Echoing McCain, Lowry misrepresented Obama's comments on Pakistan
SUMMARY: On Hannity & Colmes, National Review's Rich Lowry aired a clip of Sen. John McCain falsely asserting that Sen. Barack Obama said he's "going to bomb a country that is a sovereign nation," a distortion of Obama's statement about Pakistan that McCain has repeatedly made. Lowry then echoed McCain by saying that Obama "detailed his willingness to bomb suspected terrorist cells in Pakistan." In fact, Obama said: "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and [Pakistani] President [Pervez] Musharraf won't act, we will."
On the February 21 broadcast of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, after airing a clip of Sen. John McCain falsely asserting that Sen. Barack Obama said he's "going to bomb a country that is a sovereign nation," a distortion of Obama's statement about Pakistan that McCain has repeatedly made, guest host and National Review editor Rich Lowry echoed McCain by asserting that Obama "detailed his willingness to bomb suspected terrorist cells in Pakistan." Lowry added that, in an attempt at "political posturing," "[t]he Obama campaign said McCain distorted the Illinois senator's positions." Lowry did not elaborate on the Obama campaign's objections to McCain's distortion of Obama's comments, nor did he note what Obama has actually said. In fact, during an August 1, 2007, foreign policy speech, Obama stated: "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and [Pakistani] President [Pervez] Musharraf won't act, we will." Obama did not mention "bomb[ing]" in general, nor did he specify what action he would take. He did not say he would take action against Pakistan, but against "high-value terrorist targets," and that any action would be conditional on the receipt of "actionable intelligence" and the failure of Musharraf to act.
Lowry also did not mention reports that the United States recently struck terrorist targets inside Pakistan without seeking approval from the Pakistani government. As Media Matters for America previously noted, several media outlets, including The Washington Post on February 19, reported that the United States recently used a CIA Predator aircraft to launch missile strikes inside Pakistan and that "the U.S. spy agency did not seek approval" from that country's government. In a February 19 post on the Talking Points Memo blog, managing editor David Kurtz noted McCain's mischaracterization of Obama's position on Pakistan and wrote that "[i]ronically enough, the Washington Post is reporting today on just such a U.S. military strike into Pakistan." According to the Post, "Having requested the Pakistani government's official permission for such strikes on previous occasions, only to be put off or turned down, this time the U.S. spy agency did not seek approval. The government of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf was notified only as the operation was underway, according to the officials, who insisted on anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivities." The article then stated that the "incident was a model of how Washington often scores its rare victories these days in the fight against al-Qaeda inside Pakistan's national borders: It acts with assistance from well-paid sympathizers inside the country, but without getting the government's formal permission beforehand."
According to a February 21 Post article, when asked about the Post's February 19 report about U.S. strikes against Al Qaeda targets inside Pakistan, McCain "declined to comment."
From the February 21 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:
[begin video clip]
McCAIN: Well, the best idea is to not broadcast what you're going to do. That's naive.
The first thing that you do is you make your plans and you carry out your operations as necessary for America's national security interest. You don't broadcast that you are going to bomb a country that is a sovereign nation.
[...]
McCAIN: It's just fundamentals of the conduct of national security policy.
[...]
McCAIN: I especially think that, in some cases, that -- that rhetoric has to be substantiated by specific recommendations. And I think that Senator Obama has not been specific in his recipe as to how we address these challenges.
[end video clip]
LOWRY: That was John McCain attacking Barack Obama's foreign policy experience. The controversy started after Obama detailed his willingness to bomb suspected terrorist cells in Pakistan.
The Obama campaign said McCain distorted the Illinois senator's positions, but putting political posturing aside, is Obama as naive as McCain says? And which candidate from the presidential pack has the best grasp on fighting the war on terror?
Joining us now is the author of Marching Toward Hell: America and Islam after Iraq [Free Press, February 2008], former head of the CIA bin Laden unit, Michael Scheuer.















Ah, it's a beautiful thing when the right-wing noise machine is running on all cylinders...:)
What a bunch of tools.
