Media reported White House criticism of Pelosi Syria trip, but not its silence on GOP-led trip
In reporting that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is planning a visit to Syria accompanied by a bipartisan congressional delegation this week, several media outlets highlighted White House criticism of Pelosi's trip but did not note that a Republican-led delegation met with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus on April 1 -- nor did they note the White House's inconsistency in criticizing Pelosi for her trip but remaining silent on the GOP-led visit.
As the weblog Think Progress noted, during a March 30 White House press briefing, deputy press secretary Dana Perino attacked Pelosi for her decision to spend time in Syria as part of a Mideast tour. Perino stated: "I know that Assad probably really wants people to come and have a photo opportunity and have tea with him, and have discussions about where they're coming from, but we do think that's a really bad idea." But the White House did not criticize Republican lawmakers who were separately slated to visit Syria. Indeed, on April 1, Reps. Frank Wolf (R-VA), Joseph R. Pitts (R-PA) and Robert Aderholt (R-AL) traveled to Damascus and met with Assad, two days before Pelosi's scheduled trip.
Several media outlets subsequently reported the White House's criticism of Pelosi without noting this inconsistency:
- On the April 2 edition of CNN Newsroom, CNN Beirut bureau chief Brent Sadler reported that Pelosi's "Middle East shuttle with a bipartisan delegation has drawn fire from the George Bush Republican White House" because Pelosi "plans to meet later this week with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus." Sadler did not mention the Republican-led trip to Syria, although, during an earlier report on the April 2 edition of CNN's American Morning, Sadler did report: "Pelosi shrugged away that criticism, saying that, just 24 hours ago, a Republican three-person delegation also passed through Syria and met with Syria's President Bashar al-Assad."
- In an April 2 article (subscription required), The Wall Street Journal reported that "White House officials continued yesterday in their public rebuking of the speaker for the Syria visit." But the Journal did not mention the Republican delegation's reported visit to Syria or the inconsistency of the White House in its criticism.
- In a March 30 post on The Politico's Congress weblog, The Crypt, Politico staff writer Patrick O'Connor repeated the White House's attack on Pelosi but did not mention the Republican-led trip. O'Connor wrote: "The White House criticized House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) Friday for stopping in Syria during her trip to the Middle East. ... 'We discourage members of Congress to make such visits to Syria,' White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said. 'This is a country that is a state sponsor of terror.' " Shortly before O'Connor's entry was posted, Bloomberg published an article on its website mentioning the Republican-led trip to Syria.
As Media Matters for America documented, on the April 1 edition of Fox Broadcasting Co.'s Fox News Sunday, Weekly Standard editor and Fox News contributor Bill Kristol echoed the White House's attack on Pelosi. Several other Fox News personalities have similarly criticized Pelosi while ignoring the Republican-led trip:
- On the April 2 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-hosts Steve Doocy, Gretchen Carlson, and Brian Kilmeade sharply criticized Pelosi, while ignoring the Republican-led trip. Doocy asked: "What the heck is she doing in the Middle East?" adding, "This has got the White House flummoxed." Doocy later said, "[I]n our first hour today, about two hours ago, we had this as a question of the day, whether or not you thought she [Pelosi] was actually being helpful and mediating, or do you think she was meddling. The answer, overwhelmingly, meddler." Earlier in the show, on-screen text teasing the segment read: "Syria-ous mistake?"
- On the April 1 edition of Fox News' Hannity's America, host Sean Hannity said that Pelosi "decid[ed] to spend her spring break frolicking with Tehran's terrorist minions." The accompanying on-screen text read: "Wrong Time for Pelosi to Hang with Terror Sponsors." Hannity did not note the Republican-led trip.
Also, on the April 1 edition of CBS' Face the Nation, while interviewing White House counselor Dan Bartlett about U.S.-Middle East relations, host Bob Schieffer did not challenge Bartlett for asserting: "We did ask her not to go. We did not believe it would advance the diplomatic efforts in the Middle East. I think most Americans would not think that the leader of the Democratic Party in the Congress should be meeting with the heads of a state sponsor of terror." Schieffer reported that "the president hasn't been too anxious to talk to Syria about what's going on there. Apparently she is."
The selective criticism by some in the media of Pelosi's planned visit to Syria mirrors conservatives' attacks on several Democrats who traveled to Damascus in December 2006. As Media Matters noted, numerous conservative media figures assailed Democratic Sens. Bill Nelson (FL), John Kerry (MA), and Christopher Dodd (CT) for meeting with Assad but ignored Sen. Arlen Specter's (R-PA) meeting with the Syrian president later that month.
