Kurtz falsely claimed that "[u]nlike in 2000," McCain is "now us[ing]" POW experience "in some of his TV advertising"
SUMMARY: During a washingtonpost.com online discussion, Howard Kurtz falsely claimed that Sen. John McCain did not use his military service in television advertising during his failed 2000 presidential campaign. In fact, Kurtz's own reporting during the 2000 Republican presidential primary campaign contradicts his statement.
During a March 31 washingtonpost.com online discussion, in response to a question about whether Sen. John McCain "trots" out his "military service and years as a POW ... a bit too often," Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz falsely claimed that McCain did not use his military service in television advertising during his failed 2000 presidential campaign. Kurtz wrote: "Unlike in 2000, he's now used it in some of his TV advertising, and obviously it comes up again in his biography tour this week." In fact, Kurtz's own reporting during the 2000 Republican presidential primary campaign contradicts his statement.
In at least six instances, Kurtz reported that the McCain campaign highlighted his experience in Vietnam in campaign advertisements during his 2000 race:
- In an October 28, 1999, Washington Post article, Kurtz and staff writer Dan Balz wrote that McCain "is launching his first television ad today in New Hampshire, a commercial describing him as the presidential candidate with 'more courage.' ... McCain's 60-second ad, opening with vivid footage from his 5 1/2-year captivity in North Vietnam, portrays him as a fighter who stands up to special interests."
- On the December 27, 1999, edition of CNN's Inside Politics, during a segment about campaign advertising, Kurtz stated: "John McCain was a prisoner of war in North Vietnam, and his ads use chilling pictures to convey his harrowing ordeal." CNN then aired a clip from a "McCain campaign ad" in which the narrator states: "He was a young Navy pilot who volunteered for duty in Vietnam and was shot down over Hanoi. Lieutenant Commander John McCain, dragged off by an angry mob. ... His commitment to country is unquestioned, and his commitment to reducing wasteful spending is just as strong." During the segment, Kurtz said: "McCain's challenge is to connect his war-hero past to his candidacy, so he portrays himself as a fighter."
- In a February 12, 2000, Washington Post article, Kurtz wrote: "After an internal debate, McCain yesterday made a great show of announcing that he is withdrawing his negative ads in favor of a new spot that recalls how he 'stood up to his communist captors' in Vietnam."
- In a February 20, 2000, Washington Post article, Kurtz wrote that "[i]n Michigan, McCain has run ads that highlight his background as a Navy pilot shot down in Vietnam. The ads attack the 'special interests' and declare McCain 'ready to lead.' "
- On the February 20, 2000, edition of CNN's Sunday Morning, during a segment on campaign advertising, Kurtz said that after McCain pledged to stop running negative ads against opponent George W. Bush, McCain "went back to his war hero biography." CNN then aired a clip from a McCain campaign ad in which a narrator states: "In Vietnam, John McCain stood up to his Communist captors."
- In a March 12, 2000, Washington Post article, Kurtz reported that McCain advisers Mike "Murphy, [John] Weaver, and [Mark] Salter stayed on the [McCain campaign] bus to look at a positive ad that stressed McCain's Vietnam service. Murphy suggested that McCain ambush Bush at an event, challenging the governor [George W. Bush] to take down his negative ads."
From the March 31 washingtonpost.com online discussion:
Rhode Island: With all due respect to Sen. McCain's military service and years as a POW, is there a danger that he trots this out a bit too often? Nobody doubts his patriotism, but it seems in every news snippet I see, he's managing to work in a reference to his Vietnam-era service in a pseudo-humble way (along the lines of "we need to stand firm in the face of difficult circumstances -- I know a little something about that").
Howard Kurtz: Unlike in 2000, he's now used it in some of his TV advertising, and obviously it comes up again in his biography tour this week. It doesn't hurt McCain to remind people of his military service or his 5-1/2-year captivity in Hanoi, but as John Kerry learned four years ago, past heroism in a war does not necessarily help you get elected. Voters ultimately will make a judgment on what McCain can do over the next four years as opposed to what he did in Vietnam.