It's only going to get worse. This morning, I listened to the local Troglodyte Talk Radio Rush Limbaugh Wannabee. He made a big deal out of that guy who couldn't list Obama's legislative accomplishments on Hardball. Of course, one guy caught flatfooted has morphed into "Obama supporters can't tell you anything he's accomplished", which he repeated several times.
They are shameless and prolific liars... that's how they keep winning elections.
http://noisyroom.net/blog/2007/02/12/american-airstrikes-in-pakistan-bush-sends-message-to-musharraf/
Of course, these douchebags never let facts get in the way of good propaganda.
McCAIN: You don't broadcast that you are going to bomb a country that is a sovereign nation.
Oh, you mean like a Presidential candidate getting videotaped singing Bomb, bomb, bomb - Bomb, bomb Iran... Sheeesh...boy, would that be dumb?
Thats michelle obama hates america and Barrack wants to bomb our allies, oh yeah and he might be a secret muslim. The sad part is that millions of Americans will actually beleive the crap these morons say.
They think it's all part of mudslinging whether there's a shred of truth to the stories or not.
Keep 'em coming MMFA, keep 'em coming.
This is just one of many. There’s already a whole set of McCain campaign talking points that simply are not true.
Obama wants to bomb Pakistan – Both he and Michelle are unpatriotic – Obama was educated at a radical Islamic school as a child – Obama is the most liberal in the Senate while McCain has a strong conservative record – McCain has never had pork projects – McCain is a straight-shooter who sticks to his guns.
Ask your average American – and I’m not just talking just Republicans – and I bet the vast majority of them think at least 4 or 5 of these statements are true. The MSM has been repeating these falsehoods, as is evident by MMFA repeatedly highlighting these same old lies over and over in numerous stories over the past few months.
Where are voters who are not internet-savy to go to get at the truth? Look at cable news shows throughout the typical dinner-time “National Evening News” hours…
Fox News – Not one show or pundit that is “fair” or “balanced”
MSNBC – Chris Matthews Hardball 5pm – Tucker Carlson 6pm – Hardball repeat 7pm (Need I say more?)
CNN – Lou Dobbs – Glenn Beck - Wolf Blitzer (Independents?? Give me a break!)
Liberal Media bias???? Where the hell is it? Your average American is bombarded with a Republican right-wing spin promoting the corporate big-business “sell” of every issue - condemning candidates who don’t buy into corporate interests, while putting those who do on a pedestal. Liberals are constantly chastised, poked fun of, and made to appear "luney", "socialists", or out-of-touch with reality no matter where Americans turn for evening news on TV.
Until there is a news channel as dedicated to reporting the views of liberal Democrats – in exactly the same biased way as Fox and other big-business corporate enterprises like CNN and MSNBC – we haven’t a chance in hell to globally expose and repute the lies and exaggerations that are parroted about us on a daily basis.
Obama did put forth a broad plan: If we obtain actionable intelligence on Bin Laden's whereabouts in Pakistan and Musharraf refuses to act then we will act. It's the hopelessly dishonest right wingers who pretend they don't understand what Obama's means.
I've gotta admit, I share that problem. Typo? ;)
he could put forth a broad plan that could silence some of his critics. Never going to silence them all, because, after all, this is a political campaign and words will be spun to the benefit of whichever side is doing the spinning.>>
His critics won't be silenced because they won't honestly engage with what Obama said. The funniest thing about this, though? Republican pundits wringing their hands over bombing sovereign nations.
I think this thread has geometry problems. Has a small black hole swallowed 15 posts?
|"!
The whole idea is academic anyway.
What it all depends on is what Obama defines as "Actionable Intelligence". This coming from a side of the aisle that still listens to Rosie rants about conspiracy regarding 9/11; discounting the proud confession of the Taliban that they did it.
What's my point? If you tell yourself that there is no justification for war, except those that serve your own interests (like in Obama's case, any one of a hundred wars going on in Africa...to which his church claims uncomprimising loyalty) then there is no such thing as "actionable intelligence".
I say if Pakistan has been sheltering terrorists, then by all means...we bomb them. They would be our enemy. On 9/12, when Bush was saying that those who harbor our enemies will become our enemies, no one dared oppose that view because the country was too unified. Now...six years later...its war-mongering. Get a clue, people!
With Rich Lowry in the article, no wonder the threads have gone astray.