Wash. Times' Lambro asserted McCain "burnish[ed] his defense and foreign policy credentials" on trip, ignored Al Qaeda-Iran gaffe
SUMMARY: The Washington Times' Donald Lambro asserted that Sen. John McCain's "fact-finding foreign policy trip" "burnish[ed] his defense and foreign policy credentials." Lambro wrote this despite McCain's admittedly false claim during the trip that "it's common knowledge and has been reported in the media that ... Al Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran."
In a March 24 column, Donald Lambro, The Washington Times' chief political correspondent, asserted that during his "fact-finding foreign policy trip" Sen. John McCain "burnish[ed] his defense and foreign policy credentials." Lambro wrote this despite the fact that at a press conference in Amman, Jordan, McCain made the admittedly false claim that "it's common knowledge and has been reported in the media that ... Al Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran." McCain had made the same claim to nationally syndicated radio host Hugh Hewitt during a March 17 interview and did so more than once during the March 18 press conference in Amman. It was only after Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), who traveled with McCain, whispered something in his ear that McCain corrected himself, saying: "I'm sorry. The Iranians are training extremists, not Al Qaeda." U.S. officials have reportedly claimed Iran is training Shiite militants; Al Qaeda is a predominantly Sunni organization.
Further, in the column in which Lambro referred to McCain's "fact-finding foreign policy trip," he did not report that the trip included a fundraiser in London.
From Lambro's March 24 Washington Times column:
Meanwhile, the bickering continued between the two Democratic candidates over Florida and Michigan, which have been stripped of their convention delegates by Democratic officials for violating party rules -- feeding an image of a party that couldn't organize a two-car funeral, let alone run the country.
On the other side of the Atlantic, Mr. McCain was on a fact-finding foreign policy trip to meet with overseas leaders, assessing the situation in Iraq and burnishing his defense and foreign policy credentials to be commander in chief.
The contrast couldn't have been sharper: Democrats doing what they are known for -- fighting with one another, while Mr. McCain takes care of business.
Isn't there ANYBODY at the Moonie Times with any journalistic integrity???
(never mind - I just answered my own question....)
I think the fact that they work for the Moonie Times precludes any journalistic integrity.
Kinda like the "journalists" who work for the Ayatolla Robertson's Christian Broadcast News (CBN)....
No. From Wikipedia:
Anita Faye Hill (born July 30, 1956(1956-07-30)) is a professor of social policy, law, and women's studies at Brandeis University at the Heller School for Social Policy and Management and a former colleague of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. She is best known for claiming at Thomas' 1991 Senate confirmation hearings that Thomas had made provocative sexual statements to her while her supervisor.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Hill
Dang, I feel like I am experiencing Bill Murray's "Ground Hog Day". It seems like every day I see the same McCain thread. Hopefully today you'll get it right and we can move.on.
Once the media outlets start doing their job, AA, we CAN move on. Until then, the McCain threads continue.
Tin man.
And according to America, "Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man that he didn't, didn't already have". :-)
I don't think anything a person does before prepares someone for the job.
Hopefully, we'll get someone with some integrity and an ability to think on his or her feet.
We've elected many governors, a few generals, a washed up actor and a pretend cowboy. None of their prior experience helped much.
The question is not, "Did McCain misspeak?" But, "Did the trip help his image on defense and Foreign policy?"
Obviously, Lambro thinks it did help McCain, regardless of the "gaffe.'
This is just another of MMFA whiny attempts to tell journalists and columnist how they should do their craft.
If I were to critique Lambro, I'd have him compare McCain's 'misspeak' to Hillary's recent whopper about the sniper fire in Bosnia.
If I were to critique Lambro, I'd have him compare McCain's 'misspeak' to Hillary's recent whopper about the sniper fire in Bosnia. - Ed
That would be a reasonable comparison. It's very hard to believe that either was a simple misstatement or slip of the tongue.
OK let's see...McCain made a factual mistake here and Lieberman corrects him and McCain acknowledges the mistake. Doesn't seem to me he was trying to LIE and repeat the LIE.
So what does MMFA want the media to do? Cover this 24/7 and ask McCain about this every day from now until November?
And as to the substance of it..let's see...Iran is not training Al-Qaeda but they ARE training other extremists. Sunnis versus Shiites?
Will the America-Hating Liberals at least stipulate that Iran may be training the ENEMY. Probably not, since the ENEMY to them is named Bush or Cheney.
As for Iran, whose fault is it that Iran suddenly finds itself in the catbird seat? Face it; your boys have created a horrible mess over there. Part of me hopes McCan't wins so that a Republican will be in office when their house of cards finally collapses.