From the October 28, 1999, Washington Post article:
Arizona Sen. John McCain, determined to keep pace with his better-financed Republican rivals, is launching his first television ad today in New Hampshire, a commercial describing him as the presidential candidate with "more courage."
The move follows a decision by McCain, who has about $ 2 million in the bank, a fraction of the sums available to Texas Gov. George W. Bush and Steve Forbes, to speed up his advertising timetable by two weeks. Aides say he is trying to capitalize on his recent gains in New Hampshire polls and avoid being drowned out by Bush's commercials, which began Monday, and Forbes's next wave of spots.
McCain's 60-second ad, opening with vivid footage from his 5 1/2-year captivity in North Vietnam, portrays him as a fighter who stands up to special interests.
Greg Stevens, the senator's media adviser, said the commercial shows how McCain's saga "connects with the qualities people are looking for in a president. People know he's a former POW; they know he's a maverick; they know he has taken on the establishment. What the advertising does is put it all together."
McCain, who has been promoting his best-selling autobiography, in recent weeks has appeared on "Meet the Press," "This Week," "Good Morning America," "Hardball," "Equal Time" and a host of other shows. Ed Gillespie, a GOP strategist, said McCain is adept at drawing media attention but also needs to join the air wars. "He can't match Bush or Forbes point for point, but you have to get up with whatever you can because it does help to define you," Gillespie said, adding that such ads in turn attract free media coverage.
From the December 27, 1999, edition of CNN's Inside Politics:
BERNARD SHAW, HOST: Most of the current White House hopefuls have been running campaign ads for weeks or even months. By way of contrast, in the final week of 1995, the '96 campaign ad war was, for the most part, just getting under way. Then and now candidates have often used commercials to try to improve their image or undermine their opponents.
Howard Kurtz of CNN's "RELIABLE SOURCES" takes a look at some defining moments on the airwaves in recent weeks.
[...]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, FORBES CAMPAIGN AD)
FORBES: I propose removing all the taxes and penalties from Social Security benefits because you've already paid the tax during your working life.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KURTZ: John McCain was a prisoner of war in North Vietnam, and his ads use chilling pictures to convey his harrowing ordeal.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, McCAIN CAMPAIGN AD)
NARRATOR: He was a young Navy pilot who volunteered for duty in Vietnam and was shot down over Hanoi. Lieutenant Commander John McCain, dragged off by an angry mob.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KURTZ: McCain's challenge is to connect his war-hero past to his candidacy, so he portrays himself as a fighter.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, McCAIN CAMPAIGN AD)
NARRATOR: His commitment to country is unquestioned, and his commitment to reducing wasteful spending is just as strong.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KURTZ: Many candidates complain about having to raise huge sums to pay for these commercials. But nobody can afford not to play the game, which is why these images are blanketing Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. What's not so clear is whether the messages will turn negative as the race heats up -- Bernie.
From the February 12, 2000, Washington Post article:
While the Arizona senator has aired only negative ads this week, says McCain strategist Mike Murphy, "the wider story is what the fight's about, and that resonates. It's about whether the Bush machine can stop the reformer, and that is not a bad narrative for us. Everyone knows that the Bush negative ads and trash-talk assault are a result of his drubbing in the New Hampshire primary."
Bush, like McCain, says he's merely defending his honor. "This is never the preferred approach," says Ari Fleischer, a spokesman for the Texas governor. "But you cannot let somebody misrepresent your position to voters and walk away. Otherwise, what happened to Bill Bradley will happen to Governor Bush."
After an internal debate, McCain yesterday made a great show of announcing that he is withdrawing his negative ads in favor of a new spot that recalls how he "stood up to his communist captors" in Vietnam.
The descent into insults and invective has been all the more dramatic because it followed months of gentle jousting in which McCain and Bush referred to each other as good friends (though they had met only a few times before the campaign). Then came New Hampshire, and the charges and countercharges became one great blur.
