Clinton Refuses To Cross CBS Picket Line For Dem Debate

[Karmadillo]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/11/21/exclusive-clinton-refuse_n_73713.html

Exclusive: Clinton Refuses To Cross Picket Line For Dem Debate

Senator Hillary Clinton, D-NY, announced today that she will forgo CBS News' upcoming presidential debate unless the network can reach a resolution with its striking employees.

"The workers at CBS News have been without a contract for close to two and a half years," the Senator said. "It is my hope that both sides will reach an agreement that results in a secure contract for the workers at CBS News but let me be clear: I will honor the picket line if the workers at CBS News decide to strike."

In issuing the statement Clinton becomes the first Democratic candidate to publicly state her refusal to cross the picket line. Others have expressed solidarity with the strikers.

The Writers Guild of America began striking more than three weeks ago, after negotiations on a new contract for the unions 12,000 members hit an impasse. The WGA is seeking a percentage of the retail price of movies and television episodes downloaded on Internet; something to which the studios have yet to agree.

CBS News is slated to host their first Democratic debate on December 10, in the station's Los Angeles studios. Last week, however, more than three-fourths of CBS News' 300 employees (writers, desk assistants, and assignment editors, mostly) voted to authorize a strike - in the same vein as the WGA. Employees at the news station have been without a contract since April 2, 2005 and have scheduled a negotiating committee to meet on the situation following the Thanksgiving break.

more...

[Clintonista2]

1. YES! Excellent news Hillary! My prediction:

The other dems go to the debate and use it as a platform to attack Hillary while she stands with the striking workers, unable to defend herself.

[IndianaJones]

4. Edwards will not cross the line. nt.

[Clintonista2]

5. I'll believe it when I see a statement. n/t

[Maven]

46. The other two have now followed suit

per the updated article linked in the OP.

[Catchawave]

58. Also Richardson !

Good for all of them :patriot:

[sufrommich]

10. I agree.

It's a money/mouth issue for him.

[pokercat999]

66. DK will probably JOIN the line!

[high density]

6. Yeah, all those other Dems that are going to cross a picket line...

just so they can bash Hillary while she's not there. :crazy:

[Clintonista2]

9. There would be some good coming out of that scenario...

I wouldn't have to watch Edwards' teary-eyed stare as Hillary wipes the floor with him.

[Donnachaidh]

26. hallucinating again?

Why don't you share whatever it is your smoking...:eyes:

[durrrty libby]

45. Boy that hit the nail on the head, Exactly what he does

[durrrty libby]

19. Oh gosh that would be so stupid of the other candidates, but it

would only make them look very bad

Kudos to Hillary

[HERVEPA]

38. Really, really bad prediction.

[Clintonista2]

40. Thanks.

[IronLionZion]

61. because Dems cross picket lines in your imaginary world... nt

[McCamy Taylor]

2. Good for Hillary!

[maddiejoan]

3. Gosh.

This just doesn't seem like something a corporate tool would do.

actions not words, folks.

Sen. Clinton has always proved herself by actions.

Brava!

[Truth2Tell]

56. Actions like the Iraq war vote?

But really, props to Hillary for this one. Smart move.

Now if she'd just vote against the Peru "Screw-the-Workers-and-the-Earth" Trade Deal, she could move from symbolism to actual positive impact. I won't hold my breath.

[senseandsensibility]

7. That's the very least I would expect of her

and the other candidates. I will not vote for a candidate that crosses a picket line.

[Basileus Basileon]

8. Good for Clinton. I expect the others will now follow suit. I'm actually surprised nobody

beat her to the punch; this was a tailor-made opportunity for Edwards.

[Tom Rinaldo]

13. I'm surprised also, but since she was the first...

...she deserves a little extra credit for making the right call early. It is easier to be the second or third person to pass up an important debate invite than it is to be the first.

[Adelante]

14. She does deserve credit

Well done.

[Clintonista2]

15. Gosh, I never thought I'd see the day. I'll be keeping that post for my records...

:P

[Adelante]

31. I think you're confusing me with someone else

I criticize her when I think she's wrong and commend her when I think she's right quite regularly.

[BootinUp]

32. Wesdem

has always been fair if you ask me. :)

[riqster]

11. Excellent!

[Cameron27]

12. My dues-paying, union-man dad would be proud.

[Cameron27]

16. This deserves another rec

I'll add one.

[sufrommich]

18. Me too. K & R

[zabet]

17. Actions.

They drown out words.
:thumbsup: for Hillary

[William769]

20. K&R!

[emilyg]

21. Good.

[DURHAM D]

22. Good for her.

Now, everyone can follow.

