ABC's Gibson aired McCain's criticism of Obama, but did not mention Obama's response
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
SUMMARY: On World News, Charles Gibson aired a clip of Sen. John McCain's remarks at the April 14 Associated Press Annual Meeting and Luncheon -- during which McCain criticized Sen. Barack Obama for comments Obama made on April 6 -- but did not note that Obama responded to McCain's comments later that day at the same event.
On the April 14 broadcast of ABC's World News, anchor Charles Gibson noted Sen. John McCain's remarks at the April 14 Associated Press Annual Meeting and Luncheon -- during which McCain criticized Sen. Barack Obama for comments Obama made on April 6 -- and aired a clip of McCain's speech. However, Gibson did not note that Obama responded to McCain's comments later that day at the same event.
Summarizing McCain's statements, Gibson said: "John McCain also went after Barack Obama today, telling the Associated Press annual meeting this morning that the small-town people Obama was talking about are the heart and soul of this country." After airing the clip of McCain's remarks, in which he asserted that small-town people "were not born with the advantages others in our country enjoy," Gibson continued: "And in another comment aimed at Obama, McCain added that they did not turn to their faith out of resentment."
Gibson did not mention Obama's speech at the AP event, in which Obama specifically addressed McCain's comments:
OBAMA: Now, Senator McCain and the Republicans in Washington are already looking ahead to the fall and have decided that they plan on using my comments to argue that I'm out of touch with what's going on in the lives of working Americans. And I don't blame them for this -- that's the nature of our political culture. If I had to carry the banner for eight years of George Bush's failures, I'd be looking for something else to talk about too.
But I will say this: If John McCain wants to turn this contest -- election into a contest about which party is out of touch with the struggles and hopes of working America, that's a debate I'm happy to have. In fact, I think that's a debate that we have to have, because I believe that the real insult to the millions of hard-working Americans out there would be a continuation of the economic agenda that's dominated Washington for far too long.
I may have made a mistake last week in the words that I chose, but the other party has made a much more damaging mistake in the failed policies they've chosen and the bankrupt philosophy that they've embraced for the last three decades.
From the April 14 broadcast of ABC's World News with Charles Gibson:
GIBSON: Well, John McCain also went after Barack Obama today, telling the Associated Press annual meeting this morning that the small-town people Obama was talking about are the heart and soul of this country.
McCAIN [video clip]: They were not born with the advantages others in our country enjoy. They suffered the worst during the Depression, but it had not shaken their faith in and fidelity to America and its finding ideals. Nor had it destroyed their confidence that America in their own lives could be made better.
GIBSON: And in another comment aimed at Obama, McCain added that they did not turn to their faith out of resentment. In other news, working-class voters are indeed a major voting bloc in Pennsylvania.
Then raise it as a legitimate campaign issue, you don't throw terms around like Gramps, or Grampy to elevate any legitimate campaign issue.
It just comes across as discriminatory and nasty.
Ok, we're cool!
I'll call him Gramps because he is in his 70s and sucking up to the religious extremists/dogmatists who want to impose religious law on everyone
And calling for young men and women to stay in a quagmire of which he seems not to have studied or understood. Grampa is being kind to this war monger.
We're bashing McCain, or so we're told,
Simply because the man's growing old.
But the problem is not simply his age,
It's just that he doesn't come off quite sage.
Whenever he speaks one cannot help find
That his mouth very often betrays his mind.
Perhaps he's just speaking from the heart,
But, truth be told, he does not sound very smart.
(I could easily have ended on another rhyme,
We'll save the flatulance for another time.
While we admit this, we cannot but blush,
John's thoughts echo the ideas of Bush.)
Bob - so you're saying that all of the flip-flopping, pandering, and all-around Bush-praising McCain has done over the past 7-8 years is NOT because of senility?
You're saying that he is actually conscious and aware of his sleazy politicking? Maybe he's been hanging around Karl Rove too much.
5 1/2 years of his life in a POW camp.
Mccain's time as a POW does not give him a lifetime pass on saying and/or doing stupid things. And we have the right to call him on it when he says or does something stupid.
