Clinton Raises Serious Questions

This post is about a pet peeve:  the Clinton campaign’s love affair with the phrase “raises serious questions.”

Need examples?  According to Clinton or her surrogates, the following raise serious questions about Obama:  Austan Goolsbee, General McPeak, references to Geraldine Ferraro, a 1996 voter questionnaire, even Pennsylvania polls.

Just once, I’d like a reporter to respond:

You’ve told us such and such raises serious questions.  What questions?  How are they serious?  And why all the serious questions from the ’solutions’ candidate?

Some of you may feel it’s just semantics, one of those silly expressions, like the way in polite company you preface an argument that somebody is an idiot with the phrase, “with all due respect.”  But it’s worse than that.   It’s linguistic cover for stupid or offensive statements.

Let me take you back to a serious-question-raising campaign moment from two weeks ago.  In a conference call with reporters, Mark Penn forgot the campaign doublespeak and made this statement:

If Barack Obama can’t win [in Pennsylvania], how could he win the general election? . . . Senator Obama really can’t win the general election.

A few minutes later, a reporter asked about it, and Howard Wolfson jumped in to claim that Mark Penn hadn’t said it (although apparently people record these telephone conferences).  So Mark Penn clarified.  In the revised and sanitized version, he said this:

If [Obama] can’t win Pennsylvania it raises serious questions about whether he can win a general election.

By converting it from a conclusion to an innuendo, the speaker is absolved of the political accountability that comes with saying something stupid.  That’s the theory, anyway.

Clinton tells us that she’s not doing any harm to the Democratic party by staying in the race.  She assures us that anyone who dislikes Obama as a result of these attacks will return.  If Obama gets the nomination, she’ll persuade the voters back.  Imagine that speech:

Hey remember the time I told you I’ve passed the commander-in-chief threshold, Sen. McCain has done that, and “you’ll have to ask Sen. Obama with respect to his candidacy”?  Well I asked him, and it turns out, he passed!

And remember the time, Bill Clinton told you that it’d be great if I ran against McCain because then we’d have “two people who loved this country” running?  You’ll be glad to hear, turns out, Obama loves this country too!  Isn’t that neat?

Oh, and remember the time I mentioned that Obama wasn’t a Muslim “as far as I know“?  Not that there’s anything wrong with being Muslim, but I looked into it, and it turns out he’s not Islamic after all!  Score one for Jesus!

Innuendo by innuendo, serious question by serious question, Clinton has persuaded some voters to dislike Obama who will not return.

The only serious question left for Clinton’s candidacy is when will it stop?

[Crossposted at Overbreadth.com]

•  ...

  

  by Trix on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:21:06 PM PDT

  •  Someone changed that picture

    Isn't that a barred owl?  They have really cool BROWN eyes and for some reason people often photoshop their eyes to look like a great horned owl.  

    That's either a spotty or a barred, basically the same kind of owl, either has brown eyes.  

    I could do the hoots for you too in case you were wondering just how much of a dork I am.  

    by Sun dog on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:29:03 PM PDT

    •  LOL... I think it's known as an ORLY owl ;) n/t

      by Trix on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:30:44 PM PDT

  •  Trix, how and when ever I might disagree with you

    about politics, you certainly recognize someone who is "trying, in their own way, to be free."  Thanks for the great pic.

    by DaNang65 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:31:58 PM PDT

    •  heh

      c'mon we both know Trix is the most palatable HRC supporter ever.

      by bythesea on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 01:15:50 AM PDT

•  Good point. We've come to challenge the

  no-content phrases like, "some people say," or "some people feel," etc.  "Serious questions is another variant, and yes, we ought to challenge it rigorously.

  by oxon on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:24:19 PM PDT

  •  Speaking of "Some people say"...

    If the North Carolina debate happens, Katie Couric will be moderating.

    :-)

    by Trix on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:26:15 PM PDT

    •  Gah!

      That's like having Susan Somers performing the Easter Mass, for some reason.

      by bythesea on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 01:17:01 AM PDT

  •  In wikipedia parlance, "weasel words"

    They rightly squash weasel words over at wikipedia.  Wish the MSM would do the same.

    by barath on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:40:38 PM PDT

•  Good find. I

  hadn't noticed that.  It is a rather vague statement when you think about it.

  by vengeance for mr sympathy on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:25:51 PM PDT

  •  When I say

    "vague statement," I guess what I really mean is that it invites the listener to tie whatever issue it is that "raises serious questions" into any narrative that they happen to be concerned about.

    by vengeance for mr sympathy on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:28:20 PM PDT

•  Sounds serious

  When Hillary said Obama hadn't been vetted enough, I guess she meant there might be some serious questions out there that might or might not need to be thought about sometime by someone.  Because it could defintiely be a problem is something serious came up. Seriously.  

  by Sun dog on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:26:35 PM PDT

•  "Some people say"

  Hillary had Vince Foster offed.

  by MJJLWolf on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:28:42 PM PDT

  •  Boo! n/t

    by bythesea on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 01:17:28 AM PDT

•   "Some people say": the three-word introduction

  (on FOX) to more shit than I knew was possible to sling.

  by phrogge prince on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:31:20 PM PDT

•  your diary raises serious questions

  by soros on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:32:41 PM PDT

  •  your response raises serious questions

    by Aqualad08 on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:39:45 PM PDT

    •  There you go again!

      by soros on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:43:22 PM PDT

•  Linguistic cover

  Another one that makes me nuts is "I feel that..."  When the person really means they think or believe something.  It's hard to argue with another person's feeling so saying it that way is kind of like wearing rhetorical body armor.  I teach my students that if I hear them say  "I feel" it better be followed by an actual feeling word: bad, sad, happy, sick, etc.  What the heck is so wrong with saying what we mean?

  by luckylizard on Mon Mar 31, 2008 at 11:58:59 PM PDT

•  Clinton is winning the "framing" war

  For every news piece about how this and that is crunch  time for Hillary, you see three pieces that are clearly framed from  the Hillary campaign's point of view. They may be amoral people, but they know how to play the rough game of politics a lot better than then  Obama campaign  does.

  by CrustyPolemicist on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 01:45:42 AM PDT

•  mccain girl speaks!

  by lmenshevik on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 02:36:38 AM PDT

•  put this one to rest: meeting with hostile leader

  by lmenshevik on Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 02:44:07 AM PDT