prism_specification

 

 

 

 

 

PRISM:

Publishing Requirements for Industry Standard Metadata

 

 

Guide to the
PRISM Aggregator Message V2.2

 

Referencing the PRISM Specification 2.1 and 3.0

 

October 4, 2012

 

 

 

 

idealliancelogo_cymk


Copyright and Legal Notices

Copyright (c) International Digital Enterprise Alliance, Inc. [IDEAlliance] (2001 2010).

All Rights Reserved.

This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to IDEAlliance, except as needed for the purpose of developing IDEAlliance specifications, in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the IDEAlliance Intellectual Property Policy document must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English. The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by IDEAlliance or its successors or assigns.

NO WARRANTY, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE REGARDING THE ACCURACY, ADEQUACY, COMPLETENESS, LEGALITY, RELIABILITY OR USEFULNESS OF ANY INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DOCUMENT OR IN ANY SPECIFICATION OR OTHER PRODUCT OR SERVICE PRODUCED OR SPONSORED BY IDEALLIANCE. THIS DOCUMENT AND THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN AND INCLUDED IN ANY SPECIFICATION OR OTHER PRODUCT OR SERVICE OF IDEALLIANCE IS PROVIDED ON AN " AS IS" BASIS. IDEALLIANCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY ACTUAL OR ASSERTED WARRANTY OF NON-INFRINGEMENT OF PROPRIETARY RIGHTS, MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

NEITHER IDEALLIANCE NOR ITS CONTRIBUTORS SHALL BE HELD LIABLE FOR ANY IMPROPER OR INCORRECT USE OF INFORMATION. NEITHER IDEALLIANCE NOR ITS CONTRIBUTORS ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANYONE'S USE OF INFORMATION PROVIDED BY IDEALLIANCE. IN NO EVENT SHALL IDEALLIANCE OR ITS CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE TO ANYONE FOR DAMAGES OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, LOST PROFITS, LOST DATA OR ANY FORM OF SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES OF ANY KIND WHETHER BASED ON BREACH OF CONTRACT OR WARRANTY, TORT, PRODUCT LIABILITY OR OTHERWISE.

IDEAlliance takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available. IDEAlliance does not represent that it has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on IDEAlliance's procedures with respect to rights in IDEAlliance specifications can be found at the IDEAlliance website. Copies of claims of rights made available for publication, assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification, can be obtained from the President of IDEAlliance.

IDEAlliance requests interested parties to disclose any copyrights, trademarks, service marks, patents, patent applications, or other proprietary or intellectual property rights which may cover technology that may be required to implement this specification. Please address the information to the President of IDEAlliance.


Table of Contents

1     Introduction. 1

1.1         About the PRISM Aggregator Message. 1

1.2         Previous Versions of the PAM Guide. 2

1.3         PAM DTDs and XSDs. 2

1.4         PAM Namespaces. 3

1.5         Standard URLs for PAM Schemas. 3

1.6         PAM Guide V2.2. 4

1.7         The PRISM Specification Documentation Packages. 4

1.8         Legend for Diagrams. 4

1.9         Relationship to PRISM.. 5

1.10       Relationship to PSV. 5

2     Elements in the PRISM Aggregator Message. 7

2.1         Elements in Alphabetical Order 7

2.2         Message Framework. 8

2.3         Head Elements by Function. 9

2.4         Head Elements by Structure. 13

2.5         Body Elements. 16

2.6         Inline Metadata Markup. 18

2.7         Media Element 18

Appendix A        PAM Metadata Glossary. 21

Appendix B        PRISM Class Attribute Reference. 27

Appendix C        PAM Example with XHTML Default for DTD.. 29

Appendix D        PAM Example with XHTML Default for XSD.. 43

Appendix E         Fully Qualified PAM Example for DTD.. 56

Appendix F         Fully Qualified PAM Example for XSD.. 69


1        Introduction

The PRISM Aggregator Message is a standard format for publishers to use in transmitting XML content and associated metadata to aggregators and syndicators. This document describes PAM in detail and provides some examples of how it is used.

1.1      About the PRISM Aggregator Message

Using the PRISM Aggregator Message is consistent with the existing flow of content between suppliers and aggregators. PAM simply provides an alternative format. However, adapting your processes to conform to PAM will provide many advantages and financial benefits to you and your business partners.

·        The use of a single, industry-standard format for extraction and acquisition reduces the errors and costs of tracking and deploying multiple formats to communicate with multiple business partners.

·        The use of a single format for all organizations speeds the processing of content and speeds the integration of new business partners into your workflow. If a new partner is using a format that you can already handle, little if any process change is necessary to transmit content between you. The value and accessibility of the content will be increased because time to market is reduced.

·        The use of a common industry format reduces the barrier to entry for all publishers and content aggregators. This is especially valuable for smaller organizations.

·        Aggregators manage content from a large numbers of sources. Today, you receive metadata in as many different formats as you do content. By providing a common metadata standard, PRISM helps everyone in the electronic content business track, use and re-use their content.

·        Providing content encoded in XML adds to the content’s value because it makes it possible to repurpose it for multiple opportunities:

·        Tables of information marked up as tables can take advantage of more formatting capabilities, making them look more professional on output than the fixed-width font style that many are forced to use. Furthermore, the information within them now becomes accessible as data.

·        The inline XML markup that lets you identify names, key phrases and other important data elements within an article or paragraph, makes it easier to format them, search for them and turn them into links. This ability will also greatly contribute to search and display flexibility.

·        Standardization of the use of special characters gives you wider access to more scientific symbols and foreign characters. Furthermore, they can be handled automatically.

All of these capabilities combine to enable you use your content on a wider variety of output media and products, getting more value from your information assets.

By enabling the delivery of detailed information in a consistent format, the PRISM 2.1 DTD or PRISM 2.1 XSD allows publishers and other content-related companies to better communicate with a broader range of partners who are just now standardizing on XML. Many major publishers, other content rights holders, and developers of software tools and information and retrieval systems have indicated their plans to support this standard.

1.2      Previous Versions of the PAM Guide

The PRISM specification defines a collection of metadata elements for common publishing needs. One application of PRISM was to define a format that combined PRISM metadata with content markup to support the use case of transmitting XML content from the publisher to aggregators and syndicators.

Prior to the release of PRISM 2.1, the PAM Guide documented the PRISM Aggregator Message Document Type Definition (DTD).  This was the only schema definition provided for the PRISM Aggregator Message.

Note: It is important to note that there are some differences between XML DTDs and XML Schemas (XSDs) and there are differences between how documents are validated against DTDs and XSDs.  This is particularly noticeable when using XML Namespaces.  PAM utilizes elements and attributes from seven (7) namespaces and care must be taken when moving from one validation environment to the other.

According to Ronald Bourret in his online Namespaces FAQ http://www.rpbourret.com/xml/NamespacesFAQ.htm, “Validating against a schema is called schema validation. Validating against a DTD is simply called validation.  Although there are a number of differences between schema validation and validation, the main difference between the two with respect to XML namespaces is that schema validation resolves qualified names into expanded names before comparing them, while validation simply compares the qualified names. As a result, a document being validated against an XML Schema can use any prefix in qualified names, while a document being validated against a DTD must use the prefix that is used in the DTD.  Thus, the prefixes in the XML document must match the prefixes in the DTD and validation against a DTD, while possible, does not really behave as one would expect with respect to XML namespaces.  When an XML document is validated against XML Schemas prefixes in the XML document do not need to match prefixes in the XML schema.”

1.3      PAM DTDs and XSDs

Two new PAM DTDs have been prepared in support of PRISM 2.2.  The DTDs were based on the Modular XHTML Specification.  But the structure was simplified to allow for the development of an XSD and to support maintenance over time. The two DTDs are:

One PAM XSD was prepared.  This XSD was designed to mirror the PAM DTD as closely as possible, given the differences between schema validation and validation.  See Section 2.2 above.  Two instance types, mirroring those that validate with pam-full.dtd and pam-xhtml.dtd can be authored. 

Fully qualified PAM xml:  If you wish to validate strictly against the XSD, including exact namespace mappings, you will need to call to the pam.xsd without defaulting the xhtml namespaces.  This is done with the following statement that calls to the pam.xsd with “xmlns:xsi” and declares all namespaces:

xmlns:pam="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/pam/2.2/"

xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"

xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/basic/2.2/"

xmlns:pim="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/pim/2.2/"

xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"

xmlns:prl="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/prl/2.0/"

xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" 

xmlns:pur="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/prismusagerights/2.1/"

xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"

targetNamespace="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/pam/2.2/"

elementFormDefault="qualified" attributeFormDefault="qualified" version="pam06282012">

PAM xml with xhtml set as the tag default:  If you wish to tag PAM xml using default xhtml tagging, you will need to call to the pam.xsd and default the xhtml namespace.  This is done with the following statement that calls to the pam.xsd with “xmlns:xsi”,  declares all namespaces and defaults to the xhtml namespace

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<pam:message xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.prismstandard.org/schemas/pam/2.2/

xmlns:pam=“http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/pam/2.2/"

xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"

xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/basic/2.2/"

xmlns:pim="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/pim/2.2/"

xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"

xmlns:prl="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/prl/2.0/"

xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" 

xmlns:pur="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/prismusagerights/2.1/"

xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns="http://prismstandard.org/pam2.2/xhtml">

1.4      PAM Namespaces

PRISM will retain the URI references for all XSD modules for PAM with their /2.2/ designation.  Since the PRISM Usage Rights namespace was added with PRISM 2.1, pur: will have a 2.1 designation. See Section 3 for recommended namespace URI.

1.5      Standard URLs for PAM Schemas

Standard URLs have been established to access PRISM/PAM XSDs and DTDs.

To access PAM 2.2 XSDs and DTDs:

http://www.prismstandard.org/schemas/pam/2.2/pam.xsd

http://www.prismstandard.org/schemas/pam/2.2/pam-xhtml.dtd

http://www.prismstandard.org/schemas/pam/2.2/pam-full.dtd

1.6      PAM Guide V2.2

The elements that are included in PAM Guide V2.2 represent existing PAM elements combined with new and updated elements that represent both traditional printed article content and multi-platform article content including web based content and mobile content.

The location of the PAM Guide V2.2 is http://www.prismstandard.org/guides/PAMGuide_2.2.pdf or http://www.prismstandard.org/guides/PAMGuide_2.2.htm.

Note: In adding new elements and attributes to construct PAM V2.2, the XML message became somewhat more complex.  Not only are we now mixing elements from seven (7) namespaces but we are also mixing attributes and elements from different namespaces.  For example <xhtml:h1 prism:class=”x” or <dc:contributor prism:role=”x”.  Also differences in construction of a DTD vs an XSD means that for messages validated against XSDs, it is not possible to default to the xhtml namespace as we have done in the past using a DTD alone.  Therefore for clarity and to enable instances to validate against either a DTD or XSD, all elements and attributes must be namespace qualified.

1.7      The PRISM Specification Documentation Packages

The PRISM 3.0 Specification Documentation Package is referred to in this Guide because PAM 2.2 uses some of the new elements contained within the PRISM 3.0 Specifications  Likewise PAM also refers to documentation for PRISM 2.1 in order to maintain its backward compatibility.  Certain elements that remain within PAM have been deprecated when PRISM 3.0 was developed.  So PAM truly is made up of a mix of elements crossing both of these specifications. .  The PRISM 2.1 Documentation consists of the following documents.  Use these documents as the authoritative source for all issues of concern.

The PRISM 2.1 Specification Documentation Package can be accessed at www.prismstandard.org/specifications/2.1/ while the PRISM 3.0 Specification Documentation Package is accessed at www.prismstandard.org/specifications/3.0/.

1.8      Legend for Diagrams

In this guide, the XML model is often illustrated by a model diagram.  Each diagram was produced with the XML Spy product.  These diagrams show the elements and attributes that make up a model and their order and frequency.

The legend for reading XML model diagrams is shown in Figure 2.1.  Elements that are required by the model are shown in a solid box.  Elements that are optional are shown in a dotted box.  Likewise attributes may be required (solid box) or optional (dotted box).  A repeatable occurrence of elements is indicated by numbers below each element box to the right. 

The diagrams also indicate how elements are assembled. When building some models, elements may occur in a sequence with a specified order.  Other models provide a choice from among a number of elements.  The legend in Figure 1.2 shows the connectors for sequence and choice.

Figure 2.1 Legend for XML Diagrams

1.9      Relationship to PRISM

PAM is the PRISM Aggregator Message.  The use case for PAM is to encode magazine articles in XML to deliver content to aggregators. PAM is an XML tag set built on the foundation of PRISM metadata and controlled vocabularies.  PAM is an application of PRISM, but PAM and PRISM are not synonymous.  PAM is an XML tag set that uses PRISM metadata for a very specific purpose while PRISM remains the core specification for metadata and controlled vocabularies. See Figure 2.2.

1.10  Relationship to PSV

PAM is the PRISM Aggregator Message.  The use case for PAM was originally to encode magazine articles in XML to deliver content to aggregators..  While some publishers currently use PAM XML as a content source, that was not the original intent. Now a new use case, to encode semantically rich content for transformation and delivery to any platform, has led to the development of a new XML tag set, the PRISM Source Vocabulary.  PSV, like PAM is also built on the foundation of PRISM metadata and controlled vocabularies,  But nextPub and PAM are not the same.  Each has a very specific use case and each has a different XML tag set.  See Figure 2.2.

Note: PSV is based on PRISM 3.0 while PAM 2.2 remains backwardly compatible and is based on PRISM 2.1 with a few extensions to include a few critical elements from PRISM 3.0.

Figure 2.2 Relationship of PAM, PRISM and nextPub


2        Elements in the PRISM Aggregator Message

2.1      Elements in Alphabetical Order

The following is an alphabetical list of the metadata elements that are included in the PAM message.  Following the element name is the namespace pointing to the document in the PRISM documentation package where that element appears.



2.2      Message Framework

These elements form the containers for PAM metadata and text encoding elements.  They, themselves do not encode specific metadata fields.    Figure 3.1 shows the message framework structure. 

Figure 3.1 PAM Message Framework

The PAM message begins with the pam:message tag.  There is an optional attribute to specify the version of the schema used for this message.  Each article is made up of an XHTML head element that carries numerous descriptive metadata fields followed by an XHTML body element that carries the text of the article coded in XML.

Example: The following example shows how to code the PAM message framework. Note that this example uses the pam.dtd as its schema with the default being the xthml: namespace.

<?xml version="C1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<!DOCTYPE pam:message SYSTEM "pam-xhtml.dtd">

<pam:message>

  <pam:article>

    <head>

        ARTICLE METADATA HERE

    </head>

        ARTICLE CONTENT HERE

    <body>

    </body>

  </pam:article>

</pam:message>

Example: The following example shows how to code the PAM message framework. Note that this example uses the pam.xsd as its schema and does not default to the xhtml: namespace.

<pam:message xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"

xsi:schemaLocation="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/pam/2.2/ pam.xsd"

xmlns:pam="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/pam/2.2/"

xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"

xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"

xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"

xmlns:pim="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/pim/2.2/"

xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/basic/2.2/"

xmlns:prl="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/prl/2.0/"

xmlns:pur="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/prismusagerights/2.1/"

xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" >

  <pam:article>

    <xhtml:head>

        ARTICLE METADATA HERE

    </xhtml:head>

        ARTICLE CONTENT HERE

    <xhtml:body>

    </xhtml:body>

  </pam:article>

</pam:message>

2.3      Head Elements by Function

There are many metadata elements in the article head.  These can be grouped by function.  The grouping of elements by function can be seen in the final order of elements prescribed by the XML schema.

Key Elements for Aggregators:  These elements provide key identification and signal those receiving the content about the most important features of the article that follows.  The dc:identifier is required for each article. The publication name is also required.  Either the cover date or the publication date is required.

The status of the article can be indicated as A (Add, this article is new), C (correction, the original article is being resent with a published correction appended in prism:hasCorrection), U (update, replace the entire article previously sent), and D (delete article previously sent). The default is to add the article.

Additional Issue Identifiers:

Elements Providing a Title: These element provide a number of titles, some of which may vary by delivery platform.

Elements indicating Creative Origin:Elements identifying creators and contributors

Elements providing Publication Information:  Elements that help identify the publication to which this article belongs

Publication Date Elements:

Elements Identifying Position within in an Issue or on a Website:

Element Identifying the Subject of an Article:

Article Length

Related Content

Rights and Usage

Best Practice is to employ the new rights description elements from the pur: namespace.  Those elements include:

Blog Identification

·        prism:blogTitle

·        prism:blogURL

Series and Supplement Indentification:

·        seriesNumber

·        seriesTitle

·        supplementDisplayID

·        supplementTitle

·        supplementStartingPage

Note:  The following PAM rights elements will function in PAM 2.2 but will be deprecated if PAM moves to full PRISM 3.0 support.

·        prism:copyright

·        prl:usage

·        prism:dateReceived

·        prism:embargoDate prism:platform=

·        prism:expirationDate prism:platform=


2.4      Head Elements by Structure

The following is a list of the PAM metadata elements that occur in the head element according to the specified PAM structure.  The elements in the message head are specifically ordered where deemed appropriate by publishers preparing content to deliver and aggregators who are receiving content.  See Figure 2 for the head model.  Remember the “?” means the element is optional. The asterisk indicates that the elements are optional, can appear as many times as necessary, and can be used in any order. The order here is important!  While the order of the elements at the beginning and end of the head is important, a group of elements in the middle of the article head can be used to specify the subject of the article can occur in any order.

Remember that you will not use all the elements in the article head.  See the following example below for an to see how the article head might be coded:

Example: This example shows a typical message head for a print article with the xhtml namespace default.

