we’ve been marginalized out of national politics.