Gregory, Byron York repeated myth of Giuliani as 9-11 hero, omitting criticism
On the May 11 edition of NBC's Today, NBC News chief White House correspondent David Gregory said of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Republican presidential candidate: "To many, 9-11 made Giuliani a hero." Later in the same segment, Gregory aired a clip of National Review White House correspondent Byron York asserting that Giuliani might "convince" conservative voters who oppose his abortion positions "to still vote for him because he's so strong on issues of national security." Neither Gregory nor those quoted in his report took note of the serious questions surrounding Giuliani's record on the issues of terrorism and national security, which Media Matters for America has repeatedly documented.
The view that Giuliani acted heroically before, during, and after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks has been strongly disputed:
- On the May 1 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, HBO host Bill Maher said that "[a]ll of the experts told him [Giuliani] to move the command-and-control center out of the World Trade Center. He put it in the World Trade Center." Maher added: "He's not a terrorism fighter. He has no credentials in this."
- In their book, Grand Illusion: The Untold Story of Rudy Giuliani and 9/11 (HarperCollins, August 2006), Wayne Barrett and CBSNews.com senior producer Dan Collins cited several of what they presented as Giuliani's security-related failures, as Media Matters noted, including "the lack of interoperable radios" between the New York fire and police departments, which they wrote "became ... a focus of fury" (Page 343). On 9-11, the New York City fire department was using outdated VHF radios that were incompatible with the police department's UHF radios.
- A March 14 New York Times article reported that Harold A. Schaitberger, general president of the International Association of Fire Fighters, said, "The whole issue of the radios is unforgivable. ... Everyone knew they needed a better system, and he [Giuliani] didn't get it done."
- Similarly, in an April 25 speech, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) appeared to attack Giuliani's record on emergency preparedness, as blogger Atrios (Media Matters Senior Fellow Duncan Black) noted and Media Matters documented. New York Times reporters Adam Nagourney and Michael Cooper wrote: "McCain sought to undercut what had been the former mayor's biggest political claim to fame -- his stewardship of New York City after the attacks of Sept. 11 -- by noting the problems with firefighters' radios on the day of the attack." McCain later denied that he was specifically referring to Giuliani.
Gregory's assertion -- "To many, 9-11 made Giuliani a hero" -- reflects a larger media pattern of asserting, as Giuliani's political strength, 9-11, terrorism, or national security without noting relevant facts. As Media Matters has noted, media figures have repeatedly touted Giuliani's reputation as "America's mayor" and the "hero of 9-11" despite the controversies that have marked his political career, including his handling of the 9-11 terrorist attacks.
From the May 11 edition of NBC's Today:
GREGORY: Later today, Giuliani is expected to reaffirm his support for abortion rights during a speech in an attempt to butt the conventional wisdom that a Republican seeking the White House cannot win the nomination with pro-choice views.
[begin video clip]
GREGORY: To many, 9-11 made Giuliani a hero -- and on the campaign trail, that's his topic of choice.
GIULIANI: The only way to keep us safe and the only way to give us a chance to win this is to be on offense against them. No more defense for the United States of America.
GREGORY: Giuliani may want to talk about terror but, increasingly, conservatives want to talk about his stance on abortion.
[...]
GREGORY: But Giuliani is getting tired of all the grilling on the topic, sounding irritated with talk show host Laura Ingraham this week.
[begin audio clip]
GIULIANI: I would love to come back, but you -- you're gonna have to ask me about the war on terror and what we do about that --
INGRAHAM: Yeah, we will.
GIULIANI: -- which is after all what most -- what most citizens ask me about --
INGRAHAM: Well, conservatives are citizens too, Mayor Giuliani.
[end audio clip]
YORK: I think there's going to be some part of the Republican electorate that he's never going to win over on abortion, and the question is: "Can he convince them to still vote for him because he's so strong on issues of national security?"
[end video clip]
GREGORY: Abortion is proving to be a hot button issue in this campaign at this juncture and Giuliani is not the only one on the defensive.
