The Talking Point Two-Step

She was a lobbyist- (4.00 / 1)

In 2009, Ann Kuster's clients included:

Bonnie Clac
NARAL Pro-Choice New Hampshire
Merck Vaccine Div
NH Independent Schools
Bedford Ambulatory Surgical Center
Dartmouth Medical School
Dartmouth College
Fidelity Investments

http://www.sos.nh.gov/lobbynam...

The truth shall set you free.

---

by: NHFlatlander @ Tue May 04, 2010 at 22:36:55 PM CDT

No one disputes Kuster' line of work. (4.00 / 4)

My diary isn't about that.

It's about the rhetorical device of accidentally-on-purpose making a mistake so that you can introduce a word into print that takes a positive story for a rival and turns it into a negative.


birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Wed May 05, 2010 at 04:21:08 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Honi soit qui mal y pense (0.00 / 0)

Its literal translation from Old French is "Shame be to him who thinks evil of it",[3]  or more strictly: "Let him who thinks ill there be shamed." It is sometimes re-interpreted as "Evil be to him who evil thinks".[4]

5

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed May 05, 2010 at 06:50:45 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

In that case (0.00 / 0)

You picked the wrong story to illustrate your point.

The word being introduced is true. Ann Kuster was a lobbyist. In the TPM illustration cited in the diary, the fact, Obama was late in responding, was questionable.

Frankly, Ann Kuster work as a lobbyist is only a negative if the campaign allows it to be.  She will face much stronger criticism if she wins the primary and the campaign needs to be prepared to handle it.  One of the advantages to a primary is that, hopefully, the candidate and their campaigns, learn to be strong candidates able to fend off the attacks from their opponents.

The truth shall set you free.

---

by: NHFlatlander @ Wed May 05, 2010 at 08:29:16 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

"One of the advantages to a primary is that..." (0.00 / 0)

NH Flatlander you can't work both sides of the street, even streetwalkers know that. To lecture Annie Kuster and us on the reasons that primaries can be advantageous is hillaryiously ironic...when you trumpet your allegiance to PUMA on your Facebook page,(party unity my ass)Given your primary support of Hillary Clinton, and that PUMA wanted to fight it out on the Convention floor in Denver, not accepting President Obama's clear victories in Primaries and caucuses...I guess you learned your lesson and now teach others?? Harumph I say, and fie on your two faced-ness. Next thing you know, Demers will turn out to be advising both sides on lobbying for political gain.

5

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed May 05, 2010 at 10:50:32 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oh Piffle, Jonny (0.00 / 0)

I don't know who you think I am, but I don't have a Facebook page. Nor was I ever a member of PUMA.  As for the rest of your rant, I have no idea what you are talking about.

p.s. I agree with Kathy below - lobbying for NARAL is a good thing.

The truth shall set you free.

---

by: NHFlatlander @ Wed May 05, 2010 at 19:51:20 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

excuse moi n/t (0.00 / 0)

5

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed May 05, 2010 at 19:57:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ce n'est rien. n/t (0.00 / 0)

The truth shall set you free.

---

by: NHFlatlander @ Wed May 05, 2010 at 20:22:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I disagree. (4.00 / 2)

I'm not interested in the accuracy of either statement.

I am interested in how when someone wants to get something in the media bloodstream, one way to do it is to use a verbal Trojan Horse.

Coffman and Brownie both did it, and well.

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Wed May 05, 2010 at 17:49:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

This wasn't a negative attack (4.00 / 1)

Coffman was asked why NARAL supported Kuster over Swett and the obvious answer was that Kuster had a working relationship with NARAL with makes the endorsement to be expected.  There was nothing negative in the statement.  Being a lobbyist for NARAL is hardly a negative in a Democratic primary in a pro-choice state.

With all due respect, it looks to me like you are seeing negativity that isn't actually there.

We have two candidates who are strongly pro-choice and progressive.  I would be proud to have either of them in Congress.

---

by: brianrater @ Wed May 05, 2010 at 11:20:25 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Dean's right. (4.00 / 2)

The Swett campaign is being passive-aggressive; maybe not in a way that works with people here, but it's neither praise nor an accident.

---

by: Laura Clawson @ Wed May 05, 2010 at 12:52:35 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Let's go to the videotape (slo-mo bold mine) (4.00 / 2)

Coffman said that Swett, "as a pro-choice candidate, is disappointed not to have their support. But she is not surprised given that Annie has been a paid lobbyist for NARAL and possibly for Planned Parenthood over decades of working and lobbying in Concord."

Bold 1: Make clear that Swett is not anti-choice.  Check.

Bold 2:  Throw cold water on the endorsement.  Check.

Bold 3:  Remind readers Kuster is a lobbyist. Check.

Bold 4:  Introduce speculation about more lobbying, not because they must know it's true but because it's a great setup for...

Bold 5: Getting in the word "lobbying" again, and this time with the added descriptor "decades". Check.

I like  Swett.  I like Coffman.  If Swett wins the nomination I'm going to work my heart out for her.

But it's clear to me what's going on here.  Coffman deftly turned the tables on a key Kuster endorsement (itself in response to a key endorsement for Swett), into a discussion about the dreaded word "lobbyist".  And DiStaso took the bait.

I'm not faulting Coffman here - quite the opposite! It was surgically precise, brief, and effective.  Swett is very lucky to have her. But to repeat, it's clear to me what's going on here.

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Wed May 05, 2010 at 18:13:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Very Different Take (0.00 / 0)

Meagan Coffman is too smart (and too sane) to criticize Ann McLane Kuster for lobbying for NARAL.  She's not going to hit Ann by drawing attention to the part of her resume that is uniformly appealing to Democratic primary voters (myself included).  That makes no political sense -- like attacking Tom Brady for throwing too many touchdown passes.

When I read that article, I saw nothing more than an attempt to diminish the impact of the endorsement by citing a past personal/ professional relationship. Heard similar arguments from pro-choice Democrats during Charlie's first seven elections, e.g., that NH NARAL never endorsed a Democrat over Charlie because Bass' brother Alex was a big donor.  (I never found out whether that was even true, but it was definitely in the rumor mill during the '90s and early '00s, when Charlie's choice record was far from perfect.)

Personally, I congratulate Ann for winning the endorsement, and am grateful to both her and Katrina for their clear defense of women's fundamental rights.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Wed May 05, 2010 at 21:22:25 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Charlie Chameleon (0.00 / 0)

I have no idea where Mr Bass stands now, but I know NARAL consistently supported him because he was solidly pro-choice. They supported him over his congressional opponent Dick Swett because Bass was, in fact, clearly better on protecting reproductive rights.

The guiding force, the only factor behind the endorsement decisions by NARAL, Planned Parenthood and others is their issue: protecting reproductive rights. They do what they believe is best to defend these hard fought rights which remain today seriously threatened.  

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Thu May 06, 2010 at 08:22:37 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Charlie on Choice (0.00 / 0)

I have no idea where Mr Bass stands now, but I know NARAL consistently supported him because he was solidly pro-choice.

If you define "solidly pro-choice" as:

* Supporting the Hyde Amendment to restrict federal funding of reproductive services for poor women;

* Backing the Bush Administration's phony 2001 "compromise" policy on stem cell research; and

* Empowering Gingrich, DeLay, and a rabid anti-choice and anti-woman cadre of extremist House leaders committed to undermining reproductive freedom

. . . then, perhaps, you are not as pro-choice as I think you are, Burt.  Charlie did all of this, and you should NOT give him a free pass.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu May 06, 2010 at 08:43:43 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes! Bass likely is the worst of the worst (0.00 / 0)

I am not even interested to know where the other GOPers are on this issue.

In the primary, we have to figure out who is the worst of the best.

It is not a subject that I focus on, so I will leave it up to those that are better informed.

www.KusterforCongress.com - www.paulhodesforsenate.com

www.nikitsongas.com - www.devalpatrick.com

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Thu May 06, 2010 at 09:24:15 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Pass? Not Me! (0.00 / 0)

I knew Charlie Bass. Charlie Bass was a friend of mine.

Today's Charlie Bass is not the Charlie Bass of old, when he and I served in the state senate in the early 1990s.
As I said, he's a chameleon. You know I'll do my part to make sure he does not go back to Washington!!

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Thu May 06, 2010 at 12:56:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Agreed (0.00 / 0)

So don't re-state misleading stuff like this:

I have no idea where Mr Bass stands now, but I know NARAL consistently supported him because he was solidly pro-choice.

To the best of my recollection, NH NARAL refused to endorse a Democratic opponent to Charlie Bass in seven elections -- not Arnie, Mary Rauh, Dick, Katrina, Barney Brannen, and, of course, Paul.  Given Charlie's "mixed choice" record, that is not right, regardless of NH NARAL's justifications.  

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu May 06, 2010 at 13:14:58 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Memories (0.00 / 0)

This discussion is reminding me of the reason I stopped donating to NARAL years agio. I had finally gotten over it, too.




"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Thu May 06, 2010 at 13:25:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I should point out. . . (0.00 / 0)

I am a strong, strong supporter of NARAL, and have phone banked for the national organization on several occasions over the years.  

Have just been disappointed about this particular blind spot on the part of the New Hampshire chapter.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu May 06, 2010 at 14:24:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

? (4.00 / 4)

Representing NARAL is a good thing, not a bad thing.

It takes a certain amount of grit to represent a choice organization.  



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Wed May 05, 2010 at 07:58:20 AM CDT

co-signed (0.00 / 0)

---

by: measurestaken @ Wed May 05, 2010 at 10:17:22 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

this seems silly (0.00 / 0)

As a principal at Swett Associates, Katrina did plenty of lobbying. I know she's no longer working for the firm, but let's not act as if AMK is the only person with lobbying experience in this race. A non-issue, I think.  

---

by: measurestaken @ Wed May 05, 2010 at 09:59:57 AM CDT

the way to unify (0.00 / 0)

is to remind you, you are all Sox fans...they are about to go over .500 at home, and for the season...wooohoo for you    

the same way you were hating on Daisuke early in the game you all cheered him when he left. Scala was already damning him on FB status, by the second inning...what I'm saying is you folks thrive on conflict which leads to new understanding. Have at it.
18 years ago (!) when Dick won the last Swett campaign, I remember his nuanced position on abortion...sort of pro choice theoretically, but against Federal funding, so its choice for those who can afford to abort, and he voted against late term abortion, which is a medical procedure, never elective, correct DD ?


5

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Thu May 06, 2010 at 21:39:05 PM CDT

not sure (4.00 / 1)

I'm not sure what the position of someone in an election 18 years ago who is not running for office today has to do with the position of someone else. My husband is a Yankees fan - his position is wrong, and not mine.

Just as I am not sure why representing NARAL should be considered anything other than a good thing.

Move on.

   



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Fri May 07, 2010 at 08:17:02 AM CDT

[ Parent ]