Bush ran an ad saying McCain would tax $ 40 billion in employee fringe benefits. McCain ran an ad accusing Bush of breaking a handshake agreement not to run negative ads. Bush ran a negative ad accusing McCain of violating the pledge. McCain ran an ad saying that Bush twists the truth like President Clinton. (Wait, there's more.) Bush ran an ad saying that McCain's tax plan would hurt churches. McCain denied that he would hurt churches and called Bush the unwitting pawn of special interests. Bush called McCain a liar. McCain said they should both yank their negative ads. Bush said he wouldn't because McCain's were worse. Bush stood beside a renegade veteran who accused McCain of abandoning veterans. McCain said that was just sad.
From the February 20, 2000, Washington Post article:
Well before the South Carolina votes were cast, Texas Gov. George W. Bush and Arizona Sen. John McCain were advertising heavily in Michigan and other key states that hold primaries over the next 2 1/2 weeks.
The $ 70 million Bush campaign has aired commercials in California, Arizona, Washington, North Dakota and Virginia, including stations in the District. McCain, while running no television ads in his home state of Arizona, where he is ahead in the polls, is on the airwaves in California, Washington and Virginia.
In Michigan, McCain has run ads that highlight his background as a Navy pilot shot down in Vietnam. The ads attack the "special interests" and declare McCain "ready to lead." Bush recently switched to a spot accusing McCain of opposing "real reform" on campaign financing and calling it "disappointing" that McCain is running a negative campaign.
In a sign of Michigan's importance, both campaigns have been running ads there since late December. The Bush camp says it expects to spend as much as $ 2.6 million on advertising in Michigan, with McCain at close to $ 2 million. This would be a larger spending gap than in South Carolina, where the Bush camp says it spent $ 3.1 million on the airwaves, compared with $ 2.8 million for McCain.
From the February 20, 2000, edition of CNN's Sunday Morning:
MILES O'BRIEN, HOST: George W. Bush and John McCain aren't wasting any time. After Bush's big South Carolina victory over McCain, both flew to Michigan, which holds its primary Tuesday. Bush started campaigning immediately, complaining about some radio ads that criticize him.
On the matter of campaign ads, South Carolina voters told exit pollsters they regarded McCain as more negative than Bush.
Howard Kurtz of CNN's "RELIABLE SOURCES" takes a look.
[...]
KURTZ: Last week, McCain declared that he was getting off the low road.
McCAIN: We will run no attack, response, or any other kind of negative advertising.
KURTZ: Instead, the Arizona senator went back to his war hero biography.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, McCAIN CAMPAIGN AD)
UNIDENTIFIED NARRATOR: In Vietnam, John McCain stood up to his Communist captors.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KURTZ: Bush, meanwhile, has stayed on the offensive.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, BUSH CAMPAIGN AD)
UNIDENTIFIED NARRATOR: Senator McCain, five times he voted to use your taxes to pay for political campaigns. That's not real reform.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(END VIDEOTAPE)
From the March 12, 2000, Washington Post article:
But as Bush seized on Murphy's spot to launch a new round of attack ads, the press began covering them like two squabbling politicians. Schnur thought the Clinton ad was a mistake. McInturff had them sinking in the polls, and Davis and Stevens were extremely concerned. Their reform message was being drowned out.
On Thursday, Feb. 10, while McCain was holding a town meeting, Murphy, Weaver and Salter stayed on the bus to look at a positive ad that stressed McCain's Vietnam service. Murphy suggested that McCain ambush Bush at an event, challenging the governor to take down his negative ads.
But when McCain got back on the bus, he was visibly upset. A woman in the audience had told him that her Boy Scout son had received a call in which McCain was described as a liar and a fraud. He decided to announce that he was yanking his negative spots for good.
On Friday, Murphy was stunned to discover that the Pentagon had slashed the air time for his Clinton ad the previous Tuesday without telling him. Rick Davis said everyone had known the ad schedule and perhaps Murph was out of the loop. But Murphy felt saddled with the worst of both worlds: Bush was pummeling them over an attack ad that almost no one had seen.