Respect? Yeah, right.
Obama: ...I may have made a mistake last week in the words that I chose..
Yes he did and his response, as cited by MMFA, was simply eqivocating.
No wonder Gibson didn't air it. He said nothing.What was Obama thinking? A politician telling the truth? What an idiot. Doesn't he understand he should just try to pander to everyone while trying to offend no one?
dazed,
Why then is Obama backtracking and changing his story? Either he is telling the truth then or he's telling the truth now. The logical conclusion is that he either lied then or is lying now. You can't have it both ways.
Obama simply exposed himself with this latest gaffe as a typical pandering politician who in private expresses condescension for people who are not voting for him.
Dazed,
It seems to me then you are admitting he is pandering by offering his regret for telling the truth.
Dbeden has it exactly right.
It seems to me then you are admitting he is pandering by offering his regret for telling the truth.
When are YOU gonna offer your regret for posting stupid, trivial, non-consequential arguments on this board, AA?
Anothercitizenofthecountrytheleftsaysisthescourgeoftheearth,
You are absolutely spot on. Even when he did respond previously he said that he believed in the truth of what he said....Media Matters (for very little) is hoping this lame shot over the bow will somehow squelch any further reminders of his words in San Francisco. This was what he said a couple days prior to McCain's comments at the luncheon.
"I said something that everybody knows is true, which is that there are a whole bunch of folks in small towns in Pennsylvania, in towns right here in Indiana, in my hometown in Illinois, who are bitter," Obama said in Muncie, Indiana.
"So I said well you know when you're bitter you turn to what you can count on. So people they vote about guns, or they take comfort from their faith and their family and their community," he said. (if only they would vote to count on more government to solve all of their ills instead)my speculative thoughts about Obama's true feelings.
"Now, I didn't say it as well as I should have."
He spoke from the heart in San Francisco- hey that would make a great campaign song- :). You usually do that when things are not scripted. like a Freudian slip, speaks volumes of what you truely believe.
Now MM(vl) will seek balance, I suppose, so look soon to appear another thread on McCain's mistatement on where Al Quieda lives. But if he repeats the phrase, "Now, I didn't say it as well as I should have.", and he'll be off the hook just like bowling Barry!
Didn't you know Snoopy? Proudconservative has the ability to delve into Obama's mind and tell us what he really means when he says things. It is a common trait for those on the hard right. I wonder why they didn't know that GW was a bold faced liar though?
The reality is that he will cling to this idea that Obama is an elitist when the true elitism comes from McCain and Hillary who have not bought groceries or a gallon of gas in twenty years. They rely on their "servants" to do that for them. But of course that automatically qualifies them to "feel our pain." Because they have lived off our tax money for the last twenty years they know what it is like to "live" in America. Obama the elitist?????????? Yeah right.
Chris,
My take on the "bitter" comments from Obama are, honestly, worrisome. Now, I am an Obama fan and I can certainly understand what he was trying to say, and what he meant regarding the bigger picture of his comments in context.
I don't fault people for word missteps as much as some people, we all say things we wish we either hadn't said, or wish we said differently. We are human beings, not robots. That being said, it's the word "bitter" and "cling" that will be used against him, and as you say already is to the hilt by Hillary.....she is having a field day with this, typical Clintonian politics and reminds me why another 4 or 8 years of that tacked on to the last 8 of Bush and his polarizing crap is more than we as a country can stand.
It's worrisome to me because Obama's words will be played over and over and he will be painted as just irritated at those who don't share what he feels is the overriding issue, the economy. As if guns and faith shouldn't be factors for some, well, in fact, they are. As I said, I know what he meant and I take him at his word because I don't see him as a panderer or a shifty, poll-driven politician. He is honest, and forthright, and I admire that about him above our policy disagreements.
I hope he continues to confront this head on, with Hillary and McCain, if it becomes an issue for him in the fall. He is best when he stands his ground and doesn't back down in the face of political expediency.
Words have meaning, and every single syllable a politician utters these days is out there for dissection and analysis ad nauseum.....they all better learn how to deal with it. Good luck Obama, I hope this is the end of this.