From the April 2 edition of CNN Newsroom:
SADLER: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's Middle East shuttle with a bipartisan delegation has drawn fire from the George Bush Republican White House because the speaker, who presides over a Democratic majority in Congress, plans to meet later this week with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus -- a stopover that the White House calls, quote, "a bad decision," because the Bush administration considers Syria a supporter of terrorism.
Pelosi's visit to Lebanon comes amid escalating political tension in Beirut, where Hezbollah-led opponents of the Western-backed government supported by Syria and Iran have virtually paralyzed the city center by camping out on the prime minister's doorstep. Pelosi said solutions to some of Lebanon's problems, including crucial agreements on an international court to try suspects in the murder two years ago of former five-time Prime Minister Rafik Hariri lie on the road to Damascus. She made no apology for putting Syria on her agenda but made it clear Syrian behavior needs to change.
PELOSI [video clip]: Of course, the role of Syria and Iraq, the role of Syria supporting Hamas and Hezbollah, the role of Syria and so many respects that we think there could be a vast improvement. So, therefore, we think it's a good idea to establish the facts, to hopefully build some confidence between us. We have no illusions, but we have great hope.
SADLER: But Lebanon's anti-Syrian leaders are weary of rapprochement between Syria and the West, fearing it could occur at Lebanon's expense and weaken their efforts to end Syrian interference in the country. Brent Sadler, CNN, Beirut.
From the April 2 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:
DOOCY: Now, let's talk about Nancy Pelosi. What the heck is she doing in the Middle East? The headline in the New York Post over the weekend said "Miss Syria" because she is going to go to Syria later on in the week, and, in fact, yesterday she was speaking to the prime minister of Israel, and apparently, she's got a message she's going to take to the people who run Syria. This has got the White House flummoxed. Dan Bartlett talked yesterday just about how crazy this is. Listen to this.
BARTLETT [video clip]: I think most Americans would not think that the leader of the Democratic Party and the Congress should be meeting with the heads of a state sponsor of terror.
CARLSON: Well, that'd usually be the role of the secretary of state. So, that's maybe why some people would think that this is maybe not the right move for the speaker of the House. Now, what is this message that she is apparently going to give to Syrian leaders? Apparently, it's to -- a message that they've known loud and clear, they just haven't listened to it, which is to stop supporting Palestinian militants.
KILMEADE: Yeah, Israel says if you are willing -- we are willing to talk if Syria stops supporting terrorism. OK, fantastic. So, now, if they just knew this, now she could be the referee to show up with this message. The bottom line is, even Secretary of State Colin Powell, who Democrats seem to really embrace, said, "Look, I'm very frustrated. They say one thing, they do another."
By going out there, she's enabling herself to be played by a Syrian president, Assad, and the government that could say, "Look, even their -- his own -- the United States' own government can't get on the same page. See how crazy that President Bush is? Even the speaker of the House is split from him." So, it looks like America is running two parallel governments to the Middle East.
DOOCY: Well, in our first hour today, about two hours ago, we had this as a question of the day, whether or not you thought she was actually being helpful and mediating, or do you think she was meddling. The answer, overwhelmingly, meddler.
CARLSON: Maybe she wants to be secretary of state, if possibly a Democrat is elected into office. That's one way to possibly look at this. Maybe she's trying to make inroads.
From the April 1 edition of Fox News' Hannity's America:
HANNITY: But never fear, here comes the San Francisco speaker. Now, it's bad enough that before she left, the speaker wouldn't bring to a vote a Republican resolution condemning Iran for this new hostage crisis. Instead, she decides to spend her spring break frolicking with Tehran's terrorist minions. But when you come from a city that bans military recruiters and teaches schoolchildren using left-wing books with anti-war propaganda cartoons, I guess playing volleyball with terrorists -- well, it doesn't seem like too much of a stretch. And that's the state of America tonight.
From the April 1 edition CBS' Face the Nation:
SCHIEFFER: Let me ask you, speaking of the war, and Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House, has left for the Middle East, and she's also going to Syria. Now, the president hasn't been too anxious to talk to Syria about what's going on there. Apparently she is. What do you think of that mission?
BARTLETT: Well, we were against it, to be frank. We don't believe we should be sending these types of mixed signals to the leaders of a country that is on the "state sponsor of terrorism" list for a good reason. But they are --
SCHIEFFER: Did you ask her not to go?
SCHIEFFER: You did ask her not to go?
BARTLETT: We did ask her not to go. We did not believe it would advance the diplomatic efforts in the Middle East. I think most Americans would not think that the leader of the Democratic Party in the Congress should be meeting with the heads of a state sponsor of terror. They should be back in Washington and passing a war supplemental bill to make sure that our troops in harm's way get the funding they need.
SCHIEFFER: Also on the same general subject, the president came down very hard on Iran yesterday. He said there's no excuse for them taking these prisoners. Are we about to get into a war with Iran here?
Wow, I didn't even know about the Republican trip. It must be that "liberal media" again.
SCHIEFFER: " Let me ask you, speaking of the war, and Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House, has left for the Middle East, and she's also going to Syria. Now, the president hasn't been too anxious to talk to Syria about what's going on there. Apparently she is"
Yeah, finding out what's going on there... that sounds like appeasement to me.Or the sort of curiosity that might work well in an elected leader.
It's pretty sad, but I pretty much rely on MMFA to tell me the other side of the story. I like that they usually provide transcripts and legitimate links to backup their side of the story. It is a pretty darn effective way to run a website.
When I first came here, I was pretty full of conservative misinformation myself.
Must Be
You Marklars can go to Marklar and engage Marklar with Marklar, but sending you Marklars to Marklar would send mixed Marklar to the Marklars and cause more Marklar here at Marklar.
Whatchu' Markling about, Markliss?
The White House condems all trips to Syria. But especially Pelosi since she is the highest ranking person in the House and second in line for President. Her going over there validates their actions and their existence. Not only that but she is making future relations with the Bush Administration harder by showing them the lack of respect she has for Bush.
They are a terroist state, ran by the Baath Party, that have direct links to numerous terror organizations. There are still unanswered questions about what may or may not have been transferred to Syria as Coalition troops were coming in from the South during the initial Iraqi campaign.
blah blah blah terrorist state blah blah blah embolden blah blah blah talking point talking point blah blah blah pelosi baaaaaad blah blah blah
Give us something substantive, or go play somewhere else kiddo.
PS: I love how all wingnuts are mind-readers these days. They just KNOW in their hearts what does and does not "embolden" people thousands of miles away. That's talent!
They are a walking conundrum, alright. Syrians won't listen to woman speaker pelosi, but they will listen to woman Sec. Condi. Sending Dems is against policy and should be condemned, but sending republiks is OK.
I'm just guessing at this point, but if it hasn't been done yet, there is loads of cash to be made creating the liberal edition of Rush's 1st big selling book...
Let's keep this on a high level, here.
The Syrians won't listen to Nancy because they know she got a boob job.
And a darn good one if you ask me.
You've never watched Syrian TV news, have you? The anchorgirls tend to show cleavage.
Actually I have, on Worldlink TV, and come to think of it you are right.
Lead Follow Or Get Out Of The WayIt is easy to do when everything is black or white, good or evil. Of course one of the primary problems with George W. Bush’s foreign policy is the seeing everything as good vs. evil, black and white fallacy. The fact that Bush has played this unintelligent game with Iraq, Iran, Korea, etc. has proven to be disastrous.I seem to remember Bill O’Reilly criticizing Pelosi for not seeing things in black or white. I said at the time that it was a sign of intelligence that she didn’t. Bush has refused to acknowledge the Iraq Study Groups recommendation to pursue aggressive diplomacy in the region. I view it as Pelosi leading by example.
Syria exits and pretending that they don't will not make them disappear.
How is "talking" to Syria going to harm "future relations with the Bush Admin"? The Bush Administration has had NO conversations with Syria. They have made no effort to talk to anyone. The only talk that Bush does is "axis of evil" talk.
If Pelosi is the wrong person for the job, send Condi. She has done such an excellent job as Sec. of State. I'm sure she can use the additional frequent flyer miles and the photo ops of her hand waving getting on and off the plane. She is the Sec. of State and we as a nation have nothing to show for her travels
But Pelosi is delivering a message from the Prime Minister of Israel....hardly to be a real offer of peace. Looks like the Israelis are going with their "back the Dems" strategy this election. Bush will have to blow up some Iranians soon to appease the masters in Tel Aviv. If not, AIPAC will put all their cash behind the Dems...they'll get the job done!
I don't expect anything from this little trip except more unreasonable Israeli demands that Syria stop helping Hezbollah defend the borders of Lebanon from Israeli agression, with one of our politicians playing Israel's hired messenger. Gotta earn that AIPAC cash, ya know.
SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!
When a government believes that it's citizens are ignorant enough to make thier lies public as though we should now think of what they say as truth by virtue of the repetition, and prominant forums they are broadcast; we may then asume with that as a daily diet they may well be right!
I'm sure a quote from Sinclair Lewis, or Orwelle would be appropriate at this junction, but I'm tired with the obvious being said and falling on deaf ears!! If the blood, treasure, and honor lost on thier folie has not made them repent, then it is time to despell these people from the public domain permenantly!
Vote for a Democrat, and insist on the Fairness Doctrine be restored to preserve real American Democracy!!
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
The media is silent on the Republican visit for an obvious reason, which is Bush never wanted to bring Syria or Iran to the table and partner with them on coming up with a solution to the Iraq problem.
Does anyone know how many Iraq refugees Syria is hosting? Does anyone know how many Iraq refugees we have taken into the United States?
Has there ever been a report on what America is doing about the refugee problem?
Should the refugees believe McCain's claim that Iraq is all safe now?
Bush and the Republicans are not diplomats, they are the greatest obstacle to dialogue, they are the greatest obstacle to Middle East Peace.
Syria has taken in 1.2 million Iraqi refugees in the last 4 years. Source: http://www.counterpunch.org/landau03232007.html
The only Iraqi problem right now is foreign insurgents attacking coalition troops. Where do they come from?Places like Syria and Iran.
And your evidence that most insurrgents arent Iraqis fighting foriegn invaders is WHAT? Oh you dont have any, what a suprise.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200503/s1332344.htm
In an interview with CNN in Mosul, General John Abizaid - the commander of US Central Command which covers Iraq - said that while most insurgents appear to be Iraqis, "the percentage of foreign fighters over the past several months seems to have increased".
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/29/anbar.security/index.html
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Most insurgents who are battling U.S.-led forces in Iraq's Anbar province are local Iraqis loyal to al Qaeda, and not foreign fighters, the U.S. commander in the region said Monday.
Although local insurgents make up the lions share of fighters, in Anbar. Zilmer said there are "certainly foreign fighters who are part and parcel" of day-to-day rebel operations.
Looks like the Generals ON THE GROUND IN IRAQ disagree that foriegn fighters are the only problem. Only PART of the problem. The indications I have seen say Iraqis are by far the majority of fighters in Iraq.
SOS to the Decider!!!
Let's see, help me understand;
It's OK for Condi to talk to the "terrorists" by not Nancy because she's a woman.
It's OK for Republicans to talk to "terrorists" but not Democrats
It's OK to "talk" to Congress, but without oaths, witnesess, or transcripts.
It's OK to veto funds for "a troop", but not to bring him home or give him/her trainning or armor.
It's OK for your wife to "consult" for companies having business before you if you are a member of Congress and a Republican not a Democrat.
It's OK to violate any Treaty or Agreement but not support the American Constitution
and it's ok to hire your conies to fill any position if they are "good Bushies" but not anyone with experience or intergrity.
I think I understand but I need you to help me decide . . . are you a crook or just stupid?
If we only talk to our friends and allies, we won't get much accomplished.
The only reason this is a big deal is because she is the highest ranking person in the House. She is second in line for President, imagine what kind of terrorist target that makes. And she is walking right into the lions den.
Her presence there only helps solidify Syria's positions as legitimated. To receive a high ranking US Government official is a privilege that should be reserved for our allies and countries that are wanting work with us. No one has offered any evidence to refute Syrian ties to terrorism around the World.
Pelosi should be setting the example for her fellow House members and refuse to talk with people who want our way of life to end.
Syria like all other countries work with us when our interests are in common they have given us intelligence against al Queda, they do not allow terrorist attacks against Western targets and havent been implicated in any international terrorism since 1986 according to the Counsel on Foriegn Relations.
http://www.cfr.org/publication/9368/
Syria has not been directly involved in terrorist operations since 1986, according to the State Department, and it bars Syria-based groups from launching attacks from Syria or targeting Westerners.
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad—an ophthalmologist who came to power after the death in June 2000 of his long-ruling father, Hafiz al-Assad—condemned the September 11 attacks. Syria has also reportedly shared some intelligence with the United States about Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda network.
Syria isnt a great place. Almost as bad as Saudi Arabia our good ally. They do support terrorists groups against Israel which since 1967 has occupied Syrian territory in the Golan Hieghts. They are bad enough you dont have to make things UP about them no one is accusing them of sponsering terrorism around the world except YOU. They have helped in some situations against terrorists and they are NOT a blindly Islamic state. These things are not based on facts in evidence.
Who told you that they want our way of life to end? Man does Shammitty and Bunk got you scared or what? Buck up cowboy! I think Someone should talk to them and ask them what their problem is, so we Americans can hear it for ourselves. Then we can form our own opinions of what we should be doing, instead of just getting the disinformation and sucking it up hook line and sinker. You sir, need to start thinking for yourself, But quick!
On another topic...is anyone tracking the amount of time cable news is spending on the 08 election - fundraising, daily reports of polls. It seems out of control.
Just curious.