Murphy, meanwhile, peeled off in New York to sign a deal to sell his consulting firm to Interpublic Group. He was now worth millions of dollars. But he had no time to savor the moment.
The media is so anxious to hump McCain that they'll even ignore their own words in order to boost him.
McCain has ALWAYS used for political gain his status as a veteran and a former POW. In his first campaign for the US House in 1986 McCain used his unique experience to respond to charges of carpetbagging:
The turning point during the campaign came during one of several political forums. Until then, McCain's critics had gotten plenty of traction by labeling him a carpetbagger who moved to the state and the East Valley seeking a political opportunity.
For months, McCain countered that he moved to Arizona to be with his new wife. It fell on deaf ears. Then frustration led to inspiration one day.
He spat out a retort that his life in the Navy hadn't allowed him the luxury to settle anywhere until then.
"As a matter of fact, the place I've lived the longest in my life was Hanoi," he said. The reference was to his 5 1/2 year confinement in the "Hanoi Hilton," a prisoner-of-war camp where he was held and tortured after he was shot down during a bombing mission in 1967.
"John McCain did not use his military service..."
Just add the word successfully and suddenly it is true. The MSM has not been lying just dropping words accidentally. The Bush WH and its minions have ran several campaigns utterly destroying the value of military service McCain, Cleland, and Kerry -- all who served bravely while Bush hid in the rear. The real rear the Alabama National Guard while failing to maintain his flight readiness.
I guess the same way serving tea to foreign dignitaries wives does in Hill's case. ;)
As for pimping your Military Service, Hills has that covered also!
http://www.slate.com/id/2187780
Now if only the video of Hills low crawling through the gutters of Korea would turn up!
It doesn't, but when was the last time we actually chose a President based on their actual abilities to lead? Instead, we ask ourselves idiotic questions such with which candidate we would most like to sit down and have a beer, which one is most attractive, which one seems more moral, which one is most opposite to the previous President, etc. etc. etc.
Senator McCain, according to the military, your Silver Star was awarded "For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity while interned as Prisoner of War in North Vietnam from 27 October to 8 December 1967. His captors, completely ignoring international agreements, subjected him to extreme mental and physical cruelties in an attempt to obtain military information and false confessions for propaganda purposes. Through his resistance to those brutalities, he contributed significantly toward the eventual abandonment of harsh treatment by the North Vietnamese, which was attracting international attention."
Sir, given the fact that you made more than two dozen propaganda broadcasts, condemning American military conduct, during your captivity, how do you reconcile the Silver Star citation with your actual behavior? Wouldn't you agree that the citation is inconsistent with the facts of your actions?
The REAL story of McCain's behavior in captivity has somehow escaped the attention of the media. It dosen't take much research to come to the conclusion that the long told story of McCain's POW heroics is just that,...a STORY!I'm also wondering why no one has thought to ask the Senator about his despicable performance while serving on the Senate Committee for POW/MIA's. This is a very twisted individual.
You sir/madam are a total idiot.
There are three things you can do during torture. Give up information. Hold out and tell only Name, Rank, Serv #. Thirdly, give some info, but maybe be misleading at times, outright lie others and finally give up some info if under duress.
Now in the first instance if you give up all the info you know, the enemy has no use for you and that service member would have probably been killed according to data from the Vietnam era. Same goes for John Wayne holding out till the bitter end. He would probably enrage his captors and be tortured to death.
The way the services TEACH POW scenarios goes along with the third way. Keep your captors guessing, don't give up any hard info give up disinformation, and THAT is/was the way to SURVIVE.
I can assure you sir, that if you were captured and tortured for FIVE YEARS, you would probably give up some info also. I willing to bet first off you would not have the onions to serve to start with and if you ever were faced with a situation like this (think peace corp) you would fall into the first camp. Give up everything you know then be found a month later dumped into a ditch.