Tommy,
Time to wake up and smell the roses my friend. How's this for pandering?
Last October a contemporary figure, Barack Obama of Chicago, likewise disparaged false patriotism, as we noted last month:
Obama appeared at a town hall meeting in Pennsylvania yesterday wearing a flag lapel pin--a symbol, according to Obama himself, of false patriotism.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120836044782519757.html?mod=Best+of+the+Web+TodayMaybe we should call him Slick Barry? :-)
My browser shows my quotes very small. Let me try that again.
Tommy,Time to wake up and smell the roses my friend. How's this for pandering?
Last October a contemporary figure, Barack Obama of Chicago, likewise disparaged false patriotism, as we noted last month:
"The truth is that right after 9/11 I had [an American flag lapel] pin," Obama said. "Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we're talking about the Iraq war, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security. . . ."
Obama appeared at a town hall meeting in Pennsylvania yesterday wearing a flag lapel pin--a symbol, according to Obama himself, of false patriotism.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120836044782519757.html?mod=Best+of+the+Web+Today
Maybe we should call him Slick Barry? :-)
AA,
I got your jist. And I understand the way people's perceptions vary in degree. I am trying to judge him fairly based on all I have seen in his campaign, in totality and in context. I imagine it is in a politician's blood to pander to a certain extent, they all do it, regardless of party, and you know, I hate that. And maybe Obama is starting to do that with the flag lapel pin, I don't know. For me, it's too early to indict him as a serial, typical pandering politician. If my mind is changed, I will admit I misjudged and go from there.
So far, I have seen far more positive and good things from Obama about the healing and the bringing together this country is starving for after Bush has train-wrecked us in the past 8 years - I am probably more closely aligned with Bush politically than Obama, on some things, and I find him a miserable failure and wouldn't even consider voting for him, ever, for anything.
So, it's more than about policy or ideology for me, at least so far, with this election cycle.
I haven't decided on anyone yet.
Tommy,
Your view is shared by a lot of people. Can you cite anything in particular that Obama say's he'll do to unite the country? All I see is liberal talking points. Raise taxes on the rich, cut and run in Iraq, talk to our enemies. How this unites us I don't know.
Personally I liked Obama before the wheels started coming off. Now about every week I am becoming more convinced that his crafted image does not match reality. I thought Bob Johnson had a good point. If Obama were white and named Jerry Smith, would he as a Freshman Senator with three years experience in the Senate and nothing to really show for it, be a serious contender for the White House? I think not.
AA,
It isn't so much about what he says in specifics, re; policy, etc. It's more of a atypical politician appealing to our better side and our yearning to stop all this bickering and Fox News-ification of our politics, the gotchas, the nasty rhetoric that has poisoned our process so that nothing is accomplished beyond entrenched political polarizing us vs. you mentality.
I'm sick of it, it solves nothing and gets us nothing but I'm right, you're wrong, I'm good, you're bad, I'm this, you're that. Much of it is the Rove-style divisiveness that has been employed in recent campaigns, look at the Clinton years for starters, everybody hated their opponents then, Dems and Reps.....it was ruin them and bring 'em down, all for political sport and game.
Maybe I am naive, maybe I am hoping for more than what can ever be, but I am willing to give it a try, as of this writing. The same ole Clinton/Bush and possibly McCain, not sure yet, hasn't worked too well lately.
"All I see is liberal talking points. Raise taxes on the rich, cut and run in Iraq, talk to our enemies." (AA)
OK, AA, I know you got a little upset with my responses to you, re: your plagiarizing, and I'm really making an effort to just resist pointing out your silliness, but...
To refer to those little ass-backwards Hannity-bombs as liberal talking points? Come on, quit throwing meatballs out there ! ;0)
Regarding the lapel pin, he didn't simply change his mind. He was handed the pin by a disabled veteran he met with earlier in the day who asked him to wear it. He honored the man's request.
From the moment he was handed the pin his critics had a smear tool regardless of what he did. As we can see, a bunch of idiots are finding something to criticize in his decision to wear it. If he had chosen not to it would have been portrayed as a slap in the face of that veteran and all veterans. I don't know if Obama thought about those opposing options or not. It doesn't really matter. He honored the man's request and it has no deeper meaning than that.