    <head>

      <dc:identifier>100340926</dc:identifier>

      <prism:issueIdentifier>1000710</prism:issueIdentifier>

      <pam:status>A</pam:status>

      <prism:originPlatform prism:platform="print"/>

      <dc:title>The Real Running Mates</dc:title>

      <dc:creator>Karen Tumulty</dc:creator>

      <dc:contributor prism:place="New York">Reporting by Nancy Gibbs

      </dc:contributor>

      <dc:contributor prism:place="Washington">Jay Newton-Small</dc:contributor>

      <prism:publicationName>Time</prism:publicationName>

      <prism:issn>0040-781X</prism:issn>

      <prism:coverDate>2007-09-24</prism:coverDate>

      <prism:publicationDate prism:platform=”web”>
       2007-09-22</prism:publicationDate>

      <prism:coverDisplayDate>September 24, 2007</prism:coverDisplayDate>

      <prism:volume>170</prism:volume>

      <prism:number>13</prism:number>

      <prism:edition>U.S. Edition</prism:edition>

      <prism:startingPage>30</prism:startingPage>

      <prism:url>http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/

                              0,28804,1660946_1661334_1661288,00.html</prism:url>

      <prism:channel>Specials</prism:channel>

      <prism:section>The Well</prism:section>

      <prism:subsection1>Cover Story</prism:subsection1>

      <prism:subsection2>Nation</prism:subsection2>

      <prism:subsection3>Running Mates</prism:subsection3>

      <dc:subject>POLITICS</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>CAMPAIGNS</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>VOTERS</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>FAMILY</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>MARRIAGE</dc:subject>

      <prism:person>Elizabeth Edwards</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Cindy McCain</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Bill Clinton</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Michelle Obama</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Jeri Thompso</prism:person>

      <prism:genre>coverStory</prism:genre>

      <prism:wordCount>4188</prism:wordCount>

      <dcterms:hasPart>See also additional image(s) in Cover Description file and Table of Contents of same issue.</dcterms:hasPart>

     <pur:rightsAgent>Harold McBain</pur:rightsAgent>
</head>

Figure 3.2a Article Head Metadata Structure Part 1

Figure 3.2b Article Head Metadata Structure Part 2


2.5      Body Elements

The content of the article is coded within the XHTML body element.  The body has been enhanced in several ways.  A PRISM “class” attribute has been added to many elements so that we can specify what type of paragraph or heading they are.  In addition a media element has been added to provide for special encoding of related media objects.  See Figure 3.3.

Figure 3.3 PAM Body Elements

Many body elements are what is called “block presentation elements.”  These structures include parabraphs, block quotes and headings.  These elements carry the prism:class= attribute and can be used to code special structures such as pull quotes and side bars.  If you need to specify a class for other xhtml elements you can use the xhtml class= attritute as an alternative.

Note: Best practice is to use the prism:class= attribute on the <div tag when special structures are complex such as several paragraphs or a paragraph and a table. To specify a structure as a box, deck, byline, dateline, sidebar, lead-in, fnRef, fnBody, fnKey, pullQuote or  ticker use prism:class and not the XHTML class= attribute.

Figure 3.4 shows the paragraph structure.  It is made up of text and allows numerous other elements within the text.

Figure 3.4. Block Presentation Element Structure

Example:  This example shows typical body markup with the xhtml namespace default.

<body>

      <h1>A Wake-Up Call on Campus</h1>

      <p prism:class="deck">Virginia Tech has inspired counseling services to reassess</ p>
      <p prism:class="byline">By Nancy Shute</ p>
      <p>This fall, when students at <pim:location>Penn State-Altoona</pim:location> trudge back to their dorms demoralized by a failed test or a romance on the rocks, they can take advantage of free <pim:keyword>mental-health counseling</pim:keyword>, on the spot, from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Thursday.</p>
      <p>At <pim:location>Cornell University</pim:location>, where foreign students tend to avoid the campus counseling center, a counselor now staffs an outpost in the international dorm so the isolated and struggling can drop in for an impromptu chat.</p>

      <p>All students who come to the health center at the <pim:location>University of Wisconsin</pim:location>, even if just for a sprained ankle or a case of the sniffles, soon will be automatically screened for depression and offered treatment if needed.</p>

. . . . </body>

2.6      Inline Metadata Markup

The standard XHTML body elements have been modified to allow for the inclusion of additional PRISM inline markup elements.  These elements allow for coding the subjects of an article right inline with the content.  This type of encoding facilitates more exact search capabilities.  Not only can one locate an article with a particular subject, but the exact area of the text can be targeted as well.  The PAM 2.2 inline markeup elements include:

2.7      Media Element

A special pam:media element has been added to encode media related to the article content.  While the media object is not included in the XML message, the pam:mediaReference can be used to link to the media object.  See Figure 3.5.

Figure 3.5 PAM Media Element

Example: this example shows a sample pam:media element

    <pam:media>

        <dc:type>Picture</dc:type>

        <dc:format>image/jpeg</dc:format>

        <pam:nonpublishedMediaTitle>Virginia Tech</pam:nonpublishedMediaTitle>

        <pam:credit>Scott Goldsmith/Aurora for USN&amp;WR</pam:credit>

        <pam:caption>Gregory Eells and his staff of counselors are much more
           visible around campus this fall.
        </pam:caption>

     </pam:media>


Appendix A PAM Metadata Glossary

This appendix contains a glossary for the metadata elements within the PRISM Aggregator message.  The elements are listed alphabetically.  Following the element name is the namespace pointing to the document in the PRISM documentation package where that element appears.

academicField (prism:, pim:) Refines dc:subject by specifying an academic speciality.

adultContentWarning (pur:)  Specifies an adult content warning for an article or media object..

aggregateIssueNumber (prism:) This number represents the total number of issues of a serial publication.

aggregationType (prism:)  The unit of aggregation such as a magazine or journal.

agreement (pur:)  Specifies the contract, license or release for a media object.

alternateTitle (prism:)  An alternate title or alternate headline for a resource that may be used in a table of contents, a popup etc. and can vary with platform.

article (pam:) Contains the metadata and markup for one article. 

channel (prism:)  Web channel assigned to the resource.  A navigational aid.  Has attributes for indication of subchannel1 -4 to indicate finer nagivation.

caption (pam:) Caption for a media object in PAM.

contributor (dc:)  An entity responsible for making contributions to the content of a media resource.

copyright (prism:, pur:)  Copyright statement for the resource.

corporateEntity (prism:)  The name(s) of publisher’s organizational units related to the resource, either as the financial owner or group responsible for the resource, and at a lower hierarchical level than the corporate entity named in dc:publisher.

coverDate (prism:)  The cover date is the numeric form of the issue date (cover display date) printed on the cover of a magazine; suitable for storing in a database field with a 'date' data type.

coverDisplayDate (prism:)  The cover display date is the issue date printed on the cover of a magazine as a text string. 

creator (dc:)  An entity primarily responsible for creating the content of a media resource.

credit (pam:)  A caption-style attribution for a media object as published.

creditLine(pur:)  Specifies the credit line for a media asset required by an agreement. May be tied directly to an agreement by the agreementID attribute.

description (dc:)  An account of the content of the resource.

doi (prism:)  The Digital Object Identifier, DOI, for the article.

edition (prism:)  An identifier for one of several alternate issues of a magazine or other resource such as a foreign edition.

eIssn (prism:)  The electronic ISSN for the publication in which the resource was published.

embargoDate (prism:, pur:)  Earliest date (potentially including time) the resource may be made available to users or customers according to the rights agreement or to a clause in the rights agreement.  May be specified by distribution platform.

endingPage (prism:)

event (prism:, pim:)  An event (social gathering, phenomenon, or more generally something that happened at a specifiable place and time) referred to in order to indicate a subject of the resource.

excusivityEndDate (pur:) The date (potentially including time) when exclusive rights to a resource ends. May be specified by distribution platform.

expirationDate (prism:, pur:)  The date (potentially including time) by which the resource must be removed from availablty to users or customers used according to a rights agreement.  May be specified by distribution platform.

format (dc:)  The physical or digital manifestation of the resource.  Expressed as a MIME type.

genre (prism:)  Describes the genre, or the intellectual content of the resource.

hasCorrection (prism:)  Identifies any known corrections to the current resource.

hasPart (dcterms:)  The described resource includes the referenced resource either physically or logically.

identifier (dc:)  An unambiguous reference to the resource, within a given context.  Required for each article sent within a PAM message.

imageSizeRestriction (pur:) Specifies restrictions on the usage size for an image. May be tied to agreement.

industry (prism:, pim:)  An industry or industry sector, referred to in order to indicate a subject of the resource.

isbn (prism:)  The ISBN for the book in which the resource was published.

issn (prism:)  The ISSN for the publication in which the resource was published.

issueIdentifier (prism:)  An additional identifier, typically used to record an identifier for a specific issue of a magazine or other resource, as distinct from the "special" name element, prism:issueName.

issueName  (prism:)  An additional identifier, typically used for major issues of a magazine or other resource.

issueTeaser (prism:) A teaser that is used to increase interest in an issue of a magazine or other serial publication.

IssueType  (prism:) Defines the type of serial publication issue. Serial publications often have two different types of issues.  Regular issues are part of the subscription while Special Issues have a unique focus and content.  Special Issues are typically not included with the magazine subscription.

keyword (pim:, prism:)  An element used to tag keywords that are likely to be used in search queries. Note that this differs from a subject or elements such as prism:person, prism:event, or prism:organization that are the subject of the article.

link (prism:, pim:) Describes a link to an outside resource such as a website, email or hash tag.

location (prism:, pim:)  A geospatial location, referred to in order to indicate a subject of the resource.

media (pam:)  An alternative to the XHTML img element. Permits referring to and providing metadata for a media object related to an article.

mediaReference (pam:)  Links to the media file referred to by pam:media.

mediaTitle (pam)  Published title of the media element.

message (pam:)  Root element for message from publisher to aggregator that ontains one or more articles.

nonpublishedMediaTitle (pam:) Nonpublished title of the media element.

number  (prism:)  Additional identifier for the publication where the resource appeared, providing the number portion of the common volume, number scheme.

object (prism:, pim:)  The name of a physical or virtual object, referred to in order to indicate a subject of the resource.

optionEndDate (pur:) The date (potentially including time) when the option to use a resource ends. May be specified by distribution platform.

organization (prism:, pim:)  The name of an organization, referred to in order to indicate a subject of the resource.

originPlatform (prism:)  The original platform where a resource’s intellectual content was delivered.

pageRange (prism:)  Identifies the page range for the published print version of the resource.

permissions (pur:) A free text field used to pecify special permissions for the use of a media asset.

person (prism:, pim:)  The proper name of a person, referred to in order to indicate a subject of the resource.

postDate (prism:)  Date (and potentially the time) the identified resource is to be posted online. This includes both web and mobile content.

productCode (prism:) The product code for a publication.  This may be a bipad or even a full UPC or Magazine Barcode.

publicationDate (prism:) This is the close date in date time format for a print publication and the post date for digital content; suitable for storing in a database field with a 'date' data type. Because the publication date may vary by platform, it is the best practice to specify the platform using the PRISM Controlled Vocabulary for platform.

publicationDisplayDate (prism:) This is the close date in date time format for a print publication and the post date for digital content expressed as a text string.  Because the publication date may vary by platform, it is the best practice to specify the platform using the PRISM Controlled Vocabulary for platform.

publicationName (prism:)  Title of the magazine, or other publication, in which a resource was/will be published.

publisher (dc:)  The entity responsible for making the resource available.

quote (pim:)  Marks the words attributed to a specific person in the text.

restrictions (pur:) A free text field used to pecify special permissions for the use of a media asset.

reuseProhibited (pur:) Cannot be used.

rightsAgent (pur:) Can be used to specify the rights agent.  This is a free text field so contact information may be included. The rights agent may not be the rights owner.

rightsOwner (pur:) Can be used to specify the rights owner.  This is a free text field so contact information may be included. The rights owner may be different from the rights agent.

section (prism:)  Name of the publication section in which the resource is categorized. A section is a logical subdivision of a publication which helps to identify the general subject domain of the contained content.

seriesNumber (prism:) The number of an issue within a series of issues, typically focused on a special topic.

seriesTitle (prism:) The title of a series of serial publications.

sport (prism:, pim:) Refines dc:subject.  Describes a sport, or an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature.

startingPage (prism:)  Identifies the first page number for the published version of the resource.

status (pam:)  Defines the processing status of the article.  The default is to add the article (A).

subchannel1 (prism:) First level Web sub channel assigned to the resource.

subchannel2 (prism:) Second level Web sub channel assigned to the resource.

subchannel3 (prism:) Third level Web sub channel assigned to the resource.

subchannel4 (prism:) Fourth level Web sub channel assigned to the resource.

subject (dc:)  The main topic or topics of the content of the resource.  Defines “aboutness”.

subsection1 (prism:)  Name of the subsection of the publication in which the resource appears. Should follow the prism:section element and precede the prism:subsection2 element (if one is given).

subsection2 (prism:)  Name of the subsection of the publication in which the resource appears. Should follow the prism:section1 element and precede the prism:subsection3 element (if one is given).

subsection3 (prism:)  Name of the subsection of the publication in which the resource appears. Should follow the prism:section2 element and precede the prism:subsection4 element (if one is given).

subsection4 (prism:)  Name of the subsection of the publication in which the resource appears. Should follow the prism:section3 element.

subtitle (prism:) The subtitle for the publication, typically a book.

supplementDisplayID (prism:) Identifies the supplement displayed on the supplement cover.

supplementStartingPage (prism:) Identifies the first page number for supplement within the pages of a magazine.

supplementTitle (prism:) Identifies the title as displayed for the supplement published within a magazine.

teaser (prism:)  A short description of the resource.

textDescription (pam:) Contains a textual description for the item referred to in a pam:media element.

ticker (pim:, prism:)  Indicates a stock ticker symbol that is the subject of the article.

timePeriod (prism:, pim:)  The temporal subject of the content of the resource.

title (dc:)  The published name given to the resource.

type (dc:)  The style of presentation of the resource’s content, such as an image or a table.

url (prism:)  This element provides the url for an article or unit of content.

usage (prl:)  A standard phrase or phrases, defined by the publisher that describes the usage or restriction criteria for the content.

uspsNumber (prism:) A unique identifying code for a serial publication granted by the USPS when no ISSN exists.  This can be used in place of the ISSN or can even be used as the unique dc:identifier.

versionIdentifier (prism:)  Provides an additional identifier, typically used to record a specific version of a resource. Best practice is to use a version identifier that implies sequence.

volume (prism:)  Additional identifier for the publication where the resource appeared, providing the Volume portion of the common Volume, Number scheme.

wordCount (prism:)  The (approximate) count of the number of words in a textual resource.


Appendix B PRISM Class Attribute Reference

This appendix contains a complete list of the class attributes that are allowed on elements within the body of the PRISM Aggregator Message.

The URI for the PRISM PAM Class Vocabulary is:http://prismstandard.org/vocabularies/2.0/pam.xml.

Term

Definition

#body

The principal component of the resource. [NewsML]

#box

Ancillary content that is presented with an article and cannot stand alone.

#byline

The byline (author) of the story.

#caption

Text identifying or explaining, and printed in close proximity to, illustrations or other images. [AAT]

#credit

An acknowledgement, appearing in the style of a caption.

#dateline

The geographical location where the story was filed, e.g., city, state, and/or country where the story originated.

#deck

A sub-head or secondary headline that generally is preceded by the article headline and precedes the body of the story.

#footnotes

Note above the footer of the page made up of the note and the reference to the note.

#lead-in

Eye catching beginning to a caption.

#pullQuote

Eye catching quote pulled from the text of the body of an article.

#sidebar

A substantive piece of content that is presented with an article and can stand alone.

#subtitle

A subtitle of a resource.

#teaser

A short description of the resource.

#title

The title of a resource.


Appendix C PAM Example with XHTML Default for DTD

This example shows the coding for fully qualified PAM xml verified against the pam-xhtml.dtd.    Note that this example is for content originally published online and validated against a DTD.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<!DOCTYPE pam:message SYSTEM "pam-xhtml.dtd">

<pam:message>

  <pam:article xml:lang="en-US">

    <head>

      <dc:identifier>100340926</dc:identifier>

      <prism:issueIdentifier>1000710</prism:issueIdentifier>

      <pam:status>U</pam:status>

      <prism:originPlatform prism:platform="print"/>

      <dc:title>The Real Running Mates</dc:title>

      <dc:creator>Karen Tumulty</dc:creator>

      <dc:contributor prism:place="New York">With reporting by Nancy Gibbs</dc:contributor>

      <dc:contributor prism:place="Washington">Jay Newton-Small</dc:contributor>

      <prism:publicationName>Time</prism:publicationName>

      <prism:issn>000000</prism:issn>

      <prism:coverDate>2007-09-24</prism:coverDate>

      <prism:coverDisplayDate>September 24, 2007</prism:coverDisplayDate>

      <prism:volume>170</prism:volume>

      <prism:number>13</prism:number>

      <prism:edition>U.S. Edition</prism:edition>

      <prism:startingPage>30</prism:startingPage>

      <prism:url>http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1660946_1661334_1661288,00.html</prism:url>

      <prism:channel>Specials</prism:channel>

      <prism:section>The Well</prism:section>

      <prism:subsection1>Cover Story</prism:subsection1>

      <prism:subsection2>Nation</prism:subsection2>

      <prism:subsection3>Running Mates</prism:subsection3>

      <dc:subject>POLITICS</dc:subject>

<dc:subject>CAMPAIGNS</dc:subject>

<dc:subject>CHILDREN</dc:subject>

<dc:subject>VOTERS</dc:subject>

<dc:subject>FAMILY</dc:subject>

<dc:subject>PRESS</dc:subject>

<prism:person>Elizabeth Edwards</prism:person>

<prism:person>Hillary Clinton</prism:person>

<prism:person>Cindy McCain</prism:person>

<prism:person>Laura Bush</prism:person>

<prism:genre>coverStory</prism:genre>

      <prism:wordCount>4188</prism:wordCount>

<dcterms:hasPart>See also additional image(s) in Cover Description file and Table of Contents of same issue.</dcterms:hasPart>

<pur:creditLine pur:required="yes" xml:lang="FR">Credit given</pur:creditLine>

</head>

        <body>

 <p prism:class="deck">

Political spouses

have traditionally wielded their influence in private. But in this race, all

the rules will have to be rewritten

</p>

<p>Elizabeth Edwards

prides herself on her ability to explain the fine print of her husband&apos;s energy

plan and the details of how John Edwards would respond to the next Katrina-size

natural disaster. She can rattle off the number of people who lack health

insurance in New Hampshire (about 127,000), how many schools there have failed

to meet the Federal Government&apos;s standards for &quot;adequate yearly

progress&quot; (191) and where the state ranks in teacher pay (24th). &quot;I

think it&apos;s important to learn policy, so that people don&apos;t have to dumb down

their questions because I&apos;m the spouse,&quot; she says. Nor, for that matter,

does she feel a spouse should have to sand down her edges. When a woman at a

house party in Bow, N.H., asked her one recent morning how her husband&apos;s

campaign would respond to &quot;the inevitable horrible mudslinging&quot; that is

part of presidential politics, you might have thought she was the one in the

family who had grown up in a brawling mill town. &quot;It&apos;s a question of being

prepared and not having any hesitation,&quot; she said. &quot;You go straight to

the nose because then they walk away bleeding. And that&apos;s the point.&quot;</p>

 

<p>It&apos;s hard to

imagine Laura Bush saying something like that. There is no handbook for the

spouse of a presidential candidate, but the expectations have always been

pretty clear. She (yes, that was the presumption) should first do no harm. Her

safest bet: stand silently at his side, beaming with admiration and awe, the

well-coiffed testament to a home life that was tranquil, drama-free and utterly

traditional. When the spouse became the story, it was seldom good news for the

principal.</p>

 

<p>Take what

happened in 1992, when a certain Governor from Arkansas started throwing around

quips like &quot;Buy one, get one free&quot; and musing about the possibility of

giving his outspoken lawyer wife a Cabinet post. In no time, people were

working out their own conflicted feelings about feminism and family by arguing

over Hillary Clinton--the influences she would bring to the White House, the

state of her marriage, even her headbands. No less a political scientist than

Richard Nixon, whose own spouse had been a paragon of cloth-coat humility,

warned, &quot;If the wife comes through as being too strong and too intelligent,

it makes the husband look like a wimp.&quot;</p>

 

<p>Fast-forward four

presidential cycles, and Hillary is leading the field for the Democratic

presidential nomination, while Bill is the one learning to fit himself into the

supporting role. With a spouse who can be counted on to outshine the candidate,

her campaign has had to handle the former President as carefully as a tactical

nuclear weapon. &quot;A lot of people might have expected him to be out

immediately, and instead, he&apos;s sort of behind the scenes and on the phone and

doing fund raising,&quot; says Elizabeth Edwards, 58. &quot;It is clearly more

complicated for them ... I&apos;m just glad that&apos;s their problem, not mine.&quot;</p>

 

<p>But Bill is far

from the only spouse rewriting the rules of the road in presidential politics.

