Blitzer ignored McCain's inconsistencies on issues, gave short shrift to other '08 hopefuls
SUMMARY: While discussing Sen. John McCain's potential
presidential candidacy, CNN's Wolf Blitzer ignored McCain's
inconsistencies on taxes and abortion and essentially contradicted himself
about McCain's position on Iraq. Blitzer also noted the names and experience of other
political figures with presidential exploratory or campaign committees but did not describe their positions on any issues.
On the November 16 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, host Wolf Blitzer purported to explain where Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) "stand[s] on the issues that matter to you," but Blitzer ignored McCain's inconsistencies on taxes and abortion and essentially contradicted himself about McCain's position on Iraq. Blitzer did not describe the positions of other political figures with presidential exploratory committees, simply noting their names and government experience. Indeed, Blitzer did not note the positions of Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack (D), who has created, as CNN.com noted on November 11, a full-fledged "presidential campaign committee" and not merely an exploratory committee. Blitzer's exposition of McCain's positions came after a 3-minute, 45-second segment on McCain's exploratory committee by CNN senior political correspondent Candy Crowley. Later, after former Sen. John Edwards (D-NC) told Blitzer that he would "maybe" run for president, Blitzer responded: "There's one explorer out there already. That was John McCain," ignoring the other such "explorer[s]" and Vilsack.
Blitzer said that McCain "supports President Bush's plan for Iraq, but he's called for more U.S. troops to be sent there to help suppress the insurgency" -- a statement that is internally inconsistent, given that McCain's call for more troops differs from Bush's stated "plan for Iraq." On October 25, Bush told reporters, "I will send more troops to Iraq if General [George] Casey [Jr.] says, 'I need more troops in Iraq to achieve victory.' And that's the way I've been running this war." As Media Matters noted, during an October 27 campaign event for Republicans in New Hampshire, McCain advocated sending 20,000 more troops to Iraq, which he said "means expanding the Army and Marine Corps by as much as 100,000 people." On the November 13 edition of The Situation Room, Blitzer touted McCain's plan while ignoring the question of whether his plan is achievable. As Media Matters also noted, on the November 13 edition of The Situation Room, CNN senior political analyst Bill Schneider asserted that McCain's "strong national security credentials are no small thing after a midterm where Iraq was a big issue," overlooking the fact that McCain's position on the war appears to be at odds with that of the majority of the American people. According to CNN's nationwide exit poll for House races, only 17 percent of voters supported sending more troops to Iraq.
Blitzer then said that McCain "opposes abortion rights, except in the case of rape, incest or to protect the life of the mother," without noting that McCain had expressed support for legislation in South Dakota banning all abortions except those necessary to save the pregnant woman's life. That law was overturned in a referendum on November 7. When the National Journal's The Hotline asked what McCain would do with the abortion bill if he were governor of the state, McCain's office replied that he "would have signed the legislation, but would also take the appropriate steps under state law -- in whatever state -- to ensure that the exceptions of rape, incest or life of the mother were included." McCain's office gave no indication what steps he could take to change a law he already signed. Moreover, as Media Matters has noted, the Associated Press reported on August 24, 1999, that McCain told reporters that "in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade." When his comments came under fire from pro-life groups, he wrote a letter to the National Right to Life Committee, stating: "I share our common goal of reducing the staggering number of abortions currently performed in this country and overturning the Roe vs. Wade decision."
Later in the program, Democratic strategist Paul Begala noted that McCain "now supports the South Dakota abortion law that would outlaw it even in the case of rape and incest." Blitzer responded to Begala only by noting that the South Dakota ban "was defeated."
Blitzer also said that McCain "supports the president's call for the extension of tax cuts," without noting that McCain initially opposed the tax cuts. As Media Matters documented, McCain said he could not "in good conscience support" President Bush's 2001 tax-cut package because it was "a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle-class Americans who need tax relief," according to a February 27, 2006, article in The Washington Times. Yet in 2006, when Congress was considering extending Bush's 2003 capital-gains tax cuts, which benefited mainly the richest Americans, McCain voted with his Senate Republican colleagues to keep them on the books. Even Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform who advocated the tax cut and cheered McCain's reversal, labeled it a "big flip-flop."
In her segment, Crowley asserted that "[e]veryone fully expects" McCain to announce he will run for president in January, which means "they kind of get two hits from us. They file for an exploratory committee, and we give it lots of attention. And then in January, when a lot of these candidates are going to announce officially, we go back at it again."
From the November 16 edition of CNN's The Situation Room at 4 p.m. ET:
CROWLEY: Everyone fully expects that come January, he'll make the official announcement and, by the way, they kind of get two hits from us. They file for an exploratory committee and we give it lots of attention. And then in January, when a lot of these candidates are going to announce officially, we go back at it again. So it's a -- it's a good mechanism for fundraising and also for a little name recognition.