Watch it, Bill. Right in the middle of your well reasoned post that explained this whole non-issue and pointed out how "free-pass" Obama is having another minor league swift-boating aimed at him, you(justifiably) used the word "idiots".
This negates your entire comment and qualifies you for a scolding about avoiding the issues and resorting to insults.At least that's how it usually goes.
Bill,
I'm glad he honored the vet by wearing it. Whether we like it or not, that lapel pin is a symbol of patriotism and respect for our country. And symbols mean a lot. If Obama was sensitive enough to wear the pin for the veteran, why is he not sensitive enough to wear it for all veterans as a symbol of his patriotism?
Obama spoke volumes by taking the pin off. That too was symbolic. Obama is free to do as he chooses, and for the reasons he chooses. All I know is that many Americans took his pin removal as un-American. (You are free to disagree.)
I fiind it rather ironic, as I said before, that Obama wraps himself in the flag in just about every ad or news conference I've seen since the Wright scandal broke out. I have to laugh at all the flags that are lined up behind him when he speaks. I think I saw about 20 of them on the dias behind Obama in a recent newscast.
Symbolism is not absolute. Different people can seem to be looking at the same thing, yet are perceiving them differently. In the run-up to the invasion of Iraq he began to perceive the lapel pins as having shifted in meaning. He explained it very well himself. I've seen no reason to not take his word for it. I've certainly never seen him display any lack of patriotism. For you, or anyone, to disregard what he says and apply your own entirely subjective interpretation to it is unjustified. And, frankly, I don't think he's been displaying any more flags at his campaign events than any other candidates have.
Most people go around in their daily lives without an overt symbol that might or might not be perceived as representing patriotism. It's arrogant and condescending to tell those people that doing so shows a lack of patriotism.
But Mrs. McCain makes a great ahi tuna salad, straight from the Food Network.....too funny.
Good points Chris, as always.
Achris,
Obama's made $991,296 in 2006 and $1.7 million in 2005. I doubt that will land them in the middle class.
Snoop,
I have the numbers for 2002. He earned $259,394. I am not sure if that is combined income or separate. In either case, it is hardly middle class. The following is from the Chicago Tribune which was chronicling Obama's lack of charitable giving.
In 2002, the year before Obama launched his campaign for U.S. Senate, the Obamas reported income of $259,394, ranking them in the top 2 percent of U.S. households, according to Census Bureau statistics. That year the Obamas claimed $1,050 in deductions for gifts to charity, or 0.4 percent of their income. The average U.S. household totaled $1,872 in gifts to charity in 2002, according to the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-0704250022apr25,1,1209388.story
Snoop,
I think you missed the point completely or are trying to move the conversation. Where they live is not the issue. The point isn't what they made six years ago. The point is that they are now raking in around a million a year.
Hey, I have no problem with that. Good for them!
But getting back to the discussion, it does put them in with the wealthiest wage earners in America. I do believe the top 1% earn over $345,000 per year. I would guess the Obama's are in the top half of the top 1% of wage earners. Even that $200,000 six years ago put them in the upper 3% of wage earners. Hardly middle class if you ask me.
AA,
The point is that, whether you like it or not, the real elitist are Hillary and McCain. You should really understand that in the past twenty years both of them have lived off your dime. Neither have any inkling of what it is like to engage in the day to day activities most of us do. They vacation at Martha's Vinyard, have drivers, cooks, etc and they tell us daily that they are the ones who know what it is like to be middle class. While you point out the past two years of Obama's income you fail to realize that in the past twenty years he has lived an existence much closer to the small town voters than either of the other two or any GOP candidate since who knows when. He is the closest thing going to a citizen candidate there is. To me, that means a hell of a lot. To attempt to portray him as elitist is bull$h!t and you should know it. You are smart enough to know better than to simply fall for the analysis of those who won't vote for him in any event.