Of the 2008 candidates--and particularly among those in the top tier--more than

a few are married to outspoken, opinionated, professional women who are neither

accustomed to nor inclined toward melting into the background. They are

comfortable with, even eager about making news in their own right. Since the

2008 campaign promises to be more competitive, more expensive and more

prolonged than any we&apos;ve seen, the spouses are playing roles more typically

associated with the running mate than the mate of the person who&apos;s running. In

fact, the reality of today&apos;s politics seems to have turned Nixon&apos;s premise on

its head. A strong, smart, fully engaged spouse is practically a prerequisite

if you want to win. Sit down and talk to some of them, and you will realize

that while they all are charting the terrain ahead in their own ways, they do

so with the conviction that their partner can&apos;t get there without them. As

Cindy McCain, 53, put it, &quot;He and I are the only two in it in the

end.&quot;</p>

 

<p>The

Gladiators</p>

 

<p>ONE REASON

CAMPAIGNS ARE RELYING MORE heavily on spouses as surrogates is simply

practical: two people can cover far more territory than one. &quot;It&apos;s

obviously different. Not only am I going out and speaking, but I&apos;m also doing

fund raising on my own,&quot; says Ann Romney, 58, whose five sons too are being

deployed across the map. &quot;There are so many states in play now that you

can&apos;t possibly cover them all with the asset of just one candidate.&quot; As the

competition gets hotter, we&apos;ll see whether the traditional attack-dog role

played by vice-presidential nominees falls to the spouses as well--and whether

they are given leeway to say things that their husbands wouldn&apos;t dare. There

was no mistaking what Elizabeth Edwards meant when she said Hillary Clinton is

&quot;divisive and unelectable.&quot; She has blasted Barack Obama for being

&quot;holier than thou&quot; on the Iraq war, contended Hillary Clinton has had

to &quot;behave as a man&quot; and &quot;is just not as vocal a women&apos;s advocate

as I want to see,&quot; and complained that her husband is not getting as much

media attention as either of them because &quot;we can&apos;t make John black; we

can&apos;t make him a woman.&quot;</p>

 

<p>Edwards allows

that she occasionally thinks, &quot;Golly, I wish I hadn&apos;t said it that

way.&quot; And she insists that she is merely being herself, not part of a

campaign strategy. &quot;There is no, and I mean zero, campaign discussion,

calculation, anything with respect to this. The second thing is, I don&apos;t

usually volunteer this,&quot; Edwards says of these comments about her husband&apos;s

front-running rivals. &quot;When I am specifically asked, I simply answer the

question, and it&apos;s not a matter of attacking in particular.&quot;</p>

 

<p>But that doesn&apos;t

mean all this is random. &quot;My job is to move voters,&quot; Edwards says.

&quot;If you&apos;re not moving votes or moving voters to see the candidate himself

or herself, then you&apos;re not using your time very wisely.&quot; And that

highlights another poignant and uncomfortable reality of the unique situation

in which Edwards now finds herself. What she calls &quot;my precious time&quot;

is even more so since it was revealed in March that her breast cancer, first

diagnosed in the final days of the Kerry-Edwards campaign in 2004, had recurred

as Stage IV and is incurable. Statistics suggest only 20% of patients in her

situation live for five years. Is Edwards getting a sympathy pass? Rival

campaigns think so, though they won&apos;t say so publicly. As one strategist puts

it, &quot;She&apos;s bulletproof.&quot;</p>

 

<p>Reporters are

primed to hear an attack even when none is intended. When Michelle Obama, 43,

mused last month in Iowa that &quot;if you can&apos;t run your own house, you

certainly can&apos;t run the White House&quot;--an innocent enough observation, the

full context of her remarks shows, about the challenges of juggling her

children&apos;s schedule with her husband&apos;s--it was immediately interpreted as a dig

at the Clintons. THE CLAWS COME OUT screamed a caption beneath her picture and

Hillary Clinton&apos;s on Fox News. &quot;That&apos;s a totally different context,&quot;

Obama now says. &quot;So that&apos;s one of those things where I take it, I learn a

lesson, I say, &apos;O.K., let me be clearer&apos; ... All I&apos;m trying to do is talk to

the American people about who we are, our shortcomings, our challenges. What I

don&apos;t want to feel like is that we can&apos;t have any conversations about

this--values or morals or all of that--because somebody&apos;s feelings might get

hurt. This is tough stuff.&quot;</p>

 

<p>The Guardians</p>

 

<p>AN IMPORTANT

THING TO REMEMBER ABOUT the extraordinary lineup of smart, savvy, engaged

campaign spouses in the 2008 race is that none of this is entirely new. What&apos;s

new is knowing so much about it.</p>

 

<p>First Ladies have

been deeply involved in politics all through history. In 1776, even as John

Adams was helping invent the Republic, Abigail was warning him, &quot;Do not put

such unlimited power into the hands of the husbands. Remember, all men would be

tyrants if they could.&quot; Mary Todd Lincoln had such strong views about

Cabinet members and Supreme Court nominees that some White House aides called

her &quot;the Hellcat.&quot; Edith Wilson secretly held the government together

for her stroke-incapacitated husband, though she opposed giving women the vote.

Rosalynn Carter was basically in charge of mental-health policy. As her husband

staggered through 1979, columnist Jack Anderson dubbed her the

&quot;co-President.&quot; &quot;Many, many women have brought to the table so many

different things,&quot; says Cindy McCain. &quot;It just depends on how deeply

you want to look.&quot;</p>

 

<p>McCain--whom

voters got to know as a smiling, beautiful, St. John--suited presence in her

husband&apos;s 2000 campaign--played a hard-knuckled tactical role this time around

by engineering the shake-up of a high-priced campaign organization that had

spent itself into near insolvency. In large part at Cindy McCain&apos;s instigation,

her husband&apos;s longtime political strategist John Weaver was fired; his 2000

campaign manager Rick Davis was brought back from internal exile to take over.

&quot;Truly, the only person my husband can trust is me,&quot; McCain says.

&quot;I don&apos;t have anything to lose by telling him not only what I think but

what I think he did wrong.&quot;</p>

 

<p>In the

pre-Hillary age, with different expectations for gender roles, that kind of

influence was wielded privately--over everything from policy to personnel to

political strategy--more than publicly. With the conspicuous exception of

Eleanor Roosevelt, who was an outspoken and polarizing figure in her own right,

the modern era saw a procession of generally pliant First Ladies: Bess, Mamie,

Jackie, Lady Bird, Pat. It really was Betty Ford, arguably the archetype for

today&apos;s aspiring First Spouses, who changed the rules. Faced with a traumatized

electorate and an omnivorous press corps after Watergate, she responded in the

way that came naturally--which is to say forthrightly, answering whatever

questions were thrown at her because her Midwestern manners precluded the idea

that you could just ignore a question you didn&apos;t like. There was Betty on 60

Minutes saying she wouldn&apos;t be surprised if her teenage daughter Susan were

having sex or if her kids had tried pot. When she observed to a columnist that

the only question she hadn&apos;t been asked was how often she slept with her

husband, the reporter came back with: &quot;Well, how often do you?&quot; Her

answer: &quot;As often as possible!&quot; The Fords &quot;flung open the White

House windows and declared there are real people living here,&quot; says

journalist Kati Marton, who wrote Hidden Power, a book on presidential

marriages, and who herself is married to former Clinton Administration official

Richard Holbrooke.</p>

 

<p>But then, Betty

Ford got the First Lady&apos;s job without ever having to campaign for it. And not

everyone was charmed by her candor. Some of the President&apos;s aides wanted to

muzzle her, and his pollsters said she could cost him 20 points with

conservative GOP voters. First Lady aspirants have more typically acted as

fabric softener. Tipper Gore made her husband look looser, as did Kitty

Dukakis, though in both cases that wasn&apos;t saying much. Laura Bush has almost

always been a more popular figure than W., though most people could not name a

policy position that she&apos;s passionate about.</p>

 

<p>The current class

of candidates&apos; spouses has plenty who still fit the traditional mold--like Mary

Brownback, 49, who married Sam while she was in law school and proudly declares

that she&apos;s never worked outside the home. &quot;Basically,&quot; she says, &quot;I

live in the kitchen.&quot; Ann Romney calls herself the CFO--chief family

officer--and her husband Mitt&apos;s campaign website says she &quot;places primary

importance on her role as a wife, a mother and a grandmother.&quot; Mike and

Janet Huckabee were high school sweethearts; now 52, she was 18 when they

married, and they renewed their vows in a covenant marriage on Valentine&apos;s Day,

2005. Jill Tracy Biden, 56, was a student teacher when she and Joe Biden

married in 1977, and has dropped off the campaign trail now that the school

year has begun again.</p>

 

<p>In fact, for a

politician&apos;s spouse, some things never change. This is how Barbara Richardson,

58, a veteran of her husband Bill&apos;s successful campaigns for the House and the

New Mexico governorship, summed it up before a debate in South Carolina:

&quot;While Mr. Wonderful is out there campaigning, the rest of us as spouses

are still schlepping through the airport to a commercial plane with kids in

tow. We miss our connections. We&apos;re standing in grocery-store lines, and

frankly, we&apos;re just trying to keep body and soul and house and home and family

together, while they go out and make nice--Mr. Popularity!&quot;</p>

 

<p>Have voters

really adjusted their ideas and expectations of a First Mate? The spouses

themselves don&apos;t sound so sure. &quot;As much as it may sound a little archaic,

I think the American voter wants a traditional situation,&quot; says Cindy

McCain. &quot;In other words, I don&apos;t believe they want a spouse who is involved

in day-to-day politics. And I&apos;m not criticizing any former Administration. I&apos;m

just telling you what people have told me. They still kind of want the

traditional-looking family.&quot;</p>

 

<p>Even Elizabeth

Edwards, for all her outspokenness, agrees. &quot;There are certain baseline

things people require in a First Lady--a graciousness,&quot; she says.

&quot;There is sort of a sense of maternal capabilities that we might be looking

for. I don&apos;t think that in any way disqualifies Bill, but I do think that if

it&apos;s a woman, they&apos;re looking perhaps for something like that.&quot;</p>

 

<p>Marriages Under

the Microscope</p>

 

<p>MANY A FIRST

MARRIAGE HAS BEEN THE subject of rumor and speculation, but the Clinton

presidency put political marriage under the microscope in a way it never had

been before. In this new season of full disclosure, there&apos;s Elizabeth Kucinich,

29, who told the Associated Press that a lazy day at home consists of getting

up for brunch and then going back to bed until 4:30 p.m., &quot;John Lennon and

Yoko Ono--style.&quot; But it&apos;s hard to think of another spouse who has taken

openness as far as Michelle Obama. Her idea of managing her husband&apos;s image

seems to begin with knocking him off his pedestal.</p>

 

<p>In a Glamour

magazine interview, Michelle Obama said her husband is so &quot;snore-y and

stinky&quot; that her daughters won&apos;t cuddle with him in bed. She tells voters

how he leaves his dirty socks around and invites them to tattle if they see him

violating their deal in which she would allow him to run if he would stop

smoking. Barack Obama has written with startling candor about the strains that

his political career has put on their marriage, particularly when both were in

their formative years. &quot;Leaning down to kiss Michelle goodbye in the

morning, all I would get was a peck on the cheek,&quot; he wrote. &quot;By the

time Sasha was born--just as beautiful, and almost as calm as her sister--my

wife&apos;s anger toward me seemed barely contained.&quot;</p>

 

<p>But you could

argue that her acknowledgment of his flaws makes her more effective when she

turns that anger on his critics. &quot;Don&apos;t be fooled by people who claim that

it is not his time,&quot; she exhorts. &quot;We&apos;ve heard this spewed from the

lips of rivals ... every phase of our journey: He is not experienced enough. He

should wait his turn. He is too young. He is not black enough. He is not white

enough.&quot;</p>

 

<p>Michelle Obama

says she is betting that voters will not only accept that frankness but embrace

it. &quot;You win with being who you are and with being clear and comfortable

with that,&quot; she says. &quot;I&apos;m finding that people completely understand

me. For the most part, I think the women and the men and the families and the

folks that we are meeting on the campaign trail understand the realities of

families of today.&quot;</p>

 

<p>ODDLY ENOUGH, IT

IS THE REPUBLICAN spouses who are stretching the limits of traditional values

in ways they never have before. Ann Romney&apos;s story line--the high school

sweetheart and sunny stay-at-home mom who produced a close-knit,

picture-perfect family--actually sets her apart among the leading contenders&apos;

wives. Which doesn&apos;t hurt when you are trying to persuade voters, particularly

evangelical conservatives, to consider putting a Mormon in the White House.

&quot;I think that people have seen Mitt and me. They certainly know we have a

very strong marriage and very strong family,&quot; she says. &quot;I think that

is clearly helpful to him in breaking down barriers that people have had in the

past.&quot; But, she adds, &quot;I don&apos;t know if they&apos;ve seen enough.&quot;</p>

 

<p>For the others,

the question may be whether voters have seen too much. The public displays of

affection that front runner Rudolph Giuliani and wife Judith put on for Barbara

Walters--holding hands and calling each other &quot;baby&quot; and

&quot;sweetheart&quot;--only served to remind viewers that this first blush of

love is also the third marriage for each, and that wife No. 3 is one of the

reasons his children with wife No. 2 won&apos;t campaign for him. &quot;I have just

recently begun--I think they call it in the political world--being &apos;rolled

out,&apos;&quot; Judith, 52, told Walters, but the process has been anything but

smooth. A scathing profile of Judith Stish Ross Nathan Giuliani in Vanity Fair

pored over her two failed marriages (one of which she acknowledged only

recently), the requirement that a separate seat on her plane be provided for

the Louis Vuitton handbag that is known around Giuliani headquarters as Baby

Louis, and the inconvenient timeline of their courtship, which started while he

was still living with second wife Donna Hanover.</p>

 

<p>Through all this,

Judith Giuliani is trying hard to keep her game face on. &quot;It&apos;s a steep

learning curve. It&apos;s all been new to me,&quot; she says. &quot;What&apos;s really

important is, it&apos;s my husband who&apos;s running for office. He is the one. I do

think that is important for us to focus on. We aren&apos;t electing a spouse.&quot;

And while Rudy Giuliani told Walters he would be &quot;very, very

comfortable&quot; with having his wife, a nurse, attend Cabinet meetings--&quot;I

couldn&apos;t have a better adviser&quot;--Judith downplays her influence and her

interest in his campaign and in any future Giuliani Administration. &quot;My

role is really to support my husband in the ways I have always supported him. I

love to take charge of his personal health needs, make sure he&apos;s exercising,

getting the right food, which is a real challenge on the campaign trail,&quot;

she says. &quot;I do attend some meetings, but more often than not, it&apos;s for my

own edification.&quot;</p>

 

<p>For Fred

Thompson&apos;s wife Jeri, 40, who is a quarter-century younger than he is, it&apos;s

hard to figure out which female stereotype is more toxic: the siren whose

tight, low-cut outfits had cable-television commentator and former GOP

Congressman Joe Scarborough speculating that she &quot;works the pole&quot;--a

phrase usually associated with strippers--or the conniving Lady Macbeth who has

been blamed for sending his campaign into disarray even before it was launched.

She was a major force in persuading him to run but also a major one behind a

series of shake-ups that had the campaign on its second manager and its fourth

spokesman before Thompson even announced his candidacy.</p>

 

<p>Her defenders

note that Jeri Thompson has worked for years as a political operative. &quot;She

gets Republican politics. She gets conservative politics. But most of all, she

understands where this man is and how best to help him,&quot; says Mark Corallo,

a well-respected strategist who helped launch the campaign. But then, on the

eve of Thompson&apos;s much delayed announcement, Corallo himself resigned.</p>

 

<p>Their family

portrait--a man who qualifies for Social Security with a 40-year-old blond, a

toddler and a baby--is a far cry from that of Ike and Mamie. &quot;He sadly now

looks like their grandfather,&quot; says Marton. &quot;It&apos;s not what women want

the presidential family to look like. No doubt unintentionally, but to a lot of

women it&apos;s almost a rebuke. It&apos;s too unsubtle.&quot;</p>

 

<p>The New

Normal</p>

 

<p>IN THIS CAMPAIGN,

WHICH HAS PRODUCED SO much buzz about political marriages, the challenge for

the Clintons has been a different one: making the most remarkable situation of

all look normal.</p>

 

<p>The first time

his wife ran for office, Bill Clinton was in the White House, which kept him

safely off her stage and minimized the amount of public distraction he caused.

But behind the scenes, he was her political consultant in chief, reworking her

speeches, stepping in when her staff was putting too much on her schedule,

rehearsing her for debates and demanding she step up her ad buys.</p>

 

<p>That was two

successful Senate campaigns ago. Now the man who jokes that he wants to be

known as &quot;First Laddie&quot; downplays his role as she reaches for the

biggest prize of all: his old job. He has joined his wife in a couple of

campaign swings and is her star fund raiser. But he has yet to show up among

the spouses in the audience at any of the Democratic debates. As for his role

in any future Clinton Administration, both she and he have talked about the

possibility that she might make him an unofficial emissary. &quot;I think she

will ask me and former President Bush and other people to go help the country.