BLITZER: Candy, thanks for that. Candy Crowley and [CNN congressional correspondent] Dana Bash, as you know, they are all part of the best political team on television.
So where does McCain stand on the issues that matter to you? He supports President Bush's plan for Iraq, but he's called for more U.S. troops to be sent there to help suppress the insurgency.
On immigration, McCain supports the president's plan that calls for border security and a guest-worker program for illegal immigrants.
The senator opposes abortion rights, except in the case of rape, incest, or to protect the life of the mother.
McCain believes marriage should be defined as between a man and a woman, but he opposes a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. He also believes that individual states should make those decisions, but says he would support a federal marriage amendment if the courts interfered and overturned a state's decision.
On Social Security, the senator supports the president's call for privatization using individual savings accounts.
McCain also supports the president's call for the extension of tax cuts.
McCain's not the only person to take the first step toward a presidential run. Earlier this week, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani [R] also formed an exploratory committee.
Yesterday, the Wisconsin -- former Wisconsin governor, that is, former Bush administration cabinet secretary Tommy Thompson announced that he intends to create a similar committee early next year.
And last month, the outgoing House Armed Services Committee chairman, Duncan Hunter, announced he was taking the first steps toward a possible White House run as well.
On the other side, Tom Vilsack so far is the only president -- presidential hopeful to file formal papers on the Democratic side. The outgoing Iowa governor is expected to kick off his White House run later this month.
He hasn't made it official, by the way, but incoming Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Joe Biden [D-DE] has said here in The Situation Room and on many other newscasts that he intends to throw his hat into the ring. The senator from Delaware ran unsuccessfully for the White House once before. That was back in 1988.
[...]
BEGALA: I love it. It's version 3.0 of John McCain.
He came to Washington in the '80s as a Barry Goldwater-Ronald Reagan conservative. And then he got caught up in the Keating Five scandal. So, then he remade himself. He became version 2.0, a reformer, McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform, a maverick. He supported abortion rights. He supported gay rights.
Now it's version 3.0. The same guy who, a couple of years ago, was attacking [Rev.] Jerry Falwell is now getting along quite well with Falwell. The same guy who used to say he was for abortion rights now supports the South Dakota abortion law that would outlaw it even in the case of rape and incest.
BLITZER: Which was defeated.
[...]
BLITZER: Do you want to be president of the United States?
EDWARDS: Maybe. A resounding maybe. I haven't decided for sure, but seriously thinking about it.
BLITZER [voiceover]: There's one explorer out there already. That was John McCain, he's announced he's exploring the possibility. It doesn't mean he's going to run. But by all accounts that's a pretty good bet.
When's the last time a 'news' outlet actually showed what a candidate's record and policies were? Doesn't happen. They just call people names and bet on the Republican.
probably realize the races for nominations won't necessarily be about policies and stances but more about money.
You are absolutely correct. It's all about money... sadly, probably always has been.
[link to www.msnbc.msn.com]
Link to Meet The Press with Tim Russert where it shows 82% appose McCain's call for more troops, and the highest percentage in the complete survey calls for a total exit from the Iraq war.
Hello! Senator McCain! ... You're not paying attention! We just voted and We The People now have a mandate, "Political Capital" as Bush calls it. How dare you define what our mandate is! It's about a new direction, leading to an Exit From the War Stupid and your calling for “Stay The Course” and a huge increase of troops? It's disgusting that you don't honor the voters mandate but at least you should listen to the Generals on the ground:
Gen. John Abizaid told McCain at The Armed Services Committee of the U.S. Senate that more American troops would give the Iraqis an excuse not to confront the security situation themselves. In response McCain bristled with this comment:
(Republican)Sen. John McCain: "Basically you're advocating the status quo here today which I think the American people in the last election said that is not an acceptable condition for the American people," McCain told Gen. John Abizaid at a congressional hearing Wednesday. "I regret deeply that you seem to think that the status quo and the rate of progress we're making is acceptable. I think most Americans do not." (ps: The General defended himself admirably)
THERE HE GOES AGAIN. McCain is not qualified to define what we the voters were saying at the election. McCain is not only for the Bush "Stay The Course" policy, but he will have us stepping it up substantially.
I'm just one of those voters. I voted for new Democratic leadership and a new direction in Iraq. An exit plan is called for. More votes were cast for Democrats than ever before, but McCain just doesn't get the hint.
Remember the promise made long, long ago...when Bush said, “When They Stand Up We'll Stand Down?" Don't hold you breath for that one. Bush also said he's against time tables for the War, but he set one himself when he said the war won't end during his time in office.