Truthseeker:
The point is McCain (who has no problems with this war continuing for another 100 years) is either senile or has no understanding of the complexity of the mess we have created in Iraq. It seems that he, like the majority of Americans, no longer has any clear idea of who the ENEMY is. For example, the current Iraqi government has much closer connections with Iran than Al Queada does. Friend or foe?
SOLON: Time to expose YOU as the LIAR:
Here's an excerpt from an MMFA piece from March 24:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200803240003
"Moreover, the assertion that the misstatements "might not even be worth mentioning" echoes a reluctance PolitiFact previously expressed to highlight McCain's falsehood; in its March 18 item, PolitiFact prefaced its discussion of McCain's remarks by saying "We're not trying to pile on Sen. McCain over his misstatement."
MMFA uses the word falsehood. According to Random House:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/falsehood
the definitions of falsehood include:
1. a false statement, lie. and
3. the act of lying or making false statements.
The clear implication being made is that McCain is a LIAR.
In the future it would be helpful if you READ THE MMFA POSTS CLEARLY and then make your arguments. Otherwise spare us your left-wing rants.
As for the rest of your post: I have a crystal clear understanding of the situation. The enemy is RADICAL ISLAM and wherever it exists be it Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Africa, the Phillipines, New York City or Lincoln, Nebraska, it must be DEFEATED. If in the past we armed them and radicalized them it's regrettable but it is now time to CLEAN UP OUR MESS.
If anything we've waited too long to act. We had many a warning signal over about a 30-year period and you can trace the beginning to Iran in 1979 when the embassy was overrun and hostages taken. What about Pan-Am Flight 103. That was 1988. Coutless examples in the 1990s including the WTC bombing in 1993. (BTW..what exactly did Bubba Clinton do about that?)
Your comments about the Contras and the Muhajadeen simply serve to prove my point. They were fighting Soviet Imperialism -- yes the "We Will Bury You" Soviets -- and were more than worthy of our help. In the case of the Contras it was happening in our own backyard and had to be dealt with.
BUT as with Radical Islam today the Left never really saw the Soviet Union as the enemy. A small number of conservatives did pay attention to the threat and took it on -- against the wishes of much of the Republican Party by the way -- and ended the Cold War. The liberals just buried their heads in the sand and hoped the problem would go away. Fortunately, there just weren't enough of these people -- people like YOU Solon -- in the U.S. population at-large to vote against these Cold War policies.
But today, about 2 generations later, this attitude that the ENEMY is us -- as in the U.S. -- and that there is a moral equivalence between our culture and the culture of Radical Islam has taken hold among far too many people where sadly the outcome of this cultural struggle is in doubt.
The point is, if YOU or YOUR family are in the plane, shopping mall or school that these terrorists decide to blow up, they aren't going to show any mercy simply because you agree with them that America is a horrible country. And if you can't see that and acknowledge that they need to be be defeated, then you are even STUPIDER than a careful reading of your numerous posts would indicate.
A lot of ignorance in your post but you start out with a good point. I didnt remember that. There is a distinction what he said WAS false, no one questions that the point is did he INTENTIONALLY make a false statement? I didnt see NO ONE had called him a liar just that I hadnt seen it. Perhaps I didnt read that thread carefully enough. That WAS a good rebuttal though. Then you fall of the rails into your usual ignorant ranting stupidity.
As for Radical Islamic terrorists they are an enemy. Lets get them. I am all for it. I imagine we only disagree on the tactics. You of course stupidly go to the LIE that because we disagree about the tactics that means liberals dont want to fight them. Stupid but typical. You guys never let go of an ignorant zombie meme.
You TALK about the horrible hostage crisis of Iran in 79. It was wrong and there is no excuse for taking hostages but you didnt manage to point out that it would never have happened had we not overthrown their first democracy, freely elected Mohamed Mossedegh, in 1953 and installed the brutal Shah Pahlavi on them for 25 years. A man Amnesty International called the worlds worst torturer. The terrorism of the bombing of flight 103 was horrific. It was much worse than US downing a Libyan civilian airliner that prompted it because we didnt do it intentionally. I think Khadaffi should STILL be brought up on charges of crimes against humanity for doing it. Can you say BLOWBACK? YOU pick the Iranian hostage situation CAUSED by blowback from our hegemony and think it makes sense that it is an argument for MORE of that kind of out of control screwing around in the affairs of other countries? Yeah that is a Planet Wingnut argument alright.