We have got to restore our standing in the world,&quot; Bill Clinton told CNN&apos;s

Larry King recently. &quot;I wouldn&apos;t be surprised if she [asked] every former

President to do something.&quot;</p>

 

<p>But in the

meantime, there&apos;s an election to win. And while Hillary Clinton has the best

political strategist of her generation at her disposal, Bill is by all accounts

keeping his obtrusions to a minimum. Campaign officials say that while the

couple talks several times a day, he rarely gets involved with the workings of

her campaign. &quot;He&apos;s doing what he&apos;s asked, and he&apos;s doing what he can,&quot;

says an aide, &quot;but he&apos;s certainly not meddling.&quot; In part, that&apos;s

because his own work--his foundation and a tour to promote his new book--keeps

him plenty busy. And it also reflects the fact that she has an enormous

political machine around her that seems to be doing pretty well on its own.</p>

 

<p>&quot;If she&apos;s

writing an important article or giving an important speech, she&apos;ll ask me to

read it,&quot; the former President told Oprah Winfrey. &quot;And once in a while

she&apos;ll ask me for some advice on something strategic. But she knows so much

more about a lot of this stuff than I do because I&apos;m far removed from it.&quot;

Occasionally, he says, he gets a call from her while he&apos;s on the golf course,

and she reminds him that she&apos;s 15 years older than he was when he did it,

&quot;and I say, &apos;Well, nobody made you run.&apos;&quot;</p>

 

<p>Bill Clinton, 61,

is also making a conscious effort to stay out of the fray, though when

Elizabeth Edwards attacked Hillary as not vocal enough on women&apos;s issues, he

rode to his wife&apos;s defense. &quot;If you look at the record on women&apos;s issues, I

defy you to find anybody who has run for office in recent history who&apos;s got a

longer history of working for women, for families and children, than Hillary

does,&quot; Clinton said in an interview with ABC&apos;s Good Morning America. As for

Edwards&apos; contention that Hillary had behaved &quot;as a man,&quot; Clinton

retorted, &quot;I don&apos;t think it&apos;s inconsistent with being a woman that you can

also be knowledgeable on military and security affairs and be strong when the

occasion demands it.&quot;</p>

 

<p>But he has

steered clear of criticizing Hillary&apos;s opponents. &quot;This is a good time for

us Democrats,&quot; he says. &quot;We don&apos;t have to be against anybody. We can be

for the person we think would be the best President.&quot; Of course, that&apos;s

easy to say when your candidate is safely ahead in the polls. If their

situation and that of the Edwardses were reversed, &quot;would he be her biggest

attack dog like Elizabeth Edwards is? Maybe,&quot; concedes a strategist.

&quot;But he gets to be the big guy--at least for now.&quot; Then again, he&apos;s in

a supporting role that doesn&apos;t come with a script. No one knows that better

than a Clinton.</p>

 

<p>[This article

contains a table. Please see hardcopy of magazine or PDF.]<br/>

<br/>

THE MARCH OF HISTORY</p>

 

<p>That Was Then. This Is Now</p>

 

<p>Both in style and

in substance, the 2008 contenders for the job of First Spouse are all far

different from anyone Americans have ever seen in the East Wing<br/>

<br/>

</p>

 

<table>

<tr>

<td> </td>

<td>Accessory</td>

<td>Image</td>

<td>Credential</td>

<td>Cause</td>

<td>Divorce Record</td>

<td>Financial Experience</td>

<td>ExecutiveExperience</td>

<td>Family Photo</td>

</tr>

 

<tr>

<td>THE OLD WAY</td>

<td>Her pillbox hat was Jackie Kennedy&apos;s fashion

signature</td>

<td>Nancy Reagan never lost her adoring gaze for her

husband</td>

<td>Mamie Eisenhower touted her Million Dollar Fudge

recipe</td>

<td>Lady Bird Johnson beautified America&apos;s highways</td>

<td>Florence Harding, the first divorced First Lady, and

Betty Ford, the next and last, each had one previous marriage</td>

<td>Mary Todd Lincoln ran up secret debts with her

shopping</td>

<td>Edith Wilson wielded power after husband Woodrow&apos;s

stroke</td>

<td>Barbara Bush&apos;s was a tableau filled with

grandchildren</td>

</tr>

 

<tr>

<td>THE NEW<br/>

WAY</td>

<td>Elizabeth Kucinich would be the first First Lady to

wear a tongue stud</td>

<td>Michelle Obama talks about Barack&apos;s flaws, calling

him &quot;stinky and snore-y&quot;</td>

<td>This year&apos;s spouses are a lawyerly lot. Shown

clockwise from top left, Elizabeth Edwards, Michelle Obama, Mary Brownback and

Bill Clinton all earned their degrees in law</td>

<td>If his wife is elected, former President Bill Clinton

says he wants to help change the world by working through his foundation on

problems like aids</td>

<td>Judith Nathan Giuliani is on her third marriage--a

fact that became public only recently</td>

<td>Representative Chris Dodd&apos;s wife Jackie Clegg Dodd

sits on five corporate boards and was a vice chair of the Export-Import

Bank</td>

<td>Bill Clinton was the 42nd President of the U.S. but

jokes he might be called &quot;First Laddie&quot;</td>

<td>Jeri Thompson has a changing table on the campaign

bus</td>

</tr>

</table>

 

<p><br/>

</p>

 

<p prism:class="box">SPOUSE TALK AT TIME.COM<br/>

<br/>

To read interviews with the running mates and see

photos of the couples on the trail, visit time.com /spouses. Plus, Elizabeth

Edwards and Ann Romney speak about campaigning while battling breast cancer and

MS</p>

 

<p prism:class="pullQuote">&apos;If you&apos;re not moving votes or moving voters ... then

you&apos;re not using your time very wisely.&apos; --ELIZABETH EDWARDS</p>

 

<p prism:class="pullQuote">&apos;Truly, the only person my husband can trust is me. I

don&apos;t have anything to lose by telling him ... what I think he did wrong.&apos; --CINDY MCCAIN</p>

      <pam:media>

       <dc:type>photo</dc:type>

       <dc:format>image/jpeg</dc:format>

       <dc:identifier>us:tsn:61558</dc:identifier>

       <dc:creator>Mark Katzman prism:role="photographer"</dc:creator>

        <pam:mediaTitle>Bill Clinton</pam:mediaTitle>

        <pam:credit>Photographed by Mark Katzman</pam:credit>

        <pam:caption>This Clinton campaign again offers &quot;two for one,&quot; but the aspiring

First Laddie and strategist in chief, shown with Hillary in New Hampshire, is

trying not to outshine his wife.</pam:caption>

        <pam:textDescription>photo of Bill Clinton</pam:textDescription>

      <pur:reuseProhibited>no</pur:reuseProhibited>

      <pur:agreement>WD08-000284</pur:agreement>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="book"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="anthology"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="newsletter"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="website"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="NR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="syndicationPrint" pur:usageFee="50%"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="NR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="syndicationElectronic" pur:usageFee="30%"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="publicityHFM"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="publicityMagazine"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="magazineReuse"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="foreignEdition"/>

      <pur:creditLine pur:agreementID="WD08-000284">Mark Katzman photographer</pur:creditLine>

      </pam:media>

 

      </body>

  </pam:article>

</pam:message>


Appendix D PAM Example with XHTML Default for XSD

This example shows the coding for PAM xml that is defaulted to the xhtml: namespace and verified against the pam.xsd.    Note that this example is for content originally published online and validated against an XSD.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<pam:message xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"

xsi:schemaLocation="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/pam/2.2/ pam.xsd"

xmlns:pam="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/pam/2.2/"

xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"

xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"

xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"

xmlns:pim="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/pim/2.2/"

xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/basic/2.2/"

xmlns:prl="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/prl/2.0/"

xmlns:pur="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/prismusagerights/2.1/"

xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" >

 

 <pam:article>

    <head>

      <dc:identifier>100340926</dc:identifier>

      <prism:issueIdentifier>1000710</prism:issueIdentifier>

      <pam:status>U</pam:status>

      <prism:originPlatform prism:platform="print"/>

      <dc:title>The Real Running Mates</dc:title>

      <dc:creator>Karen Tumulty</dc:creator>

      <dc:contributor prism:place="New York">With reporting by Nancy Gibbs</dc:contributor>

      <dc:contributor prism:place="Washington">Jay Newton-Small</dc:contributor>

      <prism:publicationName>Time</prism:publicationName>

      <prism:issn>000000</prism:issn>

      <prism:coverDate>2007-09-24</prism:coverDate>

      <prism:coverDisplayDate>September 24, 2007</prism:coverDisplayDate>

      <prism:volume>170</prism:volume>

      <prism:number>13</prism:number>

      <prism:edition>U.S. Edition</prism:edition>

      <prism:startingPage>30</prism:startingPage>

      <prism:url>http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article
       /0,28804,1660946_1661334_1661288,00.html</prism:url>

      <prism:channel prism:subchannel1="news">Specials</prism:channel>

      <prism:section>The Well</prism:section>

      <prism:subsection1>Cover Story</prism:subsection1>

      <prism:subsection2>Nation</prism:subsection2>

      <prism:subsection3>Running Mates</prism:subsection3>

      <dc:subject>POLITICS</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>CAMPAIGNS</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>VOTERS</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>FAMILY</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>MARRIAGE</dc:subject>

      <prism:person>Elizabeth Edwards</prism:person>

      <prism:person xml:lang="EN" xhtml:dir="ltr">Cindy McCain</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Bill Clinton</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Michelle Obama</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Judith Guiliani</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Ann Romney </prism:person>

      <prism:person>Jeri Thompson</prism:person>

<prism:genre>coverStory</prism:genre>

      <prism:wordCount>4188</prism:wordCount>

<dcterms:hasPart>See also additional image(s) in Cover Description file and Table of Contents of same issue.</dcterms:hasPart>

<pur:creditLine required="yes" xml:lang="FR">Credit given</pur:creditLine>

</head>

        <body>

 <p prism:class="deck">

Political spouses

have traditionally wielded their influence in private. But in this race, all

the rules will have to be rewritten

</p> <p>Elizabeth Edwards

prides herself on her ability to explain the fine print of her husband&apos;s energy

plan and the details of how John Edwards would respond to the next Katrina-size

natural disaster. She can rattle off the number of people who lack health

insurance in New Hampshire (about 127,000), how many schools there have failed

to meet the Federal Government&apos;s standards for &quot;adequate yearly

progress&quot; (191) and where the state ranks in teacher pay (24th). &quot;I

think it&apos;s important to learn policy, so that people don&apos;t have to dumb down

their questions because I&apos;m the spouse,&quot; she says. Nor, for that matter,

does she feel a spouse should have to sand down her edges. When a woman at a

house party in Bow, N.H., asked her one recent morning how her husband&apos;s

campaign would respond to &quot;the inevitable horrible mudslinging&quot; that is

part of presidential politics, you might have thought she was the one in the

family who had grown up in a brawling mill town. &quot;It&apos;s a question of being

prepared and not having any hesitation,&quot; she said. &quot;You go straight to

the nose because then they walk away bleeding. And that&apos;s the point.&quot;</p>

 

<p>It&apos;s hard to

imagine Laura Bush saying something like that. There is <span>no</span> handbook for the

spouse of a presidential candidate, but the expectations have always been

pretty clear. She (yes, that was the presumption) should first do no harm. Her

safest bet: stand silently at his side, beaming with admiration and awe, the

well-coiffed testament to a home life that was tranquil, drama-free and utterly

traditional. When the spouse became the story, it was seldom good news for the

principal.</p>

 

<p>Take what

happened in 1992, when a certain Governor from Arkansas started throwing around

quips like &quot;Buy one, get one free&quot; and musing about the possibility of

giving his outspoken lawyer wife a Cabinet post. In no time, people were

working out their own conflicted feelings about feminism and family by arguing

over Hillary Clinton--the influences she would bring to the White House, the

state of her marriage, even her headbands. No less a political scientist than

Richard Nixon, whose own spouse had been a paragon of cloth-coat humility,

warned, &quot;If the wife comes through as being too strong and too intelligent,

it makes the husband look like a wimp.&quot;</p>

 

<p>Fast-forward four

presidential cycles, and Hillary is leading the field for the Democratic

presidential nomination, while Bill is the one learning to fit himself into the

supporting role. With a spouse who can be counted on to outshine the candidate,

her campaign has had to handle the former President as carefully as a tactical

nuclear weapon. &quot;A lot of people might have expected him to be out

immediately, and instead, he&apos;s sort of behind the scenes and on the phone and

doing fund raising,&quot; says Elizabeth Edwards, 58. &quot;It is clearly more

complicated for them ... I&apos;m just glad that&apos;s their problem, not mine.&quot;</p>

 

<p>But Bill is far

from the only spouse rewriting the rules of the road in presidential politics.

Of the 2008 candidates--and particularly among those in the top tier--more than

a few are married to outspoken, opinionated, professional women who are neither

accustomed to nor inclined toward melting into the background. They are

comfortable with, even eager about making news in their own right. Since the

2008 campaign promises to be more competitive, more expensive and more

prolonged than any we&apos;ve seen, the spouses are playing roles more typically

associated with the running mate than the mate of the person who&apos;s running. In

fact, the reality of today&apos;s politics seems to have turned Nixon&apos;s premise on

its head. A strong, smart, fully engaged spouse is practically a prerequisite

if you want to win. Sit down and talk to some of them, and you will realize

that while they all are charting the terrain ahead in their own ways, they do

so with the conviction that their partner can&apos;t get there without them. As

Cindy McCain, 53, put it, &quot;He and I are the only two in it in the

end.&quot;</p>

 

<p>The

Gladiators</p>

 

<p>ONE REASON

CAMPAIGNS ARE RELYING MORE heavily on spouses as surrogates is simply

practical: two people can cover far more territory than one. &quot;It&apos;s

obviously different. Not only am I going out and speaking, but I&apos;m also doing

fund raising on my own,&quot; says Ann Romney, 58, whose five sons too are being

deployed across the map. &quot;There are so many states in play now that you

can&apos;t possibly cover them all with the asset of just one candidate.&quot; As the

competition gets hotter, we&apos;ll see whether the traditional attack-dog role

played by vice-presidential nominees falls to the spouses as well--and whether

they are given leeway to say things that their husbands wouldn&apos;t dare. There

was no mistaking what Elizabeth Edwards meant when she said Hillary Clinton is

&quot;divisive and unelectable.&quot; She has blasted Barack Obama for being

&quot;holier than thou&quot; on the Iraq war, contended Hillary Clinton has had

to &quot;behave as a man&quot; and &quot;is just not as vocal a women&apos;s advocate

as I want to see,&quot; and complained that her husband is not getting as much

media attention as either of them because &quot;we can&apos;t make John black; we

can&apos;t make him a woman.&quot;</p>

 

<p>Edwards allows

that she occasionally thinks, &quot;Golly, I wish I hadn&apos;t said it that

way.&quot; And she insists that she is merely being herself, not part of a

campaign strategy. &quot;There is no, and I mean zero, campaign discussion,

calculation, anything with respect to this. The second thing is, I don&apos;t

usually volunteer this,&quot; Edwards says of these comments about her husband&apos;s

front-running rivals. &quot;When I am specifically asked, I simply answer the

question, and it&apos;s not a matter of attacking in particular.&quot;</p>

 

<p>But that doesn&apos;t

mean all this is random. &quot;My job is to move voters,&quot; Edwards says.

&quot;If you&apos;re not moving votes or moving voters to see the candidate himself

or herself, then you&apos;re not using your time very wisely.&quot; And that

highlights another poignant and uncomfortable reality of the unique situation

in which Edwards now finds herself. What she calls &quot;my precious time&quot;

is even more so since it was revealed in March that her breast cancer, first

diagnosed in the final days of the Kerry-Edwards campaign in 2004, had recurred

as Stage IV and is incurable. Statistics suggest only 20% of patients in her

situation live for five years. Is Edwards getting a sympathy pass? Rival

campaigns think so, though they won&apos;t say so publicly. As one strategist puts

it, &quot;She&apos;s bulletproof.&quot;</p>

 

<p>Reporters are

primed to hear an attack even when none is intended. When Michelle Obama, 43,

mused last month in Iowa that &quot;if you can&apos;t run your own house, you

certainly can&apos;t run the White House&quot;--an innocent enough observation, the

full context of her remarks shows, about the challenges of juggling her

children&apos;s schedule with her husband&apos;s--it was immediately interpreted as a dig

at the Clintons. THE CLAWS COME OUT screamed a caption beneath her picture and

Hillary Clinton&apos;s on Fox News. &quot;That&apos;s a totally different context,&quot;

Obama now says. &quot;So that&apos;s one of those things where I take it, I learn a

lesson, I say, &apos;O.K., let me be clearer&apos; ... All I&apos;m trying to do is talk to

the American people about who we are, our shortcomings, our challenges. What I

don&apos;t want to feel like is that we can&apos;t have any conversations about

this--values or morals or all of that--because somebody&apos;s feelings might get

hurt. This is tough stuff.&quot;</p>

 

<p>The Guardians</p>

 

<p>AN IMPORTANT

THING TO REMEMBER ABOUT the extraordinary lineup of smart, savvy, engaged

campaign spouses in the 2008 race is that none of this is entirely new. What&apos;s

new is knowing so much about it.</p>

 

<p>First Ladies have

been deeply involved in politics all through history. In 1776, even as John

Adams was helping invent the Republic, Abigail was warning him, &quot;Do not put

such unlimited power into the hands of the husbands. Remember, all men would be

tyrants if they could.&quot; Mary Todd Lincoln had such strong views about

Cabinet members and Supreme Court nominees that some White House aides called

her &quot;the Hellcat.&quot; Edith Wilson secretly held the government together

for her stroke-incapacitated husband, though she opposed giving women the vote.

Rosalynn Carter was basically in charge of mental-health policy. As her husband

staggered through 1979, columnist Jack Anderson dubbed her the

&quot;co-President.&quot; &quot;Many, many women have brought to the table so many

different things,&quot; says Cindy McCain. &quot;It just depends on how deeply

you want to look.&quot;</p>

 

<p>McCain--whom

voters got to know as a smiling, beautiful, St. John--suited presence in her

husband&apos;s 2000 campaign--played a hard-knuckled tactical role this time around

by engineering the shake-up of a high-priced campaign organization that had

spent itself into near insolvency. In large part at Cindy McCain&apos;s instigation,

her husband&apos;s longtime political strategist John Weaver was fired; his 2000

campaign manager Rick Davis was brought back from internal exile to take over.

&quot;Truly, the only person my husband can trust is me,&quot; McCain says.