I have a better idea: If They Don't Stand Up Quickly We ReDeploy and begin fighting the real war on terror. We must begin to fight a smarter war where we don't have our poor troops being killed everyday like sitting ducks on a wall.
I”m a Vietnam War Veteran just like McCain and I respect his service to our country but I hope he never becomes our President. ABC and other News Outlets are obviously supporting him.
Take Care .... Sam
as much as you'd think these righty pols would know which way the wind's blowing, they seem to be coming out of a deep, deep sleep.
6 years of regurgitating their own BS, and then enjoying the hot meal has resulted in a strange mass hypnosis. I've been listening toa lot of Conservative radio and Fox nooz since the election, and it has been fascinating.
I'm not denying that there is still a segment of this country that's (somehow) buying this load, but the ones in charge of the GOP, the omnes who are supposed to KNOW thy're lying, seem to be in this mildly sedated state, explaining how they really won and everythings just like they've said it was.
I turned on Rush Limbaugh the other day, and all I could think was in 10 years a group of historians, journalists and psychiatrists will be listening to that tape with their jaws wagging around.
I've never ever said anything nice about Limbaugh, but.......
I respect him for admitting that he is sick and tired of carrying the water for a bunch of Conservatives that don't deserve to have their water carried. He said he's been Liberated by the Democrats from having to carry that load.
That is way out of step with the disgusting response from the majority of his Wrong-Winged Pundit Comrades.
So I'm now on record for giving Rush a big thank you and a complement for telling it like it is.
Sam
...Rush will continue to be 'water boy'. What else will he do? Pull a David Brock and dedicate his career to exposing right-wing propaganda? I seriously doubt it. Like the rest of these liars... he will soon forget this statement and continue on in stride.
Is it coincidental that right after McCain states his support for more troops in Iraq, Bush announces his plan to send more troops, 20,000, to Iraq? If you want to anticipate Bush's next move, just listen to "Maverick" McCain. Soon the Baker Report will come out in favor of Stay The Course.
"Yet in 2006, when Congress was considering extending Bush's 2003 capital-gains tax cuts, which benefited mainly the richest Americans,"
That's bogus. Over 70% of Americans invest in the stock market, and the vast majority of these people earn dividends. A tax cut on dividends helps the majority of the American people, not just the rich. I can understand how you can say that eliminating the death tax only helps the rich, but cutting the dividend tax helps lower and middle income people as well. It also helps the economy because lower dividend tax rates means that more people will invest in the stock market. This gives companies more capital to work with and helps to boost their earnings. When the companies make more earnings, they end up paying more in taxes as well, and this ends up reducing the federal deficit. We have recently seen a surge in government revenue and a lowering in the deficit, and it's mostly due to the capital gains and dividend tax cuts that were enacted in 2003.
To get that number you add all of those who have small 401ks or a pension plan dividends to them are already not subjec to tax and would not benifit from the tax cut. This is simple ony 15% of the tax cuts went to benifit the bottom 60% of the people. Taxing captial gains income and dividend income at a lower rate than labor is obscene. It is absolutly a tax cut for the rich
[link to www.cbpp.org]
Only 17 percent of households in the bottom 60 percent of the income spectrum own stock in taxable accounts. In contrast, 73 percent of the households in the top 10 percent of the income spectrum own stock in taxable accounts. Among those at the very top of the income spectrum — the top one percent — 84 percent own stock in taxable accounts.
Only 17 percent of households in the bottom 60 percent of the income spectrum own stock in taxable accounts. In contrast, 73 percent of the households in the top 10 percent of the income spectrum own stock in taxable accounts. Among those at the very top of the income spectrum — the top one percent — 84 percent own stock in taxable accounts.
So OK you have the talking points down, however we are not fooled. The benifits of the divident tax cut is definitly slanted to the wealthy
and Santa lives in the North Pole. For every worker who saves a few bucks on his Dividend taxes, there are Ultra-Rich who make millions from their dividends and pay a Maximum of 15% tax. How about Equality: Tax all income, wages, dividends, capital gains etc. at the same rate.
because I don't feel like looking it up, but I'd imagine that includes people starting out a small account at work and grandma's 20 shares of Acme rolling pins.
The point of the item you quoted is that the capital gains tax cuts affect mostly very wealthy people, so it's not bogus.
It's not the death tax, it's the estate tax.
The rest of your post is righty Corporate suck-up trickle down talking points BS, even if technically factual. It fools enough working people to keep being shoveled out there.
Just like Sean Hannity/Rush and their clones spout their figures about X-million Americans will get a X- thousand average tax break under Bush. It sounds good to people who have trouble with big numbers, but translates to the top 10% or so getting huge tax breaks.
But if it makes you happy, keep on believing.