Matthews did not challenge Republican strategist's false claim that "it was Senator McCain who called for Don Rumsfeld to be sacked"
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 Hardball, Todd Harris falsely claimed that "it was Senator [John] McCain who called for Don Rumsfeld to be sacked." Chris Matthews responded: "Right." But a McCain spokesman reportedly acknowledged that McCain "did not call for his resignation."
On the June 12 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, when Republican strategist Todd Harris falsely claimed that "it was Senator [John] McCain who called for [former Secretary of Defense] Don Rumsfeld to be sacked," host Chris Matthews responded, "Right." Harris went on to assert: "In all -- in my party, a lot of people said, 'How dare he come out and say Don Rumsfeld needs to go?' " In fact, as Media Matters for America has repeatedly documented, McCain did not call for Rumsfeld's resignation. While McCain expressed "no confidence" in Rumsfeld in 2004, the Associated Press reported at the time that McCain "said his comments were not a call for Rumsfeld's resignation." Further, when Fox News host Shepard Smith specifically asked McCain, "Does Donald Rumsfeld need to step down?" on November 8, 2006 -- hours before President Bush announced Rumsfeld's resignation -- McCain responded that it was "a decision to be made by the president." On March 27, MSNBC chief Washington correspondent Norah O'Donnell issued a "clarification" on MSNBC Live after she falsely claimed McCain "called for Don Rumsfeld's resignation."
The Washington Post reported in a February 9 article that McCain "regularly reminds audiences that he also criticized Bush's management of the war and called for Donald H. Rumsfeld's resignation as defense secretary." After Media Matters noted the article's failure to report that McCain's repeated assertions that he had called for Rumsfeld's resignation were false, the Post published a February 16 article reporting that McCain "overstate[d] his public position on Rumsfeld" and that he had never called for him to resign. According to the February 16 article: "[D]uring a debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif., aired on CNN, McCain said, 'I'm the only one that said that Rumsfeld had to go.' A McCain spokesman acknowledged this week that that was not correct. 'He did not call for his resignation,' said the campaign's Brian Rogers. 'He always said that's the president's prerogative.' " The February 16 Post article also noted that "McCain's false account has been unwittingly incorporated into the narrative he is selling by some news organizations, including The Washington Post."
From the June 12 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews:
MATTHEWS: But on the biggest issue people care about, the war on Iraq, he will continue it. And the biggest issue --
HARRIS: No, the biggest issue --
MATTHEWS: -- people care about at home is the economy, and he'll keep the Bush fiscal policy, won't he?
HARRIS: Well, if you mean is he going to keep taxes low, yes. Absolutely. He's going to keep taxes low.
MATTHEWS: No, he's going to keep the Bush tax cuts.
HARRIS: On the issue of Iraq --
MATTHEWS: He's going to keep us in Iraq for 100 years.
HARRIS: -- remember it was Senator McCain who called for Don Rumsfeld to be sacked --
MATTHEWS: Right.
HARRIS: -- because the war was not being executed the way that it should have been. In all -- in my party, a lot of people said, "How dare he come out and say Don Rumsfeld needs to go?" John -- John --
MATTHEWS: Do you buy the theory that it doesn't matter how long we stay there? That's what he said yesterday. Is that really true?
HARRIS: What he --
MATTHEWS: It doesn't matter how long we stay there?
I wonder what it's like to be Donald Rumsfeld and know that your performance in office is almost universally regarded as a failure across the entire political spectrum.
Or is it possible he's not aware of that fact?
The "poetry" of Donald Rumsfeld has been set to music here:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1761585
I wonder what it's like to be Donald Rumsfeld and know that your performance in office is almost universally regarded as a failure across the entire political spectrum.
Or is it possible he's not aware of that fact?
Oh, I'm sure he's aware of it. But I'm also sure that Rummy doesn't give a damn what anyone else thinks. About anything.
Republican strategist=liar
Republican = liar
Republican Strategist = PAID liar
"But while his most fervent supporters may believe that John McCain showed foresight prior to the war. The fact is that McCain didn't just support the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq. He supported its strategy and tactics for that invasion. From troop levels to Chalabi, to the coalition of the willing, McCain fully supported the Bush-Rumsfeld approach.
This shouldn't be of any surprise to anyone - except maybe the editorial page of the Washington Post. McCain was fully supportive of Rumsfeld's vision of military transformation which believed that high-tech advanced weaponry could make up for boots on the ground - therefore enabling a lighter invasion force. This warped view of military power - which completely ignored the aftermath of an invasion - was fundamental to the neocons belief that Iraq would be the first in a number of regime change wars. In fact, John McCain adopted this view during the 2000 campaign when he strongly advocated for an aggressive policy of "rogue state rollback." He also was totally on board with the concept of the coalition of the willing as he made clear during the 2000 campaign and in his repeated demeaning statements toward allies in the run-up to the war.
It is simply wrong for the press to allow John McCain to portray himself as a critic of the war from the outset. Only after everything went to hell with the Bush-Rumsfeld-McCain plan did McCain seek to disassociate himself from the Bush administration. "
What, this is about the umpteen millionth time that Media Matters (for very little) has tried to say that McCain was not a critic of the way the war was conducted? He said it was not his perogative to fire Rumsfield, but evidently, saying in had 'no confidence' in him, in 2004 into the war is not enough. Shortly after the war began,(8/03) he stated that we needed a stronger presence and now the surge is a demonstrable success.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0529/p01s01-wome.html?page=1
Well, MM(vl), we all looking forward to this very same story for the next 4 months but we of course have come to expect very little from you anyway.
PC,
Why would McCain's people lie about this? They could just say that McCain was critical about the administration of the war and not lie about McCain advocating for Rumsfeld's firing, which he didn't. I guess you're ok with lying if it helps the conservatives, eh?
Don't waste your typing muscles, Fried. PlowedCon is in the really slow group that can never seem to grasp that this site is about the media, and not about rehashing old positions of the politicians.
Either that, or he does understand it, and is just a very untalented troll who thinks there's somebody as dopey as he is here that will give him a high five.
Oh kernal,
But when will Media Matters (vl) address the ongoing falsehood that Algore continued when he spoke of Obama's voting against the war from the very start?
Last time I checked, Al Gore is not a member of the media.
"Boy, I say boy,"
But why is the media and specifically media matters (very little), investigating the perpetuation of this myth by algore?
Or where is MM(vl) on the Pelosi common sense plan to lower gas prices promised in 05?
No instead MM(vl) provides ongoing scrutiny of something on the level of junior high pining when/if McCain 'liked' Rumsfield as more than a friend?