Achris,
Obama's elitism, IMHO, is not based on his income. However his income does show him to be in the top 1-2% of wage earners in the country at this point. I understand he didn't always make that. He also attended Princeton and Columbia, I do believe. These institutions are commonly referred to as 'elite', wouldn't you agree?
Having said that, Obama's the charge of elitism is based on what he said. He expressed a common attitude of the liberal 'elites' that small town America is full of bitter out of work people who turn to God, guns, and bigotry as a way of dealing with their joblessness. He used that rationale as the reason why he wasn't doing better in Pennsylvania. It is an elitist and condescending view of a great number of Americans.
Obama is way out of touch and he is trying to make the best out of it by saying he phrased it poorly. I think that is laughable. Go ahead and believe his apology. I don't buy it.
Snoop,
I noticed your link was to a Huffington Post opinion piece. I also noticed the one statistic that was from Newsweek cited 54% of likely voters in Pennsylvainia saw themselves as bitter. I could not find the original poll. Can you?
After reading the statistic, I wondered of what percentage of those Pennsylvanians were from small towns? Could not the poll include Obama supporters in the big cities who might be inclined to describe themselves as bitter in order to support Obama?
Curious minds want to know. :-)
>>Anothercitizenofthecountrytheleftsaysisthescourgeoftheearth,
Nah, the Republicans are the scourge of the earth. But fortunately you'll most likely be less than 50% this time around.
Yes ABC omitted Obama's response - because though many words came from his mouth he didn;' say anything. I'm beginning to realize something - Nobody says Nothing as well as Obama!
Demsarealsoupacertaincreekwithoutapaddle,
I call it, the Audacity of Dopes.
I believe the right-winger response can be summed up by this analogy:
Civil discourse : most right-wing loonies
as
Dog whistle : most humans
Civil discourse : most right-wing loonies
as
Dog whistle : most humans
That seems about right , Kyle. If they don't understand it, there must be nothing there. Reminds me of a roommate I had when I was younger who really liked movies with lots of car crashes. Occasionally he'd see a great film that was mostly dialogue, and be really disappointed that "nothing happened".
McCain's comments were not addressed at Obama, they were addressed to the people Obama insulted. Obama responded by going after McCain and the party. He said NOTHIG in relation to the story.
Nobody says Nothing like Obama - though you're getting pretty good at it too.
MMFA's headline & summery are misleading. McCain did not take a swipe at Obama, but rather he commented on what Obama had said by giving his own opinion on the subject matter. He did not attack Obama nor the Democratic party. I suppose if you want to interpret that as going after Obama personally you could possibly make the case, but I think it would be a weak one. Here's what McCain said:
Now, before I take your questions, I would like to respond briefly to the comments one of my opponents made the other day about the psychology and political mindset of Americans living in small towns and other areas that have experienced the loss of industrial jobs.
During the Great Depression, with many millions of Americans out of work and the country suffering the worst economic crisis in our history, there rose from small towns, rural communities, inner cities, a generation of Americans who fought to save the world from despotism and mass murder, and came home to build the wealthiest, strongest and most generous nation on earth. They were not born with the advantages others in our country enjoyed. They suffered the worst during the Depression. But it had not shaken their faith in and fidelity to America and its founding political ideals. Nor had it destroyed their confidence that America and their own lives could be made better. Nor did they turn to their religious faith and cultural traditions out of resentment and a feeling of powerlessness to affect the course of government or pursue prosperity. On the contrary, their faith had given generations of their families purpose and meaning, as it does today. And their appreciation of traditions like hunting was based in nothing other than their contribution to the enjoyment of life.
I personally think McCain, like many others, have misunderstood what Obama said, or was attempting to say. But to say McCain took a swipe at Obama or that Obama addressed what McCain had to say is a stretch.
Jeter - there have been too many "misunderstandings" of BO lately. Apparently when he goes off his stump speech he gets a horrible case of "Foot-in-mouth" disease. Away from a teleprompter this guy is a disaster. He had my attention for awhile - but now that he's on center stage I realize he's no better than the rest of the political whores in DC.
Nobody says Nothing like Obama
Keep digging the hole deeper Obama. You'd be better off if you kept your mouth shut.
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time."
Abraham Lincoln