Now you see how totally ignorant your post is. Oh, wait, I doubt it makes one dent on someone like you.
More s***house reading for your fogged mind.
http://www.training.sfahq.com/survival_training.htm
HOGPRINT Sir.or, Madam,
In the first place, I served two tours in Vietnam as a grunt in the 5th Marines. So, I suppose I do have the "onions". Perhaps more than yourself!
Secondly, Senator McCain was NOT tortured for 5 years,. It is you Sir, or madam, who is obviously ignorant. The absolute fact of the matter is that, most of McCain's fellow prisoners were tortured far more severly than the Senator and gave up half as much. I would suggest that you educate yourself about Mr. McCain before you cast aspersions on those who have.
As a grunt, I often wondered how I would react to torture, if I was caught. As an older, wiser man, I have no illusions about my capacity to with stand prolonged, intense physical pain. But, what I find particularly offensive about the myth of McCain's "heroic" POW resistance, is the Senator's willingness to promote something he knows full well is a lie.
It is foolish people, such as yourself, who have no real knowledge of McCain's actual behavior, who help perpetuate a myth wholly unsupported by the EVIDENCE of record.
OK Rmon...You must be the dems pathetic one man swift boater. You posted:
"Secondly, Senator McCain was NOT tortured for 5 years,. It is you Sir, or madam, who is obviously ignorant. The absolute fact of the matter is that, most of McCain's fellow prisoners were tortured far more severly[Sic] than the Senator and gave up half as much. I would suggest that you educate yourself about Mr. McCain before you cast aspersions on those who have."
Now which is it grunt. Was he or was he not TORTURED? By the dems own definition especially in light of Abu Ghraib I going with he WAS tortured. I'm also going with being a POW is torture enough wouldn't you think? You are the only person that is denying this...or sort of denies it...which brings me back to my original point about your IGNORANT post up the thread.
How about a few links to back up your points? Probably not going to happen is it devil dog?
So if you will be so kind and EDUCATE us on Mccain's REAL story. Be a good Marine and please provide footnotes and not from some kook left wing propaganda site comrade.
I can only assume you mean this by Mccain's real story;
http://www.usvetdsp.com/mcianhro.htm
On little problem with that theory:
http://www.miafacts.org/prankster.htm
So there are two of you unless you are one in the same, but Sampley was a SOF and you claim to be a Mud Marine.
Good luck on your POW misinformation mission...you're gonna need it cause America will not buy it.
HOGPRINT; For your education, sir, please read the letter written by Cmdr. Philip Butler. See, www.opednews.com, WHY I WILL NOT VOTE FOR JOHN MCCAIN.
Of course, you'll think Cmdr. Butler a liar because he doesn't fall all over himself in an effort to prop up McCain's story. Maybe the good Cmdr.Butler is brain addled because he was a POW years longer than McCain so, what could he know??
When I said McCain was NOT tortured for 51/2 years, that is exactly what I ment. Cmdr. Butler backs up that point. The Commander states, quite directly, that ALL torture stopped in 1969. So, while McCain WAS tortured, he was NOT tortured for 51/2 years. My point ran to accuracy. If your going to tell a story of abuse, as McCain is want to do quite frequently, he should at least get his facts straight. He was tortured for two years not, for 51/2. I'm assuming even you can grasp the difference. And it can hardly be stated, with any degree of accuracy, that I am the ONLY person saying that. It is a matter of FACT. Sorry facts don't fit in your world.
As far as POW misinformation is concerned, only a fool or someone who is completely brain dead (catagories you seem to fit in) could possibly buy into the Senate Committee's findings. Their conclutions are demonstrably false. I would suggest Hendon's "An Enormous Crime" for starters. And, Simple Simon, you did not respond to my statement regarding McCain's drive to classify POW/MIA documents. Or, are you acknowledging that FACT with your silence? Perhaps you can enlighten the world with a brilliant explanation as to why such classification was necessary or, desirable. And please inform me of your own military experience. Samply was Special Forces, no denying it. I was a Mud Marine. And you....?