Only on Planet Wingnut:
Rudy Giuliani and George Bush - one stands on rubble and makes speeches, the other sits in a classroom and reads My Pet Goat on 9/11 = HEROES
John Kerry and Max Cleland - one receives a purple heart while commanding a Swift Boat, the other is a triple-amputee from Vietnam = NOT HEROES
I would also add Charles Rangel, Purple Heart awarded to him in Korea. Not only considered not a hero but an appeaser and someone who is "pro" Terrorist.
They built themselves a house of cards and wind started blowing...............
MJH, I couldn't agree more.
Is the American media great or what.
We have the pet goat and Rudy saying that he sometimes contradicts himself. WHAT!!! We have gone through 6 years of this and still have at least 1 1/2 years left and you want to subject this country to more? Pleaseeeeee!
At best, Giuliani has strength in disaster management, which is an admirable quality to be sure but says nothing about strength on national security.
The real service Giuliani provided was in appearance. Gregory is right on some level, to many 9/11 did make him a hero, but that's not based on his performance beforehand. It's based on his reaction to the attack, appearing strong and collected as hundreds of thousands of lives were in shambles.
And this is the problem with our current mentality;it's all about appearances. It's about who you would rather have a beer with, Bill Clinton or George H.W. Bush (Clinton, of course, especially since he obviously would have no problem being the "wingman" at the bar and taking the chubbier girl in the group), or Clinton playing the sax on the Arsenio Hall show. It's about Reagan making people feel good about themselves and America, not whether he thinks trees cause pollution or submarine-launched missles can be recalled, or that a year's worth of nuclear waste is small enough to be stored under a desk. Or the ultimate case, George W. Bush in a flightsuit, or on his ranch, or working out, not about the disastrous lack of competency, transparency and accountability of his administration.
People do remember the look on Bush's face while he was being told about the attacks, though, and they can hold that in stark contrast to Giuliani. Will that be enough to get him Republican base voters despite his pro-planned parenthood stance, as Byron York says? I find it highly doubtful, but it could be entertaining to watch.
I remember the moment Andy Card told Bush. Jay Leno compared that look to the same look a dog would exhibit when confronted with a noise the dog never heard before.
If you speak in empty rhetoric and childishly simple terms long enough, you're bound to eventually say something that even idiots and children think is dumb.
guilianni: "The only way to keep us safe and the only way to give us a chance to win this is to be on offense against them. No more defense for the United States of America"
No more defense for the United States of America?
What, no more Department of Defense for the United States of America?
...no more Defense Secretary?
...strike "We the People... in Order... to provide for the common defence" from the U.S. Constitution's Preamble?
rudy guilianni: The candidate that even idiots and children feel intellectually superior to.
I find this rhetorical trend rather disturbing. Even on this forum, the Bush apologists are repeating this "offense, not defense" nonsense. What, exactly, does this mean? Tromping around the Middle East, invading countries, overthrowing governments who pose a "threat" to us? How long do they think we can sustain such bellicose activity without pissing off the whole world? Maybe they are willing to thump their chests and say "bring 'em on", but it doesn't sound very sensible to me.
I think Bill Maher is pretty funny, and I share most of his politics, but ...
BILL MAHER?! A source of news?! Come on, dudes. You have legitimate quotes from the Times and CBS News. Leave well enough alone.
The Times and CBS News are nothing but propaganda vehicles for Bush and the GOP.
Bill Maher is every bit as credible as Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh, who both are interviewed regularly by the MSM.
Describing Giuliani as a "Hero" for carrying out his duties as Mayor is a stretch, and a disservice to the real heroes of 9-11, the police and firefighters. Giuliani's performance as Mayor was commendable, but hardly heroic.
I've always admired David Gregory's work. His reports are generally unbiased and fair, and yet lately, I do find him skipping over important facts and information at times. This is, of course, one of those times.
As far as Rudy Guiliani is concerned, I don't think his "America's Mayor," or "9/11 hero" mystique is going to hold on for much longer. Too much is known about his lack of competence when it came to handling the pre and post 9/11 attack, and all of it well documented. Even if the media, for whatever reason, continues to sit on this stuff, as the campaign heats up, the opposition will not hesitate to bring it all to the fore, and he is going to have to answer to it.
Mr. Guiliani's heroic appeal will have a very short live span overall.
Jimmy Breslin was never fooled by Rudy the Lisp. Ghouliani prosecuted mobsters but then he started hanging around with them. Only thing worse than a mobster is a mobster wanna-be.
