About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Sowell falsely claimed Clyburn was referring to 2008 election in Petraeus comments

September 20, 2007 5:59 pm ET

8 Comments

In his September 19 nationally syndicated column, Thomas Sowell misrepresented comments made by House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC) during a July 30 "PostTalk" interview on washingtonpost.com. Echoing comments by other conservatives, Sowell falsely claimed that Clyburn "admitted that an American victory in Iraq 'would be a real big problem for us' in next year's elections." In fact, responding to a question about what Democrats would do in September if Gen. David Petraeus said, "This is working very, very well at this point; we would be foolish to back away from it," Clyburn stated that such a recommendation would be a "real big problem for us" because it would impede Democrats' efforts to garner support in Congress for legislation to begin withdrawal, not because of any electoral effect it would have.

Media Matters for America has documented in a report titled "Black and White and Re(a)d All Over: The Conservative Advantage in Syndicated Op-Ed Columns" that Sowell's column regularly appears in 141 daily U.S. papers and occasionally -- meaning at least once a month, but not weekly -- in 22 more, ranking him ninth among syndicated columnists by the number of papers in which he appears.

From Sowell's column:

Precisely because congressional Democrats already knew that there had been progress after the troop surge in Iraq -- some of their own colleagues had been there and seen it -- they had to discredit General Petraeus, in order to prevent the American people from knowing it.

Democratic Congressman James Clyburn said it all in an unguarded moment when he admitted that an American victory in Iraq "would be a real big problem for us" in next year's elections.

That is why a general who is putting his life on the line every day in Iraq, and whose efforts are producing some success, has to be called a liar on nationwide television by United States Senators and a traitor in a New York Times ad.

In fact, during the July 30 "PostTalk" interview for washingtonpost.com, Washington Post reporter Dan Balz asked Clyburn, "What do Democrats do if General Petraeus comes in in September and says, 'This is working very, very well at this point; we would be foolish to back away from it'?" Clyburn responded: "Well, that would be a real big problem for us, no question about that, simply because of those 47 Blue Dogs. I think there would be enough support in that group to want to stay the course, and if the Republicans were to remain united, as they have been, then it would be a problem for us." Clyburn added: "None of us want to see a bad result in Iraq. If we are going to get in position to yield a good result, I think Democrats want to see that." In other words, Clyburn did not say that "an American victory in Iraq" would be a problem for Democrats "in next year's elections," as Sowell claimed in his column, but, rather, that a recommendation from Petraeus against withdrawal from Iraq would impede Democrats' efforts to garner support in Congress for legislation to begin withdrawal. Following is the original exchange regarding Petraeus' report:

BALZ: What do Democrats do if General Petraeus comes in in September and says, "This is working very, very well at this point; we would be foolish to back away from it"?

CLYBURN: Well, that would be a real big problem for us, no question about that, simply because of those 47 Blue Dogs. I think there would be enough support in that group to want to stay the course, and if the Republicans were to remain united, as they have been, then it would be a problem for us.

So I think we, by and large, would do wise -- be wise to wait on the report. None of us want to see a bad result in Iraq. If we are going to get in position to yield a good result, I think Democrats want to see that. We love this country. We're as patriotic as anybody else about this. And we have loved ones involved in this issue just like everybody else. I've got family and friends involved in Iraq and Afghanistan, and so I certainly want to see a good result. But I'm certainly not going to just roll over because the president said. It is only because we get good intelligence from those people like General Petraeus who can be trusted to give us good information.

As Media Matters has previously noted (here, here, and here), Sowell's distortion echoes several conservative commentators who have misrepresented Clyburn's comments. For example, John Gibson said on the July 31 edition of Fox News' The Big Story that Democrats want "their country [to] lose a war because otherwise they might lose an election." The Republican National Committee issued a "research briefing" on July 31, titled "They Said It!" that cropped the quote from Clyburn to read: "[It Would Be] A Real Big Problem For Us."

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by eweston8542983 (September 20, 2007 6:23 pm ET)
         

      A problem, yes, but not the way Sowell's misinforming.

      Good to see the senate spending time on important items. Somewhere arround half the Dems signed on to put MoveOn in their place. I'm completely in the dark as to why they felt this was an important thing to vote for.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by nerzog (September 21, 2007 9:11 am ET)
           

        It's all about misdirection. As long as they can bloviate about nitpickery like this, pound their chests about "supporting the troops" and accuse the Left of "owning defeat"...they don't have to deal with the horrible mess their Moron in Chief has created.

        They also don't have to acknowledge the painful reality that the Bush administration lied about WMD intelligence, and took us into a war of agression against a third world country to commandeer its oil supply. The whole Republican party is now hiding behind General Petraeus, pretending that his word is unquestionable. They'll ride this hobby horse for another few months until it becomes evident once again that they're just blowing sunshine up our skirts.

        Shame on the cowardly Democrats who voted for this idiotic resolution.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by wookie (September 21, 2007 9:39 am ET)
             

          Yep, condemning Moveon is a way of condemning criticism. They don't even have to support Petraeus testimony or deal with Moveon's points about misleading statistics. 

          Report Abuse
    • Author by wesley (September 20, 2007 7:05 pm ET)
         

      More importantly Clyburn directly refuted MoveOn by stating his support for Gen.Petraeus:

       - It is only because we get good intelligence from those people like General Petraeus who can be trusted to give us good information. - Clyburn

      Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (September 21, 2007 2:23 am ET)
           

        Are YOU the one that gets to pick the topic? Why no you arent. So it isnt MORE important just because YOU want to change the topic.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (September 20, 2007 8:05 pm ET)
         

      On July 30th, the date of his statement, your saying he was cognisant of MoveOn's ad. I can't think of anyone who didn't give the general a good chance of giving a good and informative presentation at that date. Shortly before it  my opinion changed. Some folks may have a negative opinion of him with some history and evidence. I don't think you can provide a time-line of the ads conception, developement, deployment and who knew what when.

      You can supply misinformation though.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by wzwriter (September 21, 2007 8:29 am ET)
         

      THomas Sowell is one of the most useless individuals on the scene today - he's right down there with Armstrong Williams, Walter Williams, Alan Keyes, and Clarence "Pubic Hair on the Pepsi Can" Thomas.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (September 21, 2007 9:33 am ET)
         

      Too bad that we have to go to the foreign press or online to get real news coverage. Here's an article that gives a little more balanced perspective on the Petraeus/Betray-Us controversy. Apparently Moveon.org didn't invent the slur.

      [link to www.timesonline.co.uk]

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.