&quot;I don&apos;t have anything to lose by telling him not only what I think but

what I think he did wrong.&quot;</p>

 

<p>In the

pre-Hillary age, with different expectations for gender roles, that kind of

influence was wielded privately--over everything from policy to personnel to

political strategy--more than publicly. With the conspicuous exception of

Eleanor Roosevelt, who was an outspoken and polarizing figure in her own right,

the modern era saw a procession of generally pliant First Ladies: Bess, Mamie,

Jackie, Lady Bird, Pat. It really was Betty Ford, arguably the archetype for

today&apos;s aspiring First Spouses, who changed the rules. Faced with a traumatized

electorate and an omnivorous press corps after Watergate, she responded in the

way that came naturally--which is to say forthrightly, answering whatever

questions were thrown at her because her Midwestern manners precluded the idea

that you could just ignore a question you didn&apos;t like. There was Betty on 60

Minutes saying she wouldn&apos;t be surprised if her teenage daughter Susan were

having sex or if her kids had tried pot. When she observed to a columnist that

the only question she hadn&apos;t been asked was how often she slept with her

husband, the reporter came back with: &quot;Well, how often do you?&quot; Her

answer: &quot;As often as possible!&quot; The Fords &quot;flung open the White

House windows and declared there are real people living here,&quot; says

journalist Kati Marton, who wrote Hidden Power, a book on presidential

marriages, and who herself is married to former Clinton Administration official

Richard Holbrooke.</p>

 

<p>But then, Betty

Ford got the First Lady&apos;s job without ever having to campaign for it. And not

everyone was charmed by her candor. Some of the President&apos;s aides wanted to

muzzle her, and his pollsters said she could cost him 20 points with

conservative GOP voters. First Lady aspirants have more typically acted as

fabric softener. Tipper Gore made her husband look looser, as did Kitty

Dukakis, though in both cases that wasn&apos;t saying much. Laura Bush has almost

always been a more popular figure than W., though most people could not name a

policy position that she&apos;s passionate about.</p>

 

<p>The current class

of candidates&apos; spouses has plenty who still fit the traditional mold--like Mary

Brownback, 49, who married Sam while she was in law school and proudly declares

that she&apos;s never worked outside the home. &quot;Basically,&quot; she says, &quot;I

live in the kitchen.&quot; Ann Romney calls herself the CFO--chief family

officer--and her husband Mitt&apos;s campaign website says she &quot;places primary

importance on her role as a wife, a mother and a grandmother.&quot; Mike and

Janet Huckabee were high school sweethearts; now 52, she was 18 when they

married, and they renewed their vows in a covenant marriage on Valentine&apos;s Day,

2005. Jill Tracy Biden, 56, was a student teacher when she and Joe Biden

married in 1977, and has dropped off the campaign trail now that the school

year has begun again.</p>

 

<p>In fact, for a

politician&apos;s spouse, some things never change. This is how Barbara Richardson,

58, a veteran of her husband Bill&apos;s successful campaigns for the House and the

New Mexico governorship, summed it up before a debate in South Carolina:

&quot;While Mr. Wonderful is out there campaigning, the rest of us as spouses

are still schlepping through the airport to a commercial plane with kids in

tow. We miss our connections. We&apos;re standing in grocery-store lines, and

frankly, we&apos;re just trying to keep body and soul and house and home and family

together, while they go out and make nice--Mr. Popularity!&quot;</p>

 

<p>Have voters

really adjusted their ideas and expectations of a First Mate? The spouses

themselves don&apos;t sound so sure. &quot;As much as it may sound a little archaic,

I think the American voter wants a traditional situation,&quot; says Cindy

McCain. &quot;In other words, I don&apos;t believe they want a spouse who is involved

in day-to-day politics. And I&apos;m not criticizing any former Administration. I&apos;m

just telling you what people have told me. They still kind of want the

traditional-looking family.&quot;</p>

 

<p>Even Elizabeth

Edwards, for all her outspokenness, agrees. &quot;There are certain baseline

things people require in a First Lady--a graciousness,&quot; she says.

&quot;There is sort of a sense of maternal capabilities that we might be looking

for. I don&apos;t think that in any way disqualifies Bill, but I do think that if

it&apos;s a woman, they&apos;re looking perhaps for something like that.&quot;</p>

 

<p>Marriages Under

the Microscope</p>

 

<p>MANY A FIRST

MARRIAGE HAS BEEN THE subject of rumor and speculation, but the Clinton

presidency put political marriage under the microscope in a way it never had

been before. In this new season of full disclosure, there&apos;s Elizabeth Kucinich,

29, who told the Associated Press that a lazy day at home consists of getting

up for brunch and then going back to bed until 4:30 p.m., &quot;John Lennon and

Yoko Ono--style.&quot; But it&apos;s hard to think of another spouse who has taken

openness as far as Michelle Obama. Her idea of managing her husband&apos;s image

seems to begin with knocking him off his pedestal.</p>

 

<p>In a Glamour

magazine interview, Michelle Obama said her husband is so &quot;snore-y and

stinky&quot; that her daughters won&apos;t cuddle with him in bed. She tells voters

how he leaves his dirty socks around and invites them to tattle if they see him

violating their deal in which she would allow him to run if he would stop

smoking. Barack Obama has written with startling candor about the strains that

his political career has put on their marriage, particularly when both were in

their formative years. &quot;Leaning down to kiss Michelle goodbye in the

morning, all I would get was a peck on the cheek,&quot; he wrote. &quot;By the

time Sasha was born--just as beautiful, and almost as calm as her sister--my

wife&apos;s anger toward me seemed barely contained.&quot;</p>

 

<p>But you could

argue that her acknowledgment of his flaws makes her more effective when she

turns that anger on his critics. &quot;Don&apos;t be fooled by people who claim that

it is not his time,&quot; she exhorts. &quot;We&apos;ve heard this spewed from the

lips of rivals ... every phase of our journey: He is not experienced enough. He

should wait his turn. He is too young. He is not black enough. He is not white

enough.&quot;</p>

 

<p>Michelle Obama

says she is betting that voters will not only accept that frankness but embrace

it. &quot;You win with being who you are and with being clear and comfortable

with that,&quot; she says. &quot;I&apos;m finding that people completely understand

me. For the most part, I think the women and the men and the families and the

folks that we are meeting on the campaign trail understand the realities of

families of today.&quot;</p>

 

<p>ODDLY ENOUGH, IT

IS THE REPUBLICAN spouses who are stretching the limits of traditional values

in ways they never have before. Ann Romney&apos;s story line--the high school

sweetheart and sunny stay-at-home mom who produced a close-knit,

picture-perfect family--actually sets her apart among the leading contenders&apos;

wives. Which doesn&apos;t hurt when you are trying to persuade voters, particularly

evangelical conservatives, to consider putting a Mormon in the White House.

&quot;I think that people have seen Mitt and me. They certainly know we have a

very strong marriage and very strong family,&quot; she says. &quot;I think that

is clearly helpful to him in breaking down barriers that people have had in the

past.&quot; But, she adds, &quot;I don&apos;t know if they&apos;ve seen enough.&quot;</p>

 

<p>For the others,

the question may be whether voters have seen too much. The public displays of

affection that front runner Rudolph Giuliani and wife Judith put on for Barbara

Walters--holding hands and calling each other &quot;baby&quot; and

&quot;sweetheart&quot;--only served to remind viewers that this first blush of

love is also the third marriage for each, and that wife No. 3 is one of the

reasons his children with wife No. 2 won&apos;t campaign for him. &quot;I have just

recently begun--I think they call it in the political world--being &apos;rolled

out,&apos;&quot; Judith, 52, told Walters, but the process has been anything but

smooth. A scathing profile of Judith Stish Ross Nathan Giuliani in Vanity Fair

pored over her two failed marriages (one of which she acknowledged only

recently), the requirement that a separate seat on her plane be provided for

the Louis Vuitton handbag that is known around Giuliani headquarters as Baby

Louis, and the inconvenient timeline of their courtship, which started while he

was still living with second wife Donna Hanover.</p>

 

<p>Through all this,

Judith Giuliani is trying hard to keep her game face on. &quot;It&apos;s a steep

learning curve. It&apos;s all been new to me,&quot; she says. &quot;What&apos;s really

important is, it&apos;s my husband who&apos;s running for office. He is the one. I do

think that is important for us to focus on. We aren&apos;t electing a spouse.&quot;

And while Rudy Giuliani told Walters he would be &quot;very, very

comfortable&quot; with having his wife, a nurse, attend Cabinet meetings--&quot;I

couldn&apos;t have a better adviser&quot;--Judith downplays her influence and her

interest in his campaign and in any future Giuliani Administration. &quot;My

role is really to support my husband in the ways I have always supported him. I

love to take charge of his personal health needs, make sure he&apos;s exercising,

getting the right food, which is a real challenge on the campaign trail,&quot;

she says. &quot;I do attend some meetings, but more often than not, it&apos;s for my

own edification.&quot;</p>

 

<p>For Fred

Thompson&apos;s wife Jeri, 40, who is a quarter-century younger than he is, it&apos;s

hard to figure out which female stereotype is more toxic: the siren whose

tight, low-cut outfits had cable-television commentator and former GOP

Congressman Joe Scarborough speculating that she &quot;works the pole&quot;--a

phrase usually associated with strippers--or the conniving Lady Macbeth who has

been blamed for sending his campaign into disarray even before it was launched.

She was a major force in persuading him to run but also a major one behind a

series of shake-ups that had the campaign on its second manager and its fourth

spokesman before Thompson even announced his candidacy.</p>

 

<p>Her defenders

note that Jeri Thompson has worked for years as a political operative. &quot;She

gets Republican politics. She gets conservative politics. But most of all, she

understands where this man is and how best to help him,&quot; says Mark Corallo,

a well-respected strategist who helped launch the campaign. But then, on the

eve of Thompson&apos;s much delayed announcement, Corallo himself resigned.</p>

 

<p>Their family

portrait--a man who qualifies for Social Security with a 40-year-old blond, a

toddler and a baby--is a far cry from that of Ike and Mamie. &quot;He sadly now

looks like their grandfather,&quot; says Marton. &quot;It&apos;s not what women want

the presidential family to look like. No doubt unintentionally, but to a lot of

women it&apos;s almost a rebuke. It&apos;s too unsubtle.&quot;</p>

 

<p>The New

Normal</p>

 

<p>IN THIS CAMPAIGN,

WHICH HAS PRODUCED SO much buzz about political marriages, the challenge for

the Clintons has been a different one: making the most remarkable situation of

all look normal.</p>

 

<p>The first time

his wife ran for office, Bill Clinton was in the White House, which kept him

safely off her stage and minimized the amount of public distraction he caused.

But behind the scenes, he was her political consultant in chief, reworking her

speeches, stepping in when her staff was putting too much on her schedule,

rehearsing her for debates and demanding she step up her ad buys.</p>

 

<p>That was two

successful Senate campaigns ago. Now the man who jokes that he wants to be

known as &quot;First Laddie&quot; downplays his role as she reaches for the

biggest prize of all: his old job. He has joined his wife in a couple of

campaign swings and is her star fund raiser. But he has yet to show up among

the spouses in the audience at any of the Democratic debates. As for his role

in any future Clinton Administration, both she and he have talked about the

possibility that she might make him an unofficial emissary. &quot;I think she

will ask me and former President Bush and other people to go help the country.

We have got to restore our standing in the world,&quot; Bill Clinton told CNN&apos;s

Larry King recently. &quot;I wouldn&apos;t be surprised if she [asked] every former

President to do something.&quot;</p>

 

<p>But in the

meantime, there&apos;s an election to win. And while Hillary Clinton has the best

political strategist of her generation at her disposal, Bill is by all accounts

keeping his obtrusions to a minimum. Campaign officials say that while the

couple talks several times a day, he rarely gets involved with the workings of

her campaign. &quot;He&apos;s doing what he&apos;s asked, and he&apos;s doing what he can,&quot;

says an aide, &quot;but he&apos;s certainly not meddling.&quot; In part, that&apos;s

because his own work--his foundation and a tour to promote his new book--keeps

him plenty busy. And it also reflects the fact that she has an enormous

political machine around her that seems to be doing pretty well on its own.</p>

 

<p>&quot;If she&apos;s

writing an important article or giving an important speech, she&apos;ll ask me to

read it,&quot; the former President told Oprah Winfrey. &quot;And once in a while

she&apos;ll ask me for some advice on something strategic. But she knows so much

more about a lot of this stuff than I do because I&apos;m far removed from it.&quot;

Occasionally, he says, he gets a call from her while he&apos;s on the golf course,

and she reminds him that she&apos;s 15 years older than he was when he did it,

&quot;and I say, &apos;Well, nobody made you run.&apos;&quot;</p>

 

<p>Bill Clinton, 61,

is also making a conscious effort to stay out of the fray, though when

Elizabeth Edwards attacked Hillary as not vocal enough on women&apos;s issues, he

rode to his wife&apos;s defense. &quot;If you look at the record on women&apos;s issues, I

defy you to find anybody who has run for office in recent history who&apos;s got a

longer history of working for women, for families and children, than Hillary

does,&quot; Clinton said in an interview with ABC&apos;s Good Morning America. As for

Edwards&apos; contention that Hillary had behaved &quot;as a man,&quot; Clinton

retorted, &quot;I don&apos;t think it&apos;s inconsistent with being a woman that you can

also be knowledgeable on military and security affairs and be strong when the

occasion demands it.&quot;</p>

 

<p>But he has

steered clear of criticizing Hillary&apos;s opponents. &quot;This is a good time for

us Democrats,&quot; he says. &quot;We don&apos;t have to be against anybody. We can be

for the person we think would be the best President.&quot; Of course, that&apos;s

easy to say when your candidate is safely ahead in the polls. If their

situation and that of the Edwardses were reversed, &quot;would he be her biggest

attack dog like Elizabeth Edwards is? Maybe,&quot; concedes a strategist.

&quot;But he gets to be the big guy--at least for now.&quot; Then again, he&apos;s in

a supporting role that doesn&apos;t come with a script. No one knows that better

than a Clinton.</p>

 

<p>[This article

contains a table. Please see hardcopy of magazine or PDF.]<br/>

<br/>

THE MARCH OF HISTORY</p>

 

<p>That Was Then. This Is Now</p>

 

<p>Both in style and

in substance, the 2008 contenders for the job of First Spouse are all far

different from anyone Americans have ever seen in the East Wing<br/>

<br/>

</p>

 

<table>

<tr>

<td> </td>

<td>Accessory</td>

<td>Image</td>

<td>Credential</td>

<td>Cause</td>

<td>Divorce Record</td>

<td>Financial Experience</td>

<td>ExecutiveExperience</td>

<td>Family Photo</td>

</tr>

 

<tr>

<td>THE OLD WAY</td>

<td>Her pillbox hat was Jackie Kennedy&apos;s fashion

signature</td>

<td>Nancy Reagan never lost her adoring gaze for her

husband</td>

<td>Mamie Eisenhower touted her Million Dollar Fudge

recipe</td>

<td>Lady Bird Johnson beautified America&apos;s highways</td>

<td>Florence Harding, the first divorced First Lady, and

Betty Ford, the next and last, each had one previous marriage</td>

<td>Mary Todd Lincoln ran up secret debts with her

shopping</td>

<td>Edith Wilson wielded power after husband Woodrow&apos;s

stroke</td>

<td>Barbara Bush&apos;s was a tableau filled with

grandchildren</td>

</tr>

 

<tr>

<td>THE NEW<br/>

WAY</td>

<td>Elizabeth Kucinich would be the first First Lady to

wear a tongue stud</td>

<td>Michelle Obama talks about Barack&apos;s flaws, calling

him &quot;stinky and snore-y&quot;</td>

<td>This year&apos;s spouses are a lawyerly lot. Shown

clockwise from top left, Elizabeth Edwards, Michelle Obama, Mary Brownback and

Bill Clinton all earned their degrees in law</td>

<td>If his wife is elected, former President Bill Clinton

says he wants to help change the world by working through his foundation on

problems like aids</td>

<td>Judith Nathan Giuliani is on her third marriage--a

fact that became public only recently</td>

<td>Representative Chris Dodd&apos;s wife Jackie Clegg Dodd

sits on five corporate boards and was a vice chair of the Export-Import

Bank</td>

<td>Bill Clinton was the 42nd President of the U.S. but

jokes he might be called &quot;First Laddie&quot;</td>

<td>Jeri Thompson has a changing table on the campaign

bus</td>

</tr>

</table>

 

 

<p prism:class="box">SPOUSE TALK AT TIME.COM<br/>

<br/>

To read interviews with the running mates and see

photos of the couples on the trail, visit time.com /spouses. Plus, Elizabeth

Edwards and Ann Romney speak about campaigning while battling breast cancer and

MS</p>

 

<p prism:class="pullQuote">&apos;If you&apos;re not moving votes or moving voters ... then

you&apos;re not using your time very wisely.&apos; --ELIZABETH EDWARDS</p>

 

<p prism:class="pullQuote">&apos;Truly, the only person my husband can trust is me. I

don&apos;t have anything to lose by telling him ... what I think he did wrong.&apos; --CINDY MCCAIN</p>

      <pam:media>

       <dc:type>photo</dc:type>

       <dc:format>image/jpeg</dc:format>

       <dc:identifier>us:tsn:61558</dc:identifier>

       <dc:creator>Mark Katzman prism:role="photographer"</dc:creator>

        <pam:mediaTitle>Bill Clinton</pam:mediaTitle>

        <pam:credit>Photographed by Mark Katzman</pam:credit>

        <pam:caption>This Clinton campaign again offers &quot;two for one,&quot; but the aspiring

First Laddie and strategist in chief, shown with Hillary in New Hampshire, is

trying not to outshine his wife.</pam:caption>

        <pam:textDescription>photo of Bill Clinton</pam:textDescription>

      <pur:reuseProhibited>no</pur:reuseProhibited>

      <pur:agreement>WD08-000284</pur:agreement>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="book"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="anthology"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="newsletter"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="website"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="NR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="syndicationPrint" pur:usageFee="50%"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="NR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="syndicationElectronic" pur:usageFee="30%"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="publicityHFM"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="publicityMagazine"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="magazineReuse"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="foreignEdition"/>

      <pur:creditLine pur:agreementID="WD08-000284">Mark Katzman photographer</pur:creditLine>

      </pam:media>

 

      </body>

  </pam:article>

</pam:message>


Appendix E  Fully Qualified PAM Example for DTD

This example shows the coding for fully qualified PAM xml verified against the pam-full.dtd.    Note that this example is for content originally published online and validated against a DTD.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<!DOCTYPE pam:message SYSTEM "pam-full.dtd">

<pam:message>

 

  <pam:article xml:lang="en-US">

    <xhtml:head>

      <dc:identifier>100340926</dc:identifier>

      <prism:issueIdentifier>1000710</prism:issueIdentifier>

      <pam:status>A</pam:status>

      <prism:originPlatform prism:platform="print"/>

      <dc:title>The Real Running Mates</dc:title>

      <dc:creator>Karen Tumulty</dc:creator>

      <dc:contributor prism:place="New York">Reporting by Nancy Gibbs

      </dc:contributor>

      <dc:contributor prism:place="Washington">Jay Newton-Small</dc:contributor>

      <prism:publicationName>Time</prism:publicationName>

      <prism:issn>0040-781X</prism:issn>

      <prism:coverDate>2007-09-24</prism:coverDate>

      <prism:publicationDate prism:platform="print">2007-09-22</prism:publicationDate>

      <prism:coverDisplayDate>September 24, 2007</prism:coverDisplayDate>      <prism:volume>170</prism:volume>

      <prism:number>13</prism:number>

      <prism:edition>U.S. Edition</prism:edition>

      <prism:startingPage>30</prism:startingPage>

      <prism:url>http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/

                              0,28804,1660946_1661334_1661288,00.html</prism:url>

      <prism:channel>Specials</prism:channel>

      <prism:section>The Well</prism:section>

      <prism:subsection1>Cover Story</prism:subsection1>

      <prism:subsection2>Nation</prism:subsection2>

      <prism:subsection3>Running Mates</prism:subsection3>

      <dc:subject>POLITICS</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>CAMPAIGNS</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>VOTERS</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>FAMILY</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>MARRIAGE</dc:subject>

      <prism:person>Elizabeth Edwards</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Cindy McCain</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Bill Clinton</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Michelle Obama</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Judith Guiliani</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Ann Romney </prism:person>

      <prism:person>Jeri Thompso</prism:person>

      <prism:genre>coverStory</prism:genre>

      <prism:wordCount>4188</prism:wordCount>

<dcterms:hasPart>See also additional image(s) in Cover Description file and Table of Contents of same issue.</dcterms:hasPart>

<pur:creditLine pur:required="yes" xml:lang="FR">Credit given</pur:creditLine>

</xhtml:head>

        <xhtml:body>

<xhtml:p prism:class="deck">

Political spouses

have traditionally wielded their influence in private. But in this race, all

the rules will have to be rewritten

</xhtml:p>

<xhtml:p>Elizabeth Edwards

prides herself on her ability to explain the fine print of her husband&apos;s energy

plan and the details of how John Edwards would respond to the next Katrina-size

natural disaster. She can rattle off the number of people who lack health

insurance in New Hampshire (about 127,000), how many schools there have failed

to meet the Federal Government&apos;s standards for &quot;adequate yearly

progress&quot; (191) and where the state ranks in teacher pay (24th). &quot;I

think it&apos;s important to learn policy, so that people don&apos;t have to dumb down

their questions because I&apos;m the spouse,&quot; she says. Nor, for that matter,

does she feel a spouse should have to sand down her edges. When a woman at a

house party in Bow, N.H., asked her one recent morning how her husband&apos;s

campaign would respond to &quot;the inevitable horrible mudslinging&quot; that is

part of presidential politics, you might have thought she was the one in the

family who had grown up in a brawling mill town. &quot;It&apos;s a question of being

prepared and not having any hesitation,&quot; she said. &quot;You go straight to

the nose because then they walk away bleeding. And that&apos;s the point.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>It&apos;s hard to

imagine Laura Bush saying something like that. There is no handbook for the

spouse of a presidential candidate, but the expectations have always been

pretty clear. She (yes, that was the presumption) should first do no harm. Her

safest bet: stand silently at his side, beaming with admiration and awe, the

well-coiffed testament to a home life that was tranquil, drama-free and utterly

traditional. When the spouse became the story, it was seldom good news for the

principal.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Take what

happened in 1992, when a certain Governor from Arkansas started throwing around

quips like &quot;Buy one, get one free&quot; and musing about the possibility of

giving his outspoken lawyer wife a Cabinet post. In no time, people were

working out their own conflicted feelings about feminism and family by arguing

over Hillary Clinton--the influences she would bring to the White House, the

state of her marriage, even her headbands. No less a political scientist than

Richard Nixon, whose own spouse had been a paragon of cloth-coat humility,

warned, &quot;If the wife comes through as being too strong and too intelligent,

it makes the husband look like a wimp.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Fast-forward four

presidential cycles, and Hillary is leading the field for the Democratic

presidential nomination, while Bill is the one learning to fit himself into the

supporting role. With a spouse who can be counted on to outshine the candidate,

her campaign has had to handle the former President as carefully as a tactical

nuclear weapon. &quot;A lot of people might have expected him to be out

immediately, and instead, he&apos;s sort of behind the scenes and on the phone and

doing fund raising,&quot; says Elizabeth Edwards, 58. &quot;It is clearly more

complicated for them ... I&apos;m just glad that&apos;s their problem, not mine.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>But Bill is far

from the only spouse rewriting the rules of the road in presidential politics.

Of the 2008 candidates--and particularly among those in the top tier--more than

a few are married to outspoken, opinionated, professional women who are neither

accustomed to nor inclined toward melting into the background. They are

comfortable with, even eager about making news in their own right. Since the

2008 campaign promises to be more competitive, more expensive and more

prolonged than any we&apos;ve seen, the spouses are playing roles more typically

associated with the running mate than the mate of the person who&apos;s running. In

fact, the reality of today&apos;s politics seems to have turned Nixon&apos;s premise on

its head. A strong, smart, fully engaged spouse is practically a prerequisite

if you want to win. Sit down and talk to some of them, and you will realize

that while they all are charting the terrain ahead in their own ways, they do

so with the conviction that their partner can&apos;t get there without them. As

Cindy McCain, 53, put it, &quot;He and I are the only two in it in the

end.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>The

Gladiators</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>ONE REASON

CAMPAIGNS ARE RELYING MORE heavily on spouses as surrogates is simply

practical: two people can cover far more territory than one. &quot;It&apos;s

obviously different. Not only am I going out and speaking, but I&apos;m also doing

fund raising on my own,&quot; says Ann Romney, 58, whose five sons too are being

deployed across the map. &quot;There are so many states in play now that you

can&apos;t possibly cover them all with the asset of just one candidate.&quot; As the

competition gets hotter, we&apos;ll see whether the traditional attack-dog role

played by vice-presidential nominees falls to the spouses as well--and whether

they are given leeway to say things that their husbands wouldn&apos;t dare. There

was no mistaking what Elizabeth Edwards meant when she said Hillary Clinton is

&quot;divisive and unelectable.&quot; She has blasted Barack Obama for being

&quot;holier than thou&quot; on the Iraq war, contended Hillary Clinton has had

to &quot;behave as a man&quot; and &quot;is just not as vocal a women&apos;s advocate

as I want to see,&quot; and complained that her husband is not getting as much

media attention as either of them because &quot;we can&apos;t make John black; we

can&apos;t make him a woman.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Edwards allows

that she occasionally thinks, &quot;Golly, I wish I hadn&apos;t said it that

way.&quot; And she insists that she is merely being herself, not part of a

campaign strategy. &quot;There is no, and I mean zero, campaign discussion,

calculation, anything with respect to this. The second thing is, I don&apos;t

usually volunteer this,&quot; Edwards says of these comments about her husband&apos;s

front-running rivals. &quot;When I am specifically asked, I simply answer the

question, and it&apos;s not a matter of attacking in particular.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>But that doesn&apos;t

mean all this is random. &quot;My job is to move voters,&quot; Edwards says.

&quot;If you&apos;re not moving votes or moving voters to see the candidate himself

or herself, then you&apos;re not using your time very wisely.&quot; And that

highlights another poignant and uncomfortable reality of the unique situation

in which Edwards now finds herself. What she calls &quot;my precious time&quot;

is even more so since it was revealed in March that her breast cancer, first

diagnosed in the final days of the Kerry-Edwards campaign in 2004, had recurred

as Stage IV and is incurable. Statistics suggest only 20% of patients in her

situation live for five years. Is Edwards getting a sympathy pass? Rival

campaigns think so, though they won&apos;t say so publicly. As one strategist puts

it, &quot;She&apos;s bulletproof.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Reporters are

primed to hear an attack even when none is intended. When Michelle Obama, 43,

mused last month in Iowa that &quot;if you can&apos;t run your own house, you

certainly can&apos;t run the White House&quot;--an innocent enough observation, the

full context of her remarks shows, about the challenges of juggling her

children&apos;s schedule with her husband&apos;s--it was immediately interpreted as a dig

at the Clintons. THE CLAWS COME OUT screamed a caption beneath her picture and

Hillary Clinton&apos;s on Fox News. &quot;That&apos;s a totally different context,&quot;

Obama now says. &quot;So that&apos;s one of those things where I take it, I learn a

lesson, I say, &apos;O.K., let me be clearer&apos; ... All I&apos;m trying to do is talk to

the American people about who we are, our shortcomings, our challenges. What I

don&apos;t want to feel like is that we can&apos;t have any conversations about

this--values or morals or all of that--because somebody&apos;s feelings might get

hurt. This is tough stuff.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>The Guardians</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>AN IMPORTANT

THING TO REMEMBER ABOUT the extraordinary lineup of smart, savvy, engaged

campaign spouses in the 2008 race is that none of this is entirely new. What&apos;s

new is knowing so much about it.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>First Ladies have

been deeply involved in politics all through history. In 1776, even as John

Adams was helping invent the Republic, Abigail was warning him, &quot;Do not put

such unlimited power into the hands of the husbands. Remember, all men would be

tyrants if they could.&quot; Mary Todd Lincoln had such strong views about

Cabinet members and Supreme Court nominees that some White House aides called

her &quot;the Hellcat.&quot; Edith Wilson secretly held the government together

for her stroke-incapacitated husband, though she opposed giving women the vote.

Rosalynn Carter was basically in charge of mental-health policy. As her husband

staggered through 1979, columnist Jack Anderson dubbed her the

&quot;co-President.&quot; &quot;Many, many women have brought to the table so many

different things,&quot; says Cindy McCain. &quot;It just depends on how deeply

you want to look.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>McCain--whom

voters got to know as a smiling, beautiful, St. John--suited presence in her

husband&apos;s 2000 campaign--played a hard-knuckled tactical role this time around

by engineering the shake-up of a high-priced campaign organization that had

spent itself into near insolvency. In large part at Cindy McCain&apos;s instigation,

her husband&apos;s longtime political strategist John Weaver was fired; his 2000

campaign manager Rick Davis was brought back from internal exile to take over.

&quot;Truly, the only person my husband can trust is me,&quot; McCain says.

&quot;I don&apos;t have anything to lose by telling him not only what I think but

what I think he did wrong.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>In the

pre-Hillary age, with different expectations for gender roles, that kind of

influence was wielded privately--over everything from policy to personnel to

political strategy--more than publicly. With the conspicuous exception of

Eleanor Roosevelt, who was an outspoken and polarizing figure in her own right,

the modern era saw a procession of generally pliant First Ladies: Bess, Mamie,

Jackie, Lady Bird, Pat. It really was Betty Ford, arguably the archetype for

today&apos;s aspiring First Spouses, who changed the rules. Faced with a traumatized

electorate and an omnivorous press corps after Watergate, she responded in the

way that came naturally--which is to say forthrightly, answering whatever

questions were thrown at her because her Midwestern manners precluded the idea

that you could just ignore a question you didn&apos;t like. There was Betty on 60

Minutes saying she wouldn&apos;t be surprised if her teenage daughter Susan were

having sex or if her kids had tried pot. When she observed to a columnist that

the only question she hadn&apos;t been asked was how often she slept with her

husband, the reporter came back with: &quot;Well, how often do you?&quot; Her

answer: &quot;As often as possible!&quot; The Fords &quot;flung open the White

House windows and declared there are real people living here,&quot; says

journalist Kati Marton, who wrote Hidden Power, a book on presidential

marriages, and who herself is married to former Clinton Administration official

Richard Holbrooke.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>But then, Betty

Ford got the First Lady&apos;s job without ever having to campaign for it. And not

everyone was charmed by her candor. Some of the President&apos;s aides wanted to

muzzle her, and his pollsters said she could cost him 20 points with

conservative GOP voters. First Lady aspirants have more typically acted as

fabric softener. Tipper Gore made her husband look looser, as did Kitty

Dukakis, though in both cases that wasn&apos;t saying much. Laura Bush has almost

always been a more popular figure than W., though most people could not name a

policy position that she&apos;s passionate about.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>The current class

of candidates&apos; spouses has plenty who still fit the traditional mold--like Mary

Brownback, 49, who married Sam while she was in law school and proudly declares

that she&apos;s never worked outside the home. &quot;Basically,&quot; she says, &quot;I

live in the kitchen.&quot; Ann Romney calls herself the CFO--chief family

officer--and her husband Mitt&apos;s campaign website says she &quot;places primary

importance on her role as a wife, a mother and a grandmother.&quot; Mike and

Janet Huckabee were high school sweethearts; now 52, she was 18 when they

married, and they renewed their vows in a covenant marriage on Valentine&apos;s Day,

2005. Jill Tracy Biden, 56, was a student teacher when she and Joe Biden

married in 1977, and has dropped off the campaign trail now that the school

year has begun again.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>In fact, for a

politician&apos;s spouse, some things never change. This is how Barbara Richardson,

58, a veteran of her husband Bill&apos;s successful campaigns for the House and the

New Mexico governorship, summed it up before a debate in South Carolina:

&quot;While Mr. Wonderful is out there campaigning, the rest of us as spouses

are still schlepping through the airport to a commercial plane with kids in

tow. We miss our connections. We&apos;re standing in grocery-store lines, and

frankly, we&apos;re just trying to keep body and soul and house and home and family

together, while they go out and make nice--Mr. Popularity!&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Have voters

really adjusted their ideas and expectations of a First Mate? The spouses

themselves don&apos;t sound so sure. &quot;As much as it may sound a little archaic,

I think the American voter wants a traditional situation,&quot; says Cindy

McCain. &quot;In other words, I don&apos;t believe they want a spouse who is involved

in day-to-day politics. And I&apos;m not criticizing any former Administration. I&apos;m

just telling you what people have told me. They still kind of want the

traditional-looking family.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Even Elizabeth

Edwards, for all her outspokenness, agrees. &quot;There are certain baseline

things people require in a First Lady--a graciousness,&quot; she says.

&quot;There is sort of a sense of maternal capabilities that we might be looking

for. I don&apos;t think that in any way disqualifies Bill, but I do think that if

it&apos;s a woman, they&apos;re looking perhaps for something like that.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Marriages Under

the Microscope</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>MANY A FIRST

MARRIAGE HAS BEEN THE subject of rumor and speculation, but the Clinton

presidency put political marriage under the microscope in a way it never had

been before. In this new season of full disclosure, there&apos;s Elizabeth Kucinich,

29, who told the Associated Press that a lazy day at home consists of getting

up for brunch and then going back to bed until 4:30 p.m., &quot;John Lennon and

Yoko Ono--style.&quot; But it&apos;s hard to think of another spouse who has taken

openness as far as Michelle Obama. Her idea of managing her husband&apos;s image

seems to begin with knocking him off his pedestal.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>In a Glamour

magazine interview, Michelle Obama said her husband is so &quot;snore-y and

stinky&quot; that her daughters won&apos;t cuddle with him in bed. She tells voters

how he leaves his dirty socks around and invites them to tattle if they see him

violating their deal in which she would allow him to run if he would stop

smoking. Barack Obama has written with startling candor about the strains that

his political career has put on their marriage, particularly when both were in

their formative years. &quot;Leaning down to kiss Michelle goodbye in the

morning, all I would get was a peck on the cheek,&quot; he wrote. &quot;By the

time Sasha was born--just as beautiful, and almost as calm as her sister--my

wife&apos;s anger toward me seemed barely contained.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>But you could

argue that her acknowledgment of his flaws makes her more effective when she

turns that anger on his critics. &quot;Don&apos;t be fooled by people who claim that

it is not his time,&quot; she exhorts. &quot;We&apos;ve heard this spewed from the

lips of rivals ... every phase of our journey: He is not experienced enough. He

should wait his turn. He is too young. He is not black enough. He is not white

enough.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Michelle Obama

says she is betting that voters will not only accept that frankness but embrace

it. &quot;You win with being who you are and with being clear and comfortable

with that,&quot; she says. &quot;I&apos;m finding that people completely understand

me. For the most part, I think the women and the men and the families and the

folks that we are meeting on the campaign trail understand the realities of

families of today.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>ODDLY ENOUGH, IT

IS THE REPUBLICAN spouses who are stretching the limits of traditional values

in ways they never have before. Ann Romney&apos;s story line--the high school

sweetheart and sunny stay-at-home mom who produced a close-knit,

picture-perfect family--actually sets her apart among the leading contenders&apos;

wives. Which doesn&apos;t hurt when you are trying to persuade voters, particularly

evangelical conservatives, to consider putting a Mormon in the White House.

&quot;I think that people have seen Mitt and me. They certainly know we have a

very strong marriage and very strong family,&quot; she says. &quot;I think that

is clearly helpful to him in breaking down barriers that people have had in the

past.&quot; But, she adds, &quot;I don&apos;t know if they&apos;ve seen enough.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>For the others,

the question may be whether voters have seen too much. The public displays of

affection that front runner Rudolph Giuliani and wife Judith put on for Barbara

Walters--holding hands and calling each other &quot;baby&quot; and

&quot;sweetheart&quot;--only served to remind viewers that this first blush of

love is also the third marriage for each, and that wife No. 3 is one of the

reasons his children with wife No. 2 won&apos;t campaign for him. &quot;I have just

recently begun--I think they call it in the political world--being &apos;rolled

out,&apos;&quot; Judith, 52, told Walters, but the process has been anything but

smooth. A scathing profile of Judith Stish Ross Nathan Giuliani in Vanity Fair

pored over her two failed marriages (one of which she acknowledged only

recently), the requirement that a separate seat on her plane be provided for

the Louis Vuitton handbag that is known around Giuliani headquarters as Baby

Louis, and the inconvenient timeline of their courtship, which started while he

was still living with second wife Donna Hanover.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Through all this,

Judith Giuliani is trying hard to keep her game face on. &quot;It&apos;s a steep

learning curve. It&apos;s all been new to me,&quot; she says. &quot;What&apos;s really

important is, it&apos;s my husband who&apos;s running for office. He is the one. I do

think that is important for us to focus on. We aren&apos;t electing a spouse.&quot;

And while Rudy Giuliani told Walters he would be &quot;very, very

comfortable&quot; with having his wife, a nurse, attend Cabinet meetings--&quot;I

couldn&apos;t have a better adviser&quot;--Judith downplays her influence and her

interest in his campaign and in any future Giuliani Administration. &quot;My

role is really to support my husband in the ways I have always supported him. I

love to take charge of his personal health needs, make sure he&apos;s exercising,

getting the right food, which is a real challenge on the campaign trail,&quot;

she says. &quot;I do attend some meetings, but more often than not, it&apos;s for my

own edification.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>For Fred

Thompson&apos;s wife Jeri, 40, who is a quarter-century younger than he is, it&apos;s

hard to figure out which female stereotype is more toxic: the siren whose

tight, low-cut outfits had cable-television commentator and former GOP

Congressman Joe Scarborough speculating that she &quot;works the pole&quot;--a

phrase usually associated with strippers--or the conniving Lady Macbeth who has

been blamed for sending his campaign into disarray even before it was launched.