If Ghouliani ever got elected president, we would have a police state for certain....Mussolini II, Electric Bugaloo.
I love how Media Matters quotes a COMEDIAN to denigrate Giuliani's accomplishments. Just shows how low this despicable organizatoin will go to smear anyone whose views they disagree with.
It doesnt matter WHO Mahar is, was he WRONG? Just goes to show how low a dispicable rightwinger will go to show he doesnt know what he is talking about. Can you say ad hominem? I knew you could, its a logical fallacy you know.
Yes and no. Tommy and I had this discussion about credibility in the media recently, and I think this plays into it. It is an important point as to whether Maher is right or not. His political leanings shouldn't immediately discredit him.
However, if what he says is true, then surely there is some other source to provide this information. Maher can't be the only person to know about this, can he? If by some chance this is information that Maher uncovered himself, then fine, it's not fair to discredit it based on Maher's name alone (without some history of dishonesty to back it up). Otherwise, MMfA should provide outside, objective evidence instead of Maher's citation of it, in order to bolster their point.
so who else has tommy's approval to speak? And how does being an intetional comic (as opposed to the unintentional ones like dumbaya whenever he opens his mouth) equal 'SHUT UP YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO SPEAK'? No matter how accurate what what they say is? Bill has one hell of a lot more credability then Rudy or McCain or dumbaya has in any case.
No, it doesn't have anything to do with Tommy giving anyone the right to speak. The idea was that being partisan loses one credibility, which is always true to some degree (MMfA was the subject of the lost credibility, of course, and we agreed that you have to evaluate each source based on methods). I agree, relatively speaking Maher is credible. No question about it. Still, if there are other sources for what Maher is saying, they should provide them instead of (or in addition to) Maher's quote.
Not that I'm equating the two by any means, but if I saw an item on a right-wing site where they used a quote by Jonah Goldberg as evidence of something, I couldn't blame someone for questioning its veracity, whether it's true or not. Providing outside references is a better method to hep bolster credibility.
And previewing is a better method to heLp prevent spelling errors from a sticking key.
By the way, I have nothing against Bill Maher and I don't want to give that impression...I think he is a comedic genius. But to include him among your "documentation" that Giuliani is not strong on national security...that just shows how weak your argument is. Even John Kerry said something to the effect of it is unfortunate that many people get their main source of news and opinion from Bill Maher.
IO, it is unfortunate that many get a good chunk of their news from Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, etc., but I don't think it's for the reasons you think.
Your opinion seems to be that MMFA should be criticized for quoting Maher, or that those that get some of their info. from comedians are not to be taken seriously.
I'd say the problem is that our media is so inadequate, or so sensitive about reporting certain things, that it becomes necessary to go to these non-news sources for some actual commentary on current events.
Interestingobserver. Please tell me what mayor rudy's accomplishments are? Is it getting married three times or cheating on his wife when he was living in Gracie Mansion. Or selling the city to the highest bidder.
He did nothing good for the citizens of the city, he displaced the homeless and as a result Times Square looks clean but all those people are scattered throughout the city. Instead of dealing with the problems of homelessness and prostitution he covered it all up. That's why we have transvestite hookers giving out of towners head on the stoops of Greenwich Village.
His great accomplishment of fighting crime is all smoke and mirrors, arrests for smoking a joint or drinking a beer on the street skyrocketed while serious crimes were neglected. And I did forget to mention the squeege people who were arrested in droves.
In the words of a native New Yorker, Rudy is a putz.
"That's why we have transvestite hookers giving out of towners head on the stoops of Greenwich Village."
Funny that you would say that as I have actually been walking through the city and passed almost the same thing.
Fair enough Easywind--you've raised some excellent points in your post and I've said repeatedly on these boards that Giuliani's "heroism" has been greatly overblown. My problem is with the way Media Matters went about doing it--by quoting people with a major political axe to grind (McCain, Maher) and treating them as if they were unbiased assessments of Giuliani--and then on top of that, refering to these sources as "documentation." It's called dishonest reporting, and it is the hallmark of Media Matters. And on top of that, Media Matters once again mischaracterizes a quote about Giuliani--notice how David Gregory said that "to many, 9-11 made Giuliani a hero." Regardless of whether you or I believe he is a hero (from what I gather we both do not) it is indistpuable that many do. Therefore, what Gregory said was an accurate statement and so cannot be misinformatoin at all. Maybe Media Matters doesn't like the fact that many believe Giuliani is a hero, but it certainly is not an example of dishonesty to say that he is.