Your claim we were fighting Soviet Imperialism is precious. You guys just repeat whatever nonsense you are told dont you? The Sandanistas were FREELY ELECTED. It was about ideology not the Soviets. The Soviets werent establishing military bases in Nicaragua. Again this is your obliviousness. You just think we SHOULD demand other countries comply to standars we would never accept for ourselves. Should the Soviet Union have been allowed to fight a terrorism campaign against FINNLAND because they are OUR ally and a capitalist country? It is ludicrous you keep making arguments you would NEVER accept as valid from the other side. It is moral IF we do it and just an attrocity when THEY do it which was my point all along. Iran is doing nothing that WE dont do regularly. As for arming the Muhajadeen being about Soviet imperialism THAT would make more sense if we hadnt begun arming them, that is the first appropriation for arming them wasnt six months BEFORE the Soviet invasion.
More ignorance from you about us not seeing Radical Islam and the USSR as enemies. Of course we did. We just disagree on the tactics to fight them. You really are stupid so I guess you believe this because it is a hivemind assignment. Containment worked against the USSR. It worked because liberals had FAITH our system was better and would win out in the long run. Conservatives just wanted to use both the USSR and radical Islam as EXCUSES to be warmongers, fight profit friendly wars and help commit attrocities against anyone whose ideology we disapproved of like Nicaragua. You ask what Bubba did in the first WTC bombing. He found those guys and they are now in JAIL and will never commit another terrorist act. What did BUSH do about the Second WTC terrorism? Where is Osama again. Oh yeah. Bush said he doesnt worry about him since it was an EXCUSE to fight a more profit friendly war in Iraq.
We are not going to bomb our way out of terrorism. We MAKE more terrorists than we can kill and radicalising more and MORE people just isnt the answer. There is a military component to fighting terrorism but the Army is a broadsword not a scalpel and we need to target the radicals who ARE a problem and stop just DEFINING everyone we disagree with as enemies. Iraq was the most secular country in the region there was NO radical Islamic terrorism rationale for invading the place. We can now look forward to blowback for that in twenty years like overthrowing Mossedegh. THAT means people like YOU are the enemy. People who make EXCUSES for doing the wrong thing because you learned everything you know about foriegn policy by watching John Wayne movies. You use an argument AGAINST moral equivelence to put forth the argument that we should have a foriegn policy with NO MORALITY AT ALL.
I dont believe this country is horrible that is you being stupid again. When will morons like you understand that criticising what we sometimes do isnt an attack on WHO WE ARE. I mean I know you are ignorant but please that is galactic level dumb. I think we do bad things sometimes in service of power and I think that causes problems we dont need and its time we STOPPED doing those things. The game isnt worth the candle.
As for what you have been reading you are so stupid you have no ability to read with comprehension. I dont see how YOUR stupidity is MY problem
truthseeker68,
"OK let's see...McCain made a factual mistake here and Lieberman corrects him and McCain acknowledges the mistake. Doesn't seem to me he was trying to LIE and repeat the LIE."
He "made a factual mistake" four times, even after correction. Is that a lie or is he just dense?
"So what does MMFA want the media to do? Cover this 24/7 and ask McCain about this every day from now until November?"
No but considering the MSM claims the trip where he lied(?) also "burnished" his credentials, maybe they could just report the unvarnished truth?
"And as to the substance of it..let's see...Iran is not training Al-Qaeda but they ARE training other extremists. Sunnis versus Shiites?"
Conflating al Quada with the Iraqi insurgency with the regime in Iran is propaganda and feeds into the administration's bumper sticker war plan. Some of us here would rather face reality and deal with the situation as it is, not as the administration wishes it were.
"Will the America-Hating Liberals at least stipulate that Iran may be training the ENEMY. Probably not, since the ENEMY to them is named Bush or Cheney."
There are so many (wrong) assumptions in those two sentences I hardly know where to start.
You don't know where to start because you know I'm right and the truth is very hard to swallow. Liberals do not want to admit that they see their own country as the enemy. But that's exactly how they see it.
Truthseeker;
The Liberal left wingers don't hate America! How could you possibly say such a thing! Why it's just that America is at fault for everything. If you truly loved America (like Michelle Obama, for instance) you would be filled with shame at her manifold failures.
America stands for life and liberty - two values that the Liberal left does not share with their fellow citizens (the great unwashed). Unless, of course, the liberals are in the position of authority -where they can tell others how to live.
You mean The Moonie Times. A'la Reverend Sum Yung Moon. I can't believe anybody takes that rag seriously. A paper that loses money like that in order to publish the Wingnut version of the "nuze" deserves to be thrown in the same trash heap as the Pittsburgh Trib, A'la Richard Mellon Scaif.
I wouldn't wrap a fish in either.