She was a major force in persuading him to run but also a major one behind a

series of shake-ups that had the campaign on its second manager and its fourth

spokesman before Thompson even announced his candidacy.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Her defenders

note that Jeri Thompson has worked for years as a political operative. &quot;She

gets Republican politics. She gets conservative politics. But most of all, she

understands where this man is and how best to help him,&quot; says Mark Corallo,

a well-respected strategist who helped launch the campaign. But then, on the

eve of Thompson&apos;s much delayed announcement, Corallo himself resigned.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Their family

portrait--a man who qualifies for Social Security with a 40-year-old blond, a

toddler and a baby--is a far cry from that of Ike and Mamie. &quot;He sadly now

looks like their grandfather,&quot; says Marton. &quot;It&apos;s not what women want

the presidential family to look like. No doubt unintentionally, but to a lot of

women it&apos;s almost a rebuke. It&apos;s too unsubtle.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>The New

Normal</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>IN THIS CAMPAIGN,

WHICH HAS PRODUCED SO much buzz about political marriages, the challenge for

the Clintons has been a different one: making the most remarkable situation of

all look normal.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>The first time

his wife ran for office, Bill Clinton was in the White House, which kept him

safely off her stage and minimized the amount of public distraction he caused.

But behind the scenes, he was her political consultant in chief, reworking her

speeches, stepping in when her staff was putting too much on her schedule,

rehearsing her for debates and demanding she step up her ad buys.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>That was two

successful Senate campaigns ago. Now the man who jokes that he wants to be

known as &quot;First Laddie&quot; downplays his role as she reaches for the

biggest prize of all: his old job. He has joined his wife in a couple of

campaign swings and is her star fund raiser. But he has yet to show up among

the spouses in the audience at any of the Democratic debates. As for his role

in any future Clinton Administration, both she and he have talked about the

possibility that she might make him an unofficial emissary. &quot;I think she

will ask me and former President Bush and other people to go help the country.

We have got to restore our standing in the world,&quot; Bill Clinton told CNN&apos;s

Larry King recently. &quot;I wouldn&apos;t be surprised if she [asked] every former

President to do something.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>But in the

meantime, there&apos;s an election to win. And while Hillary Clinton has the best

political strategist of her generation at her disposal, Bill is by all accounts

keeping his obtrusions to a minimum. Campaign officials say that while the

couple talks several times a day, he rarely gets involved with the workings of

her campaign. &quot;He&apos;s doing what he&apos;s asked, and he&apos;s doing what he can,&quot;

says an aide, &quot;but he&apos;s certainly not meddling.&quot; In part, that&apos;s

because his own work--his foundation and a tour to promote his new book--keeps

him plenty busy. And it also reflects the fact that she has an enormous

political machine around her that seems to be doing pretty well on its own.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>&quot;If she&apos;s

writing an important article or giving an important speech, she&apos;ll ask me to

read it,&quot; the former President told Oprah Winfrey. &quot;And once in a while

she&apos;ll ask me for some advice on something strategic. But she knows so much

more about a lot of this stuff than I do because I&apos;m far removed from it.&quot;

Occasionally, he says, he gets a call from her while he&apos;s on the golf course,

and she reminds him that she&apos;s 15 years older than he was when he did it,

&quot;and I say, &apos;Well, nobody made you run.&apos;&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Bill Clinton, 61,

is also making a conscious effort to stay out of the fray, though when

Elizabeth Edwards attacked Hillary as not vocal enough on women&apos;s issues, he

rode to his wife&apos;s defense. &quot;If you look at the record on women&apos;s issues, I

defy you to find anybody who has run for office in recent history who&apos;s got a

longer history of working for women, for families and children, than Hillary

does,&quot; Clinton said in an interview with ABC&apos;s Good Morning America. As for

Edwards&apos; contention that Hillary had behaved &quot;as a man,&quot; Clinton

retorted, &quot;I don&apos;t think it&apos;s inconsistent with being a woman that you can

also be knowledgeable on military and security affairs and be strong when the

occasion demands it.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>But he has

steered clear of criticizing Hillary&apos;s opponents. &quot;This is a good time for

us Democrats,&quot; he says. &quot;We don&apos;t have to be against anybody. We can be

for the person we think would be the best President.&quot; Of course, that&apos;s

easy to say when your candidate is safely ahead in the polls. If their

situation and that of the Edwardses were reversed, &quot;would he be her biggest

attack dog like Elizabeth Edwards is? Maybe,&quot; concedes a strategist.

&quot;But he gets to be the big guy--at least for now.&quot; Then again, he&apos;s in

a supporting role that doesn&apos;t come with a script. No one knows that better

than a Clinton.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>[Contains a table. Please see hardcopy of magazine or PDF.]<xhtml:br/>

<xhtml:br/>

THE MARCH OF HISTORY</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>That Was Then. This Is Now</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Both in style and

in substance, the 2008 contenders for the job of First Spouse are all far

different from anyone Americans have ever seen in the East Wing<xhtml:br/>

<xhtml:br/>

</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:table>

<xhtml:tr>

<xhtml:td>Accessory</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Image</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Credential</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Cause</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Divorce Record</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Financial Experience</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>ExecutiveExperience</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Family Photo</xhtml:td>

</xhtml:tr>

 

<xhtml:tr>

<xhtml:td>THE OLD WAY</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Her pillbox hat was Jackie Kennedy&apos;s fashion

signature</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Nancy Reagan never lost her adoring gaze for her

husband</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Mamie Eisenhower touted her Million Dollar Fudge

recipe</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Lady Bird Johnson beautified America&apos;s highways</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Florence Harding, the first divorced First Lady, and

Betty Ford, the next and last, each had one previous marriage</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Mary Todd Lincoln ran up secret debts with her

shopping</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Edith Wilson wielded power after husband Woodrow&apos;s

stroke</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Barbara Bush&apos;s was a tableau filled with

grandchildren</xhtml:td>

</xhtml:tr>

 

<xhtml:tr>

<xhtml:td>THE NEW<xhtml:br/>

WAY</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Elizabeth Kucinich would be the first First Lady to

wear a tongue stud</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Michelle Obama talks about Barack&apos;s flaws, calling

him &quot;stinky and snore-y&quot;</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>This year&apos;s spouses are a lawyerly lot. Shown

clockwise from top left, Elizabeth Edwards, Michelle Obama, Mary Brownback and

Bill Clinton all earned their degrees in law</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>If his wife is elected, former President Bill Clinton

says he wants to help change the world by working through his foundation on

problems like aids</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Judith Nathan Giuliani is on her third marriage--a

fact that became public only recently</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Representative Chris Dodd&apos;s wife Jackie Clegg Dodd

sits on five corporate boards and was a vice chair of the Export-Import

Bank</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Bill Clinton was the 42nd President of the U.S. but

jokes he might be called &quot;First Laddie&quot;</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Jeri Thompson has a changing table on the campaign

bus</xhtml:td>

</xhtml:tr>

</xhtml:table>

 

<xhtml:p><xhtml:br/>

</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p prism:class="box">SPOUSE TALK AT TIME.COM<xhtml:br/>

<xhtml:br/>

To read interviews with the running mates and see

photos of the couples on the trail, visit time.com /spouses. Plus, Elizabeth

Edwards and Ann Romney speak about campaigning while battling breast cancer and

MS</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p prism:class="pullQuote">&apos;If you&apos;re not moving votes or moving voters ... then

you&apos;re not using your time very wisely.&apos; --ELIZABETH EDWARDS</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p prism:class="pullQuote">&apos;Truly, the only person my husband can trust is me. I

don&apos;t have anything to lose by telling him ... what I think he did wrong.&apos; --CINDY MCCAIN</xhtml:p>

      <pam:media>

       <dc:type>photo</dc:type>

       <dc:format>image/jpeg</dc:format>

       <dc:identifier>us:tsn:61558</dc:identifier>

       <dc:creator>Mark Katzman prism:role="photographer"</dc:creator>

        <pam:mediaTitle>Bill Clinton</pam:mediaTitle>

        <pam:credit>Photographed by Mark Katzman</pam:credit>

        <pam:caption>This Clinton campaign again offers &quot;two for one,&quot; but the aspiring

First Laddie and strategist in chief, shown with Hillary in New Hampshire, is

trying not to outshine his wife.</pam:caption>

        <pam:textDescription>photo of Bill Clinton</pam:textDescription>

      <pur:reuseProhibited>no</pur:reuseProhibited>

      <pur:agreement>WD08-000284</pur:agreement>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="book"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="anthology"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="newsletter"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="website"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="NR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="syndicationPrint" pur:usageFee="50%"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="NR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="syndicationElectronic" pur:usageFee="30%"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="publicityHFM"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="publicityMagazine"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="magazineReuse"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="foreignEdition"/>

      <pur:creditLine pur:agreementID="WD08-000284">Mark Katzman photographer</pur:creditLine>

      </pam:media>

      </xhtml:body>

  </pam:article>

</pam:message>

Appendix F  Fully Qualified PAM Example for XSD

This example shows the coding for fully qualified PAM xml verified against the pam.xsd.    Note that this example is for content originally published online and validated against an XSD.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<pam:message xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"

xsi:schemaLocation="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/pam/2.2/ pam.xsd"

xmlns:pam="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/pam/2.2/"

xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"

xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"

xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"

xmlns:pim="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/pim/2.2/"

xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/basic/2.2/"

xmlns:prl="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/prl/2.0/"

xmlns:pur="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/prismusagerights/2.1/"

xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

<pam:article xml:lang="en-US">

 <xhtml:head>

      <dc:identifier>100340926</dc:identifier>

      <prism:issueIdentifier>1000710</prism:issueIdentifier>

      <pam:status>A</pam:status>

      <prism:originPlatform prism:platform="print"/>

      <dc:title>The Real Running Mates</dc:title>

      <dc:creator>Karen Tumulty</dc:creator>

      <dc:contributor prism:place="New York">Reporting by Nancy Gibbs

      </dc:contributor>

      <dc:contributor prism:place="Washington">Jay Newton-Small</dc:contributor>

      <prism:publicationName>Time</prism:publicationName>

      <prism:issn>0040-781X</prism:issn>

      <prism:coverDate>2007-09-24</prism:coverDate>

      <prism:publicationDate platform="print">2007-09-22</prism:publicationDate>

      <prism:coverDisplayDate>September 24, 2007</prism:coverDisplayDate>

      <prism:volume>170</prism:volume>

      <prism:number>13</prism:number>

      <prism:edition>U.S. Edition</prism:edition>

      <prism:startingPage>30</prism:startingPage>

      <prism:url>http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/

                              0,28804,1660946_1661334_1661288,00.html</prism:url>

      <prism:channel>Specials</prism:channel>

      <prism:section>The Well</prism:section>

      <prism:subsection1>Cover Story</prism:subsection1>

      <prism:subsection2>Nation</prism:subsection2>

      <prism:subsection3>Running Mates</prism:subsection3>

      <dc:subject>POLITICS</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>CAMPAIGNS</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>VOTERS</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>FAMILY</dc:subject>

      <dc:subject>MARRIAGE</dc:subject>

      <prism:person>Elizabeth Edwards</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Cindy McCain</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Bill Clinton</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Michelle Obama</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Judith Guiliani</prism:person>

      <prism:person>Ann Romney </prism:person>

      <prism:person>Jeri Thompso</prism:person>

      <prism:genre>coverStory</prism:genre>

      <prism:wordCount>4188</prism:wordCount>

      <dcterms:hasPart>See also additional image(s) in Cover Description file and Table of Contents of same issue.</dcterms:hasPart>

      <pur:creditLine pur:required="yes" xml:lang="FR">Credit given</pur:creditLine>

  </xhtml:head>

  <xhtml:body>

<xhtml:p prism:class="deck">

Political spouses

have traditionally wielded their influence in private. But in this race, all

the rules will have to be rewritten

</xhtml:p>

<xhtml:p>Elizabeth Edwards

prides herself on her ability to explain the fine print of her husband&apos;s energy

plan and the details of how John Edwards would respond to the next Katrina-size

natural disaster. She can rattle off the number of people who lack health

insurance in New Hampshire (about 127,000), how many schools there have failed

to meet the Federal Government&apos;s standards for &quot;adequate yearly

progress&quot; (191) and where the state ranks in teacher pay (24th). &quot;I

think it&apos;s important to learn policy, so that people don&apos;t have to dumb down

their questions because I&apos;m the spouse,&quot; she says. Nor, for that matter,

does she feel a spouse should have to sand down her edges. When a woman at a

house party in Bow, N.H., asked her one recent morning how her husband&apos;s

campaign would respond to &quot;the inevitable horrible mudslinging&quot; that is

part of presidential politics, you might have thought she was the one in the

family who had grown up in a brawling mill town. &quot;It&apos;s a question of being

prepared and not having any hesitation,&quot; she said. &quot;You go straight to

the nose because then they walk away bleeding. And that&apos;s the point.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>It&apos;s hard to

imagine Laura Bush saying something like that. There is no handbook for the

spouse of a presidential candidate, but the expectations have always been

pretty clear. She (yes, that was the presumption) should first do no harm. Her

safest bet: stand silently at his side, beaming with admiration and awe, the

well-coiffed testament to a home life that was tranquil, drama-free and utterly

traditional. When the spouse became the story, it was seldom good news for the

principal.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Take what

happened in 1992, when a certain Governor from Arkansas started throwing around

quips like &quot;Buy one, get one free&quot; and musing about the possibility of

giving his outspoken lawyer wife a Cabinet post. In no time, people were

working out their own conflicted feelings about feminism and family by arguing

over Hillary Clinton--the influences she would bring to the White House, the

state of her marriage, even her headbands. No less a political scientist than

Richard Nixon, whose own spouse had been a paragon of cloth-coat humility,

warned, &quot;If the wife comes through as being too strong and too intelligent,

it makes the husband look like a wimp.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Fast-forward four

presidential cycles, and Hillary is leading the field for the Democratic

presidential nomination, while Bill is the one learning to fit himself into the

supporting role. With a spouse who can be counted on to outshine the candidate,

her campaign has had to handle the former President as carefully as a tactical

nuclear weapon. &quot;A lot of people might have expected him to be out

immediately, and instead, he&apos;s sort of behind the scenes and on the phone and

doing fund raising,&quot; says Elizabeth Edwards, 58. &quot;It is clearly more

complicated for them ... I&apos;m just glad that&apos;s their problem, not mine.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>But Bill is far

from the only spouse rewriting the rules of the road in presidential politics.

Of the 2008 candidates--and particularly among those in the top tier--more than

a few are married to outspoken, opinionated, professional women who are neither

accustomed to nor inclined toward melting into the background. They are

comfortable with, even eager about making news in their own right. Since the

2008 campaign promises to be more competitive, more expensive and more

prolonged than any we&apos;ve seen, the spouses are playing roles more typically

associated with the running mate than the mate of the person who&apos;s running. In

fact, the reality of today&apos;s politics seems to have turned Nixon&apos;s premise on

its head. A strong, smart, fully engaged spouse is practically a prerequisite

if you want to win. Sit down and talk to some of them, and you will realize

that while they all are charting the terrain ahead in their own ways, they do

so with the conviction that their partner can&apos;t get there without them. As

Cindy McCain, 53, put it, &quot;He and I are the only two in it in the

end.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>The

Gladiators</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>ONE REASON

CAMPAIGNS ARE RELYING MORE heavily on spouses as surrogates is simply

practical: two people can cover far more territory than one. &quot;It&apos;s

obviously different. Not only am I going out and speaking, but I&apos;m also doing

fund raising on my own,&quot; says Ann Romney, 58, whose five sons too are being

deployed across the map. &quot;There are so many states in play now that you

can&apos;t possibly cover them all with the asset of just one candidate.&quot; As the

competition gets hotter, we&apos;ll see whether the traditional attack-dog role

played by vice-presidential nominees falls to the spouses as well--and whether

they are given leeway to say things that their husbands wouldn&apos;t dare. There

was no mistaking what Elizabeth Edwards meant when she said Hillary Clinton is

&quot;divisive and unelectable.&quot; She has blasted Barack Obama for being

&quot;holier than thou&quot; on the Iraq war, contended Hillary Clinton has had

to &quot;behave as a man&quot; and &quot;is just not as vocal a women&apos;s advocate

as I want to see,&quot; and complained that her husband is not getting as much

media attention as either of them because &quot;we can&apos;t make John black; we

can&apos;t make him a woman.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Edwards allows

that she occasionally thinks, &quot;Golly, I wish I hadn&apos;t said it that

way.&quot; And she insists that she is merely being herself, not part of a

campaign strategy. &quot;There is no, and I mean zero, campaign discussion,

calculation, anything with respect to this. The second thing is, I don&apos;t

usually volunteer this,&quot; Edwards says of these comments about her husband&apos;s

front-running rivals. &quot;When I am specifically asked, I simply answer the

question, and it&apos;s not a matter of attacking in particular.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>But that doesn&apos;t

mean all this is random. &quot;My job is to move voters,&quot; Edwards says.

&quot;If you&apos;re not moving votes or moving voters to see the candidate himself

or herself, then you&apos;re not using your time very wisely.&quot; And that

highlights another poignant and uncomfortable reality of the unique situation

in which Edwards now finds herself. What she calls &quot;my precious time&quot;

is even more so since it was revealed in March that her breast cancer, first

diagnosed in the final days of the Kerry-Edwards campaign in 2004, had recurred

as Stage IV and is incurable. Statistics suggest only 20% of patients in her

situation live for five years. Is Edwards getting a sympathy pass? Rival

campaigns think so, though they won&apos;t say so publicly. As one strategist puts

it, &quot;She&apos;s bulletproof.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Reporters are

primed to hear an attack even when none is intended. When Michelle Obama, 43,

mused last month in Iowa that &quot;if you can&apos;t run your own house, you

certainly can&apos;t run the White House&quot;--an innocent enough observation, the

full context of her remarks shows, about the challenges of juggling her

children&apos;s schedule with her husband&apos;s--it was immediately interpreted as a dig

at the Clintons. THE CLAWS COME OUT screamed a caption beneath her picture and

Hillary Clinton&apos;s on Fox News. &quot;That&apos;s a totally different context,&quot;

Obama now says. &quot;So that&apos;s one of those things where I take it, I learn a

lesson, I say, &apos;O.K., let me be clearer&apos; ... All I&apos;m trying to do is talk to

the American people about who we are, our shortcomings, our challenges. What I

don&apos;t want to feel like is that we can&apos;t have any conversations about

this--values or morals or all of that--because somebody&apos;s feelings might get

hurt. This is tough stuff.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>The Guardians</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>AN IMPORTANT

THING TO REMEMBER ABOUT the extraordinary lineup of smart, savvy, engaged

campaign spouses in the 2008 race is that none of this is entirely new. What&apos;s

new is knowing so much about it.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>First Ladies have

been deeply involved in politics all through history. In 1776, even as John

Adams was helping invent the Republic, Abigail was warning him, &quot;Do not put

such unlimited power into the hands of the husbands. Remember, all men would be

tyrants if they could.&quot; Mary Todd Lincoln had such strong views about

Cabinet members and Supreme Court nominees that some White House aides called

her &quot;the Hellcat.&quot; Edith Wilson secretly held the government together

for her stroke-incapacitated husband, though she opposed giving women the vote.