Its not dishonest reporting for the simple reason Mahar was CORRECT. Was Guiliani warned about the WTC for an emergency center? Well thats what I read in legitimate news sources. Did he keep it there anyway? Yes he did. Its not WHO says something it is what is said. It is just sad that only people like Mahar are making this point.
Like I said, I have my share of problems with Giuliani but the failure to move the command and control center--I don't know, but that seems to be kind of Monday morning quarterbacking to me--not exactly MMQ because Giuliani was warned about it, but come on, how many people really expected the buildings to come down? If you were in his position would you necessarily have listened to these "security experts?" Maybe, maybe not. I just don't think that Giualini can be faulted for that specific lapse.
Correction: I meant to say "but it certainly is not an example of dishonesty to say that 'many believe he is (a hero)'". Saying "he is a hero" without presenting the available evidence to refute that statement could be dishonesty.
I tend to agree with you on the face of it, but I think (presuptuously) that MMFA includes his statement on the basis of it's "uncritical" nature. They often point it out when "journalists" succumb to the temptatation to rely on parroting previously debunked right-wing phraseology. I think THAT'S why he is being called out in this case.
First of all, to be clear, this is not intended as a defense of Rudy Giuliani's shortcomings in preparaing for a major disaster in New York but, rather, one possible explanation for his reputation as a hero of 9/11. It's the contrast between the actions of Giuliani and Bush immediately after the attacks.
There are numerous images of Giuliani actually on the ground in the chaotic aftermath of the 9/11 attacks and he was, to some extent, in harm's way. There are even accounts of him having to scramble through underground passageways to escape the collapsing towers. On the other hand, Bush sat in a classroom for painfully long minutes with a stunned lookon his face doing nothing (which was embarrassing, IMO). Then he rushed to the security of his jet and hopped around to safe havens almost the whole day. What a contrast...! Next to Bush, Giuliani looked like Indiana Jones.
see video: Politicians Simply Lying to the American People about Motive"The politicians really are at great fault for not squaring with the American people. We're being attacked for what we do in the Islamic world, not for who we are or what we believe in or how we live. And there's a huge burden of guilt to be laid at Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, both parties for simply lying to the American people." - Michael Scheuer, Former CIA Bin Laden Unit Chief
Here's a prediction: If Giuliani's numbers begin to tank, he will undergo a "religious conversion" and denounce his previous stand on abortion. He will kiss the ring of Pat Robertson, and all will be forgiven. The Republican Party has successfully played Evangelical Christians for suckers since Reagan...no reason they should stop now.
I think Bill Maher has little to no credit. I believe this was the same individual who stated (in regard to 9/11, which got him fired) "We have been the cowards lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away. That's cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building, say what you want about it, it's not cowardly. Stupid maybe, but not cowardly." He is no different than Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly. I really enjoy reading this site, but when MMA starts using quotes from this guy as a legit source to prove a point, that is really stretching it
Dying for a cause seems, by definition, to be not cowardly.
You can't apply all derogatory classifications to your enemy. For example, you wouldn't say that they were "stupid" either, because how would we get hit by stupid, cowardly people? What does that say about us, and why would they be a such a big threat? If we're going to believe that the war on terrorism is worthwhile, then we have to believe that we're combatting people who will do anything for their cause, not a bunch of cowards.
Conservatives should be thanking Maher for his remarks.
What Maher said about the relative cowardice of the hijackers was essentially true. Characterize it however you will, but killing yourself in such a way is not the act of a coward...a nut, perhaps, but not a coward. Where he really got into trouble was in saying that lobbing missiles from a distance was cowardly...although thinking people realize that his remark was aimed at our government and command structure, the hyper-jingoists who were in control at that time jumped on it and accused him of "attacking the troops". In the post 9/11 climate, that was the ultimate in Political Correctness.
As I stated earlier, Maher has ten times the credibility of GOP Waterboys like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh.