CNN.com article asserted Obama may have raised issue of McCain's age without noting context or campaign's denials

SUMMARY: In an analysis, CNN.com asserted that Sen. Barack Obama "may have" launched "[t]he first salvo of the general election's age war" when he "argued in an interview ... that [Sen. John] McCain had 'lost his bearings' while pursuing the Republican nomination." But CNN.com did not provide the context of Obama's remark, which would have made clear that Obama was responding to a smear by McCain and was accusing McCain of violating his pledge to avoid negative campaigning when he made the statement.
In a June 15 CNN.com analysis titled "Age an issue in the 2008 campaign," political producer Alan Silverleib asserted: "The first salvo of the general election's age war may have been launched in May, when Sen. Barack Obama argued in an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer that [Sen. John] McCain had 'lost his bearings' while pursuing the Republican nomination." However, Silverleib did not provide the context of Obama's remark, which would have made clear that Obama was responding to a smear by McCain and was accusing him of violating his pledge to avoid negative campaigning when he made the statement. Silverleib also wrote that "[t]he McCain camp claimed that Obama's use of that phrase was 'a not particularly clever way of raising John McCain's age as an issue,' " without noting that Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton denied Obama was referring to McCain's age when he made the statement.
As Media Matters for America has documented, during Obama's interview on the May 8 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, Blitzer quoted McCain as saying, "I think it's very clear who Hamas wants to be the next president of the United States. I think that people should understand that I will be Hamas' worst nightmare. Senator Obama is favored by Hamas. I think people can make judgments accordingly." In response, Obama told Blitzer that McCain's assertion was "disappointing, because John McCain always says, well, I'm not going to run that kind of politics." Obama went on to say: "I've said that they are a terrorist organization, that we should not negotiate with them unless they recognize Israel, renounce violence, and unless they're willing to abide by previous accords between the Palestinians and the Israelis. And, so, for him to toss out comments like that, I think, is an example of him losing his bearings as he pursues this nomination. We don't need name-calling in this debate."
Additionally, Silverleib wrote that Obama campaign foreign policy adviser Susan Rice "said that McCain had demonstrated a 'pattern of confusing the basic facts and reality that pertain to Iraq' " and that Rice later "said she was simply highlighting the fact that, in her opinion, McCain has his facts wrong" [emphasis added]. However, when asked to explain what she meant by the assertion that McCain was "confused" about Iraq, Rice referred to demonstrable falsehoods by McCain, not simply "her opinion" that McCain was wrong on the facts.
Rice cited the following demonstrable falsehoods by McCain during the same conference call with reporters in which she accused McCain of being "confused" about Iraq:
- McCain's statement on "the number of forces remaining in Iraq."
As Media Matters noted, McCain's May 29 statement about the U.S. troop level in Iraq, "We have drawn down to pre-surge levels," was, in fact, false. As The Washington Post reported on May 31, contrary to McCain's assertion, "the troop level in Iraq is at about 155,000, well above the 130,000 that would mark a return to levels preceding the 'surge.' "
- McCain's "Sunni-Shia confusion"
As Media Matters noted, during an April 9 hearing, McCain asked Gen. David Petraeus: "Do you still view Al Qaeda in Iraq as a major threat?" Petraeus replied: "It is still a major threat, though it is certainly not as major a threat as it was, say, 15 months ago." McCain then asked "Certainly not an obscure sect of -- of the Shiites all -- overall --" Petraeus replied, "No," as McCain said: "or Sunnis or anybody else?" In fact, Al Qaeda in Iraq is a Sunni group, not a Shiite group.
McCain also made the admittedly false claim that "[i]t's common knowledge and has been reported in the media that Al Qaeda is going back into Iran and is receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran." McCain made the misstatement twice during a press conference on March 18 and also the previous day while being interviewed by radio host Hugh Hewitt. U.S. officials have reportedly claimed Iran is training Shiite militants; Al Qaeda is predominantly a Sunni organization.
From the June 15 CNN.com analysis:
Is Sen. John McCain too old to be president?
Listen to some Democrats, and you'll think the 71-year-old Arizona senator is a man lost in a perpetual fog. He is "confused" and has "lost his bearings" or is "out of touch."
Listen to the McCain campaign, and you'll be convinced that Democrats are using those terms to exploit concerns that the presumptive Republican nominee is too old to effectively serve as president.
For his part, McCain tends to answer questions about his age with quips such as, "I'm older than dirt and have more scars than Frankenstein, but I've learned a few things along the way."
The first salvo of the general election's age war may have been launched in May, when Sen. Barack Obama argued in an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer that McCain had "lost his bearings" while pursuing the Republican nomination.
The McCain camp claimed that Obama's use of that phrase was "a not particularly clever way of raising John McCain's age as an issue."
Last Wednesday, the issue reemerged when McCain appeared on NBC's "Today" Show and argued, as he has before, that "it's not important" when troops return from Iraq as long as casualties are held to a minimum.
Sen. John Kerry, an Obama supporter, said in a hastily arranged conference call that McCain is "unbelievably out of touch" and that it "is really becoming more crystal clear ... that John McCain simply doesn't understand [the conflict]. He confuses who Iran is training, he confuses what the makeup of al Qaeda is, [and] he confuses the history ... of what has happened between Sunni and Shia."
Susan Rice, one of Obama's top foreign policy advisers, said that McCain had demonstrated a "pattern of confusing the basic facts and reality that pertain to Iraq."
When asked if he was trying to highlight the age issue through his choice of words, Kerry said it was "unfair" and "ridiculous" to make such an assertion. Rice said she was simply highlighting the fact that, in her opinion, McCain has his facts wrong.
For its part, the McCain camp says Obama is the one who is confused.
"Clearly their use of the word 'confusion' had more to do with Barack Obama's complete inability to make sense of his failure to go to Iraq in over 870 days and have a one-on-one meeting with Gen. Petraeus while portraying himself as being informed on the topic," said McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds.
Whether or not the Democrats are playing word games, it is abundantly clear that, for many voters, McCain's age is a real concern.
Roughly one-third of respondents in most recent national polls say that McCain's age could impede his ability to effectively govern the nation.
These percentages are in line with historical trends. Approximately one-third of voters expressed similar concerns about Bob Dole's age in 1996 and Ronald Reagan's age in 1984. (Dole was 73 years old in 1996. Reagan was 73 in 1984.)
From the Obama campaign's June 11 conference call:
LEWIS: Yeah, Finlay Lewis of the Copley News Service. I noticed that the word "confused" or "confusion" was woven throughout the early comments you spoke in your statement, and I'm just wondering if that's somehow a code word for suggesting that Senator McCain is just simply too old to understand these things.
RICE: This is Susan Rice. I think I was among those who used the word --
LEWIS: Yes, you were.
RICE: -- "confused." And what I meant by that was very simple: that on critical, factual questions that are fundamental to understanding what is going on in Iraq and the region, Senator McCain has gotten it wrong -- and not just once, but often repeatedly. He's often argued with journalists who've tried to point out that perhaps he had his initial statement wrong, for example, on the number of forces remaining in Iraq, or in another instance about whether the supreme leader was in fact the supreme leader in Iran. And, you know, rather than note a -- note a mistake and move on, he's pressed the point, indicating that this wasn't simply a misstatement, but rather a misunderstanding. Same with the Sunni-Shia confusion.
I'm not ascribing it to any particular function. I have -- I'm completely unable to do so. I'm simply pointing out what is a pattern that is notable. And to just add one more element to the bill of particulars: As Senator Kerry pointed out that on this question of whether a Germany- or South Korea-style deployment was desirable that, indeed, Senator McCain took a very different position several months back, and indeed, on more than one occasion, that that sort of long-term deployment would inflame sentiment in Iraq and the region that would be counterproductive. And then, when people pointed out his comment that he would be willing to have an American military presence in Iraq for as long as a hundred years, he took great umbrage and referred back to the Korea-, Germany-style deployment, which of course is a very long-term one.
And then in a speech -- his sort of "I have a dream about how the world will be great and America will be great by the end of my first term" -- he threw out 2013 as the date by which he expected American forces to be out of Iraq. And today, he says he has no idea when American forces will be out of Iraq, and that that's not important. So there's a -- there's quite a different -- quite a great deal of landscape that he's covered in the course of his comments on the region, and they do beg the question of whether he has a firm grasp of the issues and an understanding of the complexities at stake.















Huh?
Snoop what are you talking about?
Yeah, take it easy on him.
Oh darlin Julia I ain't that old.
Like my buddy Toby Keith sings:
I ain't as good as I once was
I got a few years on me now
But there was a time, back in my prime
When I could really lay it down
Then I might have just enough
I ain't as good as I once was
But I'm as good once as I ever was ;-)
Jeter, my sweet, you're still laying it down pretty well. The BS that is :-0) (see the smiley face). I just couldn't resist needling you on that "losing his bearings" argument that you lost but thought you'd won. But now you know better, or should :-0) See smiley face again.
Julia my darlin,
Of course when one says someone is "losing their bearings" it doesn't necessarily mean he's "old" & losing it. BUT we know how certain "code" words/remarks works in politics. I still think Obama was giving McCain a dig about his age. You of course can believe otherwise. I still think I'm correct...but you know that ;-)
Well my sweet Julia me thinks you're being a tad stubborn yourself ;-)
Bottom line: neither of us can say with absolute certainty what Obama may or may not have meant. Just because he or his surrogates are claiming he wasn't giving a "dig" about McCain's age doesn't mean they aren't fibbing. Do you believe everything a politician tells you? Do you really believe they'd come out & admit it? I think it was a veiled "dig" about an older man. You don't. Let's just leave it as we both have analyzed this differently.
Good night darlin :-)
Word comprehension has nothing to do with if I beleive a politician is lying to me or not. Perhaps you have become too cynical about word useage since the Bush admin. and their cronies have made word meanings irrevelant. In context, Obama's meaning is very clear.
Oh, and don't let vanity preclude you from stating your age. I already know you're probably old enough to be my daddy :-0).....:-0)
Oh, and don't let vanity preclude you from stating your age. I already know you're probably old enough to be my daddy :-0).....:-
Ouch!
Well let me put it this way Julia [I'll hold off the darlin sweetie stuff for now] IF you're under 30 I could very well be old enough to be your Daddy since my oldest son [I have 3] will be turning 27 in July & my daughter-in-law just turned 26...
Granted I married young [right out of college] & became a father at an early age, but if you're under 30 I'm gonna have to end our um... sexy cyber flirting. It's just too icky for me to think about. Sorry :-/
I'm guessing you are about 55. You are probably just old enough to be my teenage babysitter :-0) Anyway, since I've been married for 17 years, it's not likely that I'm under 30.
But since you've threatened me with no flirting I'll back off requests for your age :-0)
Hey sweet Julia :-)
No need to back off...that was ONLY if you were under 30. It just would have been toooooo weird :-O
I'll be 53 on my next birthday. Do you remember the date?
This is a test of our cyber bond ;-)
October 10th my sweet. Do you remember mine my libidinous Libran pal?
Close but no cigar...Try again.
Of course this now gives me the excuse to blow it too--but I have a good reason-- you know how us old guys lose our bearings from time to time ;-)
I'd say yours is September 26th..27th or 28th. Am I in the ballpark??
September 30th. It's easy to remember since it's the last day of September. Yours must be the 9th or 11th? (And I was so sure I was right about yours).
Does that mean we're finished :-(
Sept 30th. Got it. I promise not to forget again :-)
Mine is Oct 12th Columbus Day...just remind yourself I'm Italian & you'll never forget again :-)
Through? Us? Never darlin!!!!
Whew!!! I thought I'd blown it :-0)
I will still argue with you to keep the "tension" just the same.
Oh ok Snoop. Since I hadn't even posted anything yet on this thread I wasn't sure, though I figured it might be something like that.
I still think Buchanan meant foreign or un-American. Others when referring to Obama as "different" probably do mean Black.
Truly, right now while the iron is hot, Mr. Obama should pound the anvil again, loudly:
"Unfortunately my Fellow Americans, Mr. McCain just doesn't see this issue (any issue, IRAQ especially) the way you see it... our friend from Arizona has lost his bearings, my Fellow Americans: John McCain has lost and continues to lose, his bearings"
It's the perfect thing to do right now: the media and the McCain campaign will squawk like chickens, and howl like an old mutt... they'll mention how old their candidate is: they'll squawk about the man's advanced years, again and again... and every time they do, and every opportunity that anyone in the Obama campaign can be asked about it, they'll respond:
"That's not at all what Mr. Obama meant when he said John McCain has lost his bearings: what he meant was that Mr. McCain has lost his way, and has wandered far from the American People, on many issues, most notably IRAQ... and also that he is violating his pledge to avoid negative campaigning: that's what Mr. Obama meant, when he said that John McCain has lost his bearings"
...and then the idiots on the McCain side will continue to squawk, and come back again that it's a reference to their man's old age: inviting anyone in the Obama campaign to again explain what was meant by the observation that John McCain has lost his bearings, to again explain the real context of the comment...
...and it could go back and forth like that for who knows how long, weeks maybe, I could only hope...
Leaving everyone listening to the back and forth, certain of one thing at least:
That John McCain has lost his bearings, as Mr. Obama has said, and that his campaign has explained again and again, at every opportunity... at every opportunity the McCain campaign has required them to repeat what is meant, by John McCain losing his bearings.
That's the truth that everyone will come away with from such an exchange: John McCain has lost his bearings... because it's true: he has.
And oh yeah, whoever follows these things can't help but also come away with an impression of how old the Republican candidate is, because that candidate's campaign will have taken every opportunity, needlessly and foolishly, to remind them.
I wonder if CNN's motives in attacking Obama here and in Rick Sanchez's inappropriate comments on Obama's Father's Day speech are caused by the fear that McCain's stumbling will make this less of a horse race and CNN could be losing a lot of advertising revenue in a one-sided contest.
I don't care how much McCain stumbles, this WILL BE a close race, no matter what. Media Pundits aside, this country is still divided along bitter, partisan lines and the race issue will (sadly) probably trump any benefit the Democrats might otehrwise get due to the declining popularity of Republicans. Don't get me wrong - I like Senator Obama. I hope he wins, and I think he will. But I also think that it will be closer than most people imagine, and (agains, sadly) race is the reason. No one is racist when they're talking to people on the phone, or when there opinions are visible and fairly public. But we'll see where most of America REALLY is with ragards to race when their votes are cast PRIVATELY.
That being said: If McCain WINS in a CLOSE race, I won't blame racism. Because while a white candidate may get more of the (racially challeneged) white vote, that could be largely offset by changes in black voter turnout. But if McCain wins BIG, in a LANDSLIDE - then you KNOW it's widespread racism. No other reason, short of a youtube video of Sen Obama eating a live baby, would explain that outcome.
That being said: If McCain WINS in a CLOSE race, I won't blame racism. Because while a white candidate may get more of the (racially challeneged) white vote, that could be largely offset by changes in black voter turnout. -NiceGuyEddie.
Loved Reservoir Dogs by the way.
I have to respectfully disagree. African-Americans make up about 16 percent of the population. If you believe only 16 percent of the white population is voting based on race, check Pennsylvania, Ohio and a lot of southern states.