Rosalynn Carter was basically in charge of mental-health policy. As her husband

staggered through 1979, columnist Jack Anderson dubbed her the

&quot;co-President.&quot; &quot;Many, many women have brought to the table so many

different things,&quot; says Cindy McCain. &quot;It just depends on how deeply

you want to look.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>McCain--whom

voters got to know as a smiling, beautiful, St. John--suited presence in her

husband&apos;s 2000 campaign--played a hard-knuckled tactical role this time around

by engineering the shake-up of a high-priced campaign organization that had

spent itself into near insolvency. In large part at Cindy McCain&apos;s instigation,

her husband&apos;s longtime political strategist John Weaver was fired; his 2000

campaign manager Rick Davis was brought back from internal exile to take over.

&quot;Truly, the only person my husband can trust is me,&quot; McCain says.

&quot;I don&apos;t have anything to lose by telling him not only what I think but

what I think he did wrong.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>In the

pre-Hillary age, with different expectations for gender roles, that kind of

influence was wielded privately--over everything from policy to personnel to

political strategy--more than publicly. With the conspicuous exception of

Eleanor Roosevelt, who was an outspoken and polarizing figure in her own right,

the modern era saw a procession of generally pliant First Ladies: Bess, Mamie,

Jackie, Lady Bird, Pat. It really was Betty Ford, arguably the archetype for

today&apos;s aspiring First Spouses, who changed the rules. Faced with a traumatized

electorate and an omnivorous press corps after Watergate, she responded in the

way that came naturally--which is to say forthrightly, answering whatever

questions were thrown at her because her Midwestern manners precluded the idea

that you could just ignore a question you didn&apos;t like. There was Betty on 60

Minutes saying she wouldn&apos;t be surprised if her teenage daughter Susan were

having sex or if her kids had tried pot. When she observed to a columnist that

the only question she hadn&apos;t been asked was how often she slept with her

husband, the reporter came back with: &quot;Well, how often do you?&quot; Her

answer: &quot;As often as possible!&quot; The Fords &quot;flung open the White

House windows and declared there are real people living here,&quot; says

journalist Kati Marton, who wrote Hidden Power, a book on presidential

marriages, and who herself is married to former Clinton Administration official

Richard Holbrooke.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>But then, Betty

Ford got the First Lady&apos;s job without ever having to campaign for it. And not

everyone was charmed by her candor. Some of the President&apos;s aides wanted to

muzzle her, and his pollsters said she could cost him 20 points with

conservative GOP voters. First Lady aspirants have more typically acted as

fabric softener. Tipper Gore made her husband look looser, as did Kitty

Dukakis, though in both cases that wasn&apos;t saying much. Laura Bush has almost

always been a more popular figure than W., though most people could not name a

policy position that she&apos;s passionate about.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>The current class

of candidates&apos; spouses has plenty who still fit the traditional mold--like Mary

Brownback, 49, who married Sam while she was in law school and proudly declares

that she&apos;s never worked outside the home. &quot;Basically,&quot; she says, &quot;I

live in the kitchen.&quot; Ann Romney calls herself the CFO--chief family

officer--and her husband Mitt&apos;s campaign website says she &quot;places primary

importance on her role as a wife, a mother and a grandmother.&quot; Mike and

Janet Huckabee were high school sweethearts; now 52, she was 18 when they

married, and they renewed their vows in a covenant marriage on Valentine&apos;s Day,

2005. Jill Tracy Biden, 56, was a student teacher when she and Joe Biden

married in 1977, and has dropped off the campaign trail now that the school

year has begun again.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>In fact, for a

politician&apos;s spouse, some things never change. This is how Barbara Richardson,

58, a veteran of her husband Bill&apos;s successful campaigns for the House and the

New Mexico governorship, summed it up before a debate in South Carolina:

&quot;While Mr. Wonderful is out there campaigning, the rest of us as spouses

are still schlepping through the airport to a commercial plane with kids in

tow. We miss our connections. We&apos;re standing in grocery-store lines, and

frankly, we&apos;re just trying to keep body and soul and house and home and family

together, while they go out and make nice--Mr. Popularity!&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Have voters

really adjusted their ideas and expectations of a First Mate? The spouses

themselves don&apos;t sound so sure. &quot;As much as it may sound a little archaic,

I think the American voter wants a traditional situation,&quot; says Cindy

McCain. &quot;In other words, I don&apos;t believe they want a spouse who is involved

in day-to-day politics. And I&apos;m not criticizing any former Administration. I&apos;m

just telling you what people have told me. They still kind of want the

traditional-looking family.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Even Elizabeth

Edwards, for all her outspokenness, agrees. &quot;There are certain baseline

things people require in a First Lady--a graciousness,&quot; she says.

&quot;There is sort of a sense of maternal capabilities that we might be looking

for. I don&apos;t think that in any way disqualifies Bill, but I do think that if

it&apos;s a woman, they&apos;re looking perhaps for something like that.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Marriages Under

the Microscope</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>MANY A FIRST

MARRIAGE HAS BEEN THE subject of rumor and speculation, but the Clinton

presidency put political marriage under the microscope in a way it never had

been before. In this new season of full disclosure, there&apos;s Elizabeth Kucinich,

29, who told the Associated Press that a lazy day at home consists of getting

up for brunch and then going back to bed until 4:30 p.m., &quot;John Lennon and

Yoko Ono--style.&quot; But it&apos;s hard to think of another spouse who has taken

openness as far as Michelle Obama. Her idea of managing her husband&apos;s image

seems to begin with knocking him off his pedestal.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>In a Glamour

magazine interview, Michelle Obama said her husband is so &quot;snore-y and

stinky&quot; that her daughters won&apos;t cuddle with him in bed. She tells voters

how he leaves his dirty socks around and invites them to tattle if they see him

violating their deal in which she would allow him to run if he would stop

smoking. Barack Obama has written with startling candor about the strains that

his political career has put on their marriage, particularly when both were in

their formative years. &quot;Leaning down to kiss Michelle goodbye in the

morning, all I would get was a peck on the cheek,&quot; he wrote. &quot;By the

time Sasha was born--just as beautiful, and almost as calm as her sister--my

wife&apos;s anger toward me seemed barely contained.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>But you could

argue that her acknowledgment of his flaws makes her more effective when she

turns that anger on his critics. &quot;Don&apos;t be fooled by people who claim that

it is not his time,&quot; she exhorts. &quot;We&apos;ve heard this spewed from the

lips of rivals ... every phase of our journey: He is not experienced enough. He

should wait his turn. He is too young. He is not black enough. He is not white

enough.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Michelle Obama

says she is betting that voters will not only accept that frankness but embrace

it. &quot;You win with being who you are and with being clear and comfortable

with that,&quot; she says. &quot;I&apos;m finding that people completely understand

me. For the most part, I think the women and the men and the families and the

folks that we are meeting on the campaign trail understand the realities of

families of today.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>ODDLY ENOUGH, IT

IS THE REPUBLICAN spouses who are stretching the limits of traditional values

in ways they never have before. Ann Romney&apos;s story line--the high school

sweetheart and sunny stay-at-home mom who produced a close-knit,

picture-perfect family--actually sets her apart among the leading contenders&apos;

wives. Which doesn&apos;t hurt when you are trying to persuade voters, particularly

evangelical conservatives, to consider putting a Mormon in the White House.

&quot;I think that people have seen Mitt and me. They certainly know we have a

very strong marriage and very strong family,&quot; she says. &quot;I think that

is clearly helpful to him in breaking down barriers that people have had in the

past.&quot; But, she adds, &quot;I don&apos;t know if they&apos;ve seen enough.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>For the others,

the question may be whether voters have seen too much. The public displays of

affection that front runner Rudolph Giuliani and wife Judith put on for Barbara

Walters--holding hands and calling each other &quot;baby&quot; and

&quot;sweetheart&quot;--only served to remind viewers that this first blush of

love is also the third marriage for each, and that wife No. 3 is one of the

reasons his children with wife No. 2 won&apos;t campaign for him. &quot;I have just

recently begun--I think they call it in the political world--being &apos;rolled

out,&apos;&quot; Judith, 52, told Walters, but the process has been anything but

smooth. A scathing profile of Judith Stish Ross Nathan Giuliani in Vanity Fair

pored over her two failed marriages (one of which she acknowledged only

recently), the requirement that a separate seat on her plane be provided for

the Louis Vuitton handbag that is known around Giuliani headquarters as Baby

Louis, and the inconvenient timeline of their courtship, which started while he

was still living with second wife Donna Hanover.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Through all this,

Judith Giuliani is trying hard to keep her game face on. &quot;It&apos;s a steep

learning curve. It&apos;s all been new to me,&quot; she says. &quot;What&apos;s really

important is, it&apos;s my husband who&apos;s running for office. He is the one. I do

think that is important for us to focus on. We aren&apos;t electing a spouse.&quot;

And while Rudy Giuliani told Walters he would be &quot;very, very

comfortable&quot; with having his wife, a nurse, attend Cabinet meetings--&quot;I

couldn&apos;t have a better adviser&quot;--Judith downplays her influence and her

interest in his campaign and in any future Giuliani Administration. &quot;My

role is really to support my husband in the ways I have always supported him. I

love to take charge of his personal health needs, make sure he&apos;s exercising,

getting the right food, which is a real challenge on the campaign trail,&quot;

she says. &quot;I do attend some meetings, but more often than not, it&apos;s for my

own edification.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>For Fred

Thompson&apos;s wife Jeri, 40, who is a quarter-century younger than he is, it&apos;s

hard to figure out which female stereotype is more toxic: the siren whose

tight, low-cut outfits had cable-television commentator and former GOP

Congressman Joe Scarborough speculating that she &quot;works the pole&quot;--a

phrase usually associated with strippers--or the conniving Lady Macbeth who has

been blamed for sending his campaign into disarray even before it was launched.

She was a major force in persuading him to run but also a major one behind a

series of shake-ups that had the campaign on its second manager and its fourth

spokesman before Thompson even announced his candidacy.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Her defenders

note that Jeri Thompson has worked for years as a political operative. &quot;She

gets Republican politics. She gets conservative politics. But most of all, she

understands where this man is and how best to help him,&quot; says Mark Corallo,

a well-respected strategist who helped launch the campaign. But then, on the

eve of Thompson&apos;s much delayed announcement, Corallo himself resigned.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Their family

portrait--a man who qualifies for Social Security with a 40-year-old blond, a

toddler and a baby--is a far cry from that of Ike and Mamie. &quot;He sadly now

looks like their grandfather,&quot; says Marton. &quot;It&apos;s not what women want

the presidential family to look like. No doubt unintentionally, but to a lot of

women it&apos;s almost a rebuke. It&apos;s too unsubtle.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>The New

Normal</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>IN THIS CAMPAIGN,

WHICH HAS PRODUCED SO much buzz about political marriages, the challenge for

the Clintons has been a different one: making the most remarkable situation of

all look normal.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>The first time

his wife ran for office, Bill Clinton was in the White House, which kept him

safely off her stage and minimized the amount of public distraction he caused.

But behind the scenes, he was her political consultant in chief, reworking her

speeches, stepping in when her staff was putting too much on her schedule,

rehearsing her for debates and demanding she step up her ad buys.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>That was two

successful Senate campaigns ago. Now the man who jokes that he wants to be

known as &quot;First Laddie&quot; downplays his role as she reaches for the

biggest prize of all: his old job. He has joined his wife in a couple of

campaign swings and is her star fund raiser. But he has yet to show up among

the spouses in the audience at any of the Democratic debates. As for his role

in any future Clinton Administration, both she and he have talked about the

possibility that she might make him an unofficial emissary. &quot;I think she

will ask me and former President Bush and other people to go help the country.

We have got to restore our standing in the world,&quot; Bill Clinton told CNN&apos;s

Larry King recently. &quot;I wouldn&apos;t be surprised if she [asked] every former

President to do something.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>But in the

meantime, there&apos;s an election to win. And while Hillary Clinton has the best

political strategist of her generation at her disposal, Bill is by all accounts

keeping his obtrusions to a minimum. Campaign officials say that while the

couple talks several times a day, he rarely gets involved with the workings of

her campaign. &quot;He&apos;s doing what he&apos;s asked, and he&apos;s doing what he can,&quot;

says an aide, &quot;but he&apos;s certainly not meddling.&quot; In part, that&apos;s

because his own work--his foundation and a tour to promote his new book--keeps

him plenty busy. And it also reflects the fact that she has an enormous

political machine around her that seems to be doing pretty well on its own.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>&quot;If she&apos;s

writing an important article or giving an important speech, she&apos;ll ask me to

read it,&quot; the former President told Oprah Winfrey. &quot;And once in a while

she&apos;ll ask me for some advice on something strategic. But she knows so much

more about a lot of this stuff than I do because I&apos;m far removed from it.&quot;

Occasionally, he says, he gets a call from her while he&apos;s on the golf course,

and she reminds him that she&apos;s 15 years older than he was when he did it,

&quot;and I say, &apos;Well, nobody made you run.&apos;&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Bill Clinton, 61,

is also making a conscious effort to stay out of the fray, though when

Elizabeth Edwards attacked Hillary as not vocal enough on women&apos;s issues, he

rode to his wife&apos;s defense. &quot;If you look at the record on women&apos;s issues, I

defy you to find anybody who has run for office in recent history who&apos;s got a

longer history of working for women, for families and children, than Hillary

does,&quot; Clinton said in an interview with ABC&apos;s Good Morning America. As for

Edwards&apos; contention that Hillary had behaved &quot;as a man,&quot; Clinton

retorted, &quot;I don&apos;t think it&apos;s inconsistent with being a woman that you can

also be knowledgeable on military and security affairs and be strong when the

occasion demands it.&quot;</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>But he has

steered clear of criticizing Hillary&apos;s opponents. &quot;This is a good time for

us Democrats,&quot; he says. &quot;We don&apos;t have to be against anybody. We can be

for the person we think would be the best President.&quot; Of course, that&apos;s

easy to say when your candidate is safely ahead in the polls. If their

situation and that of the Edwardses were reversed, &quot;would he be her biggest

attack dog like Elizabeth Edwards is? Maybe,&quot; concedes a strategist.

&quot;But he gets to be the big guy--at least for now.&quot; Then again, he&apos;s in

a supporting role that doesn&apos;t come with a script. No one knows that better

than a Clinton.</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>[Contains a table. Please see hardcopy of magazine or PDF.]<xhtml:br/>

<xhtml:br/>

THE MARCH OF HISTORY</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>That Was Then. This Is Now</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p>Both in style and

in substance, the 2008 contenders for the job of First Spouse are all far

different from anyone Americans have ever seen in the East Wing<xhtml:br/>

<xhtml:br/>

</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:table>

<xhtml:tr>

<xhtml:td>Accessory</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Image</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Credential</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Cause</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Divorce Record</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Financial Experience</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>ExecutiveExperience</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Family Photo</xhtml:td>

</xhtml:tr>

 

<xhtml:tr>

<xhtml:td>THE OLD WAY</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Her pillbox hat was Jackie Kennedy&apos;s fashion

signature</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Nancy Reagan never lost her adoring gaze for her

husband</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Mamie Eisenhower touted her Million Dollar Fudge

recipe</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Lady Bird Johnson beautified America&apos;s highways</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Florence Harding, the first divorced First Lady, and

Betty Ford, the next and last, each had one previous marriage</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Mary Todd Lincoln ran up secret debts with her

shopping</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Edith Wilson wielded power after husband Woodrow&apos;s

stroke</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Barbara Bush&apos;s was a tableau filled with

grandchildren</xhtml:td>

</xhtml:tr>

 

<xhtml:tr>

<xhtml:td>THE NEW<xhtml:br/>

WAY</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Elizabeth Kucinich would be the first First Lady to

wear a tongue stud</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Michelle Obama talks about Barack&apos;s flaws, calling

him &quot;stinky and snore-y&quot;</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>This year&apos;s spouses are a lawyerly lot. Shown

clockwise from top left, Elizabeth Edwards, Michelle Obama, Mary Brownback and

Bill Clinton all earned their degrees in law</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>If his wife is elected, former President Bill Clinton

says he wants to help change the world by working through his foundation on

problems like aids</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Judith Nathan Giuliani is on her third marriage--a

fact that became public only recently</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Representative Chris Dodd&apos;s wife Jackie Clegg Dodd

sits on five corporate boards and was a vice chair of the Export-Import

Bank</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Bill Clinton was the 42nd President of the U.S. but

jokes he might be called &quot;First Laddie&quot;</xhtml:td>

<xhtml:td>Jeri Thompson has a changing table on the campaign

bus</xhtml:td>

</xhtml:tr>

</xhtml:table>

 

<xhtml:p><xhtml:br/>

</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p prism:class="box">SPOUSE TALK AT TIME.COM<xhtml:br/>

<xhtml:br/>

To read interviews with the running mates and see

photos of the couples on the trail, visit time.com /spouses. Plus, Elizabeth

Edwards and Ann Romney speak about campaigning while battling breast cancer and

MS</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p prism:class="pullQuote">&apos;If you&apos;re not moving votes or moving voters ... then

you&apos;re not using your time very wisely.&apos; --ELIZABETH EDWARDS</xhtml:p>

 

<xhtml:p prism:class="pullQuote">&apos;Truly, the only person my husband can trust is me. I

don&apos;t have anything to lose by telling him ... what I think he did wrong.&apos; --CINDY MCCAIN</xhtml:p>

      <pam:media>

       <dc:type>photo</dc:type>

       <dc:format>image/jpeg</dc:format>

       <dc:identifier>us:tsn:61558</dc:identifier>

       <dc:creator>Mark Katzman prism:role="photographer"</dc:creator>

        <pam:mediaTitle>Bill Clinton</pam:mediaTitle>

        <pam:credit>Photographed by Mark Katzman</pam:credit>

        <pam:caption>This Clinton campaign again offers &quot;two for one,&quot; but the aspiring

First Laddie and strategist in chief, shown with Hillary in New Hampshire, is

trying not to outshine his wife.</pam:caption>

        <pam:textDescription>photo of Bill Clinton</pam:textDescription>

      <pur:reuseProhibited>no</pur:reuseProhibited>

      <pur:agreement>WD08-000284</pur:agreement>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="book"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="anthology"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="newsletter"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="website"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="NR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="syndicationPrint" pur:usageFee="50%"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="NR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="syndicationElectronic" pur:usageFee="30%"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="publicityHFM"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="Y" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="publicityMagazine"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="magazineReuse"/>

      <pur:permissions pur:code="PR" pur:agreementID="WD08-000284" pur:distributionChannel="foreignEdition"/>

      <pur:creditLine pur:agreementID="WD08-000284">Mark Katzman photographer</pur:creditLine>

      </pam:media>

 

      </xhtml:body>

  </pam:article>

</pam:message>