[kenfrequed]

23. Hmm

What does she have to lose?

Politically it is a good move since she is ahead in the polls. It has a very low chance of backfiring since none of the other candidates would dare attack her in her absence or challenge her not being present.

It also de-emphasizes the debates as something to cover by the media at a time where her polling is starting to suffer lag. If there is no contender vs Hillary, there might be no story. Or worse yet the story becomes "Hillary stays away."

Of course this causes the most havoc on the campaigns of the so-called second tier candidates who could rise to become the real threats to her candidacy, particularly with an electorate that is experiencing some kind of News Cycle Fatigue Syndrome with regards to the top three contenders, and who also each have very dedicated supporters behind them.

Another reason that the CBS debates might have been troublesome is that, as an established and fairly serious news outlet, there was a much higher chance that the network would have felt obliged to provide a more balanced amount of time for all contenders. Of course this would result in big boosts for Biden, Dodd, Kucinich, and Gravel.

All of this is very important since the Hillary primary campaign strategy consists of 'inevitability,' name recognition, and a media celebrity status.

[Tom Rinaldo]

24. You should work in a spin room. This is an excellent example of it.

Doing the right thing framed as political opportunism. Yep, send in your resume now.

[kenfrequed]

29. Oh sure

Of cours...Hillary is a saint who doesn't have a political bone in her body.
(obvious sarchasm)


It's called strategy.

I am amazed at the reaction of Hillary supporters that get upset at this after so many of them accuse Kucinich of advocating impeachment as a stunt. Or how many have chided supporters of the other half of thecandidates that favor immediate withdrawl from Iraq as playing politics by suggesting something unrealistic.

[Basileus Basileon]

34. I would have taken that statement as a compliment.

Understanding motivations for actions--even if just for the candidates you dislike--is a good thing.

Now, once you grok that democracy is designed to lead people to do all the right things for all the wrong reasons, you'll be there.

[Clintonista2]

36. "grok" haha

That book really was terrible.

[riqster]

44. Thank the dog, somebody else hated it

...Bob Heinlein fell off a tall cliff with Stranger in a Strange Land. Nice to know I'm not the only one who didn't like the book.

[kenfrequed]

39. Hmmm

Well I guess I would grudgingly say "Thank you" in that case.

I also apologize.

Ammongst us activist sorts it is sometimes considered an insult to be overly strategic or to be too good at spin. And I do sometimes scratch my head at the sad irony of it.

[Basileus Basileon]

55. I'm sure the person who said it intended it to be an insult.

But like I said, I'd ignore their intent and take it as a compliment. It's not a bad thing to understand strategy.

[Tom Rinaldo]

35. First, I'm not a Hillary supporter...

Second, the fact that you presented an argument does not make it a persuasive one. I do not agree with you that Hillary Clinton would prefer to have a politically correct opportunity to skip a Presidential debate. You made a nice attempt to sell that position but I am not buying. By the time anyone gets to the stage of running for President they strongly believe in their own abilities, it takes a huge ego to run for President. These people all want more air time, not less air time. The last thing Clinton or anyone else in the current field would want is to not be present live on stage to make their own case and to immediately defend their own positions against attack rather than let an attack linger without an immediate forceful reply.

Yes Hillary made a shrewd political move just now, just like Edwards did when he was the first to say he would not appear at a FOX sponsored debate. It should serve her political interests to be the first to refuse to cross a picket line, because it appeals to Unions and Liberals, but not because she wants an excuse to miss a debate.

[kenfrequed]

41. Hmm

You presume Hillary, or any candidate would let their egos get in the way of good campaign strategy? My argument might not have been persuasive to you, but surely you could come up with a better counter argument than this.

And have I not made it clear that attacking her for not being present is going to be difficult for any canidate there? The only one that might pull it off is Gravel. You cannot attack the principled stand. It is like attempting to attack one of the other candidates for being for immediate withdrawl. Or going after Kucinich for being pro-impeachment. It will come off as sounding wonkish or heartless, even if the media does decide to try to knuckle down on supporters of the writers.

Biden tried to pull the 'be realistic' stuff with some of the anti-war crowd in one of the earlier debates and his numbers did nothing for his efforts. He came across as mean.

[Tom Rinaldo]

47. Maybe I was not clear

By way of "ego" I meant that those who run for President tend to believe that the more exposure they have to the public the more the public will be persuaded to support them. A Presidential debate is a relatively high profile/ high public exposure event, hence Hillary wants to be there same as all the rest want to be there. If she skips it and others show up, her fear would not be getting attacked for not showing up, it would be not having the chance to explain her own positions in her own words during the debate and instead allowing other candidates to negatively frame her positions for her with her not present.

She made a political gamble by stating she won't cross a picket line to attend, but I agree that the upside for her far outweighs the possible downside. Most likely other candidates will end up refusing to cross a picket line also, and even if they do then Hillary will win points with Labor and labor supporters for not joining them. Probably that would cancel out the loss of exposure, or nearly so. Up thread I noted that I was surprised that Clinton was the first to stake this position. I would have thought at least one or two other candidates - with Edwards certainly being one of them, would have beaten her to this punch - but they didn't.

[kenfrequed]

49. Well..

I certainly hope you didn't trip walking backwards uphill and around the mountain to accidentally agree with me without appearing to do so.

In anycase. The Ego argument is still all wet. Repeating it or rewording it does nothing to make it a valid argument.

As far as gambles go there was little to lose in not showing up and just about everything to gain.

And as far as others jumping on board, the other two front runners have already made similar pledges before you predicted it so I would not quit your day job to become a prognosticator.

[kenfrequed]

37. Moreover

A debate does not rely upon staff or programming creative writers to create its 'product' since its product is purely an item of news. Would she further refuse to give out press releases to be used by news outlets? Has she refused all interviews with anchors from affected networks? If the answer is 'No' than this is a gesture. It might be a heartfelt gesutre or a politically expedient gesture. But that is what it is.

The writers strike is primarily about entertainment writers working for networks not recieving adequate residuals (currently .03% if memory serves-and asking for .06%) for their work when it is released to video and concerns about getting paid appropriately for programming written for internet/promotional usage (some networks were attempting to force writing staff and even directors to generate this additional Internet material without paying them).

[Whisp]

52. doing the 'Right' thing...

:rofl:

yep, you got that right.

[cali]

27. Who's your candidate?

I'm betting you'd have only kudos for him.

[kenfrequed]

30. Kucinich

I do have mostly Kudos for him.

That's because I actually support his positions.

My only complaint is that he would at least let someone touch up his speeches a bit. He seems to write most of them himself and I think he could seriously punch up his language a bit. I also think that he could frame some of his intentions differently: "Department of Peace" comes to mind.

I don't know what he could do in the debates to get more floor time but I am saddened that he and some of the other 'lower tier candidates' get so routinely railed by the blowhard Blitzer and CNN.

[lumberjack_jeff]

54. Exactly. It was a brilliant political move on her part.

Solidarity? Meh.

If she were so strong in her support for the US worker, she wouldn't be so tight with the people offshoring our work to India.

[babylonsister]

25. Good for Clinton; I hope she starts a trend with the other candidates. nt

[dbackjon]

28. Great job!!

[tammywammy]

33. That's good news. Props to Hillary!

I expect the other candidates to follow suit, and shame on them if they don't.

[Vickers]

42. What was the context of this statement?

:shrug:

Was she asked about it by the press, or did the WGA ask for her intentions?

[druidity33]

57. good question... nt

[Beacool]

43. Good for Hillary!!!

and anybody else who refuses to cross the picket line.

[Capn Sunshine]

48. Good for Hillary for speaking out first

This is one of those brinkmanship games played during elections. Everyone waits for the other , particularly if they are anointed as "frontrunner" to go first.

[wiley]

50. Excellent Clinton statement. Really excellent.

[itsrobert]

51. She's also recommending that CNN carry the debate instead as long as Wolf moderates

And requiring the debate to be held at the Clinton Library.

[lumberjack_jeff]

53. Very good strategy.

It's not often when the stars align like that. It is both in the interests of the front-runner to not debate as it is in her interest to look good while having failed to get the endorsement of most unions.

Of course, if those writers jobs had been outsourced to India, it'd all be hunkydory.

[calteacherguy]

59. No candidate will cross the line. nt

[Audio_Al]

60. Wonderful news! This is absolutely exactly what she should do!

Thanks for the post.

[antigop]

62. but will she actually walk the picket line? Has she ever walked a picket line? n/t

[eridani]

63. Good for her.

Now let's have some action on fair trade.

[TheWraith]

64. Here's a smart thing to do: the candidates should set up their own "debate" on the street outside.

Walk around and take questions from the people on the picket line. Good PR for all involved, and if the CBS cameras want to show up and cover the thing, well, that's their perogative.

[lostnotforgotten]

65. Does Not Make Up For Her Being A Bush War Enabler

eom