NY Times' Zeleny uncritically repeated false charge that Clark "impugn[ed]" McCain's "heroism"
SUMMARY: The New York Times uncritically repeated the false charge that, during his June 29 appearance on CBS' Face the Nation, Wesley Clark "impugn[ed] Mr. [John] McCain's heroism." In fact, Clark praised McCain as "a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands of millions of others in the Armed Forces as a prisoner of war."
In a July 1 New York Times article, staff writer Jeff Zeleny uncritically repeated the false charge that, in June 29 comments retired Gen. Wesley Clark made about Sen. John McCain on CBS' Face the Nation, Clark "impugn[ed] Mr. McCain's heroism." Zeleny wrote: "In a conference call, a number of Mr. McCain's former colleagues in the military and former prisoners of war in Vietnam also stood by his record and assailed General Clark for impugning Mr. McCain's heroism." In fact, in comments from his Face the Nation appearance that Zeleny did not quote or otherwise mention, Clark praised McCain as "a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands of millions of others in the Armed Forces as a prisoner of war." Zeleny also wrote that Clark "diminished Senator John McCain's service as a naval aviator in Vietnam when he declared, 'I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president,' " but did not note that, in making that comment, Clark was repeating Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer's words. Indeed, Clark's comment came in response to Schieffer's statement that, unlike McCain, Sen. Barack Obama has not "ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down."
From Zeleny's July 1 Times article:
Senator Barack Obama on Monday rejected the comments from a leading Democrat and campaign military adviser who diminished Senator John McCain's service as a naval aviator in Vietnam when he declared, "I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president."
As Mr. Obama delivered a speech here on patriotism that tried to defuse attacks on his own background, he responded to the remarks of Wesley K. Clark, the retired general and onetime Democratic presidential candidate who suggested on Sunday that Mr. McCain had not been tested as a wartime commander.
[...]
"I will never question the patriotism of others in this campaign," Mr. Obama said, speaking over the applause of hundreds of supporters. "And I will not stand idly by when I hear others question mine."
Yet Mr. Obama's effort to highlight his American values, delivered in a 30-minute address before a backdrop of flags, was complicated by the comment from General Clark. The war record of Mr. McCain once seemed like an unassailable asset to his presidential bid, but General Clark's comments on the CBS News program "Face the Nation" -- that being shot down in Vietnam was not a qualification to be president -- raised the possibility that Mr. McCain's military record would face scrutiny.
[...]
As he campaigned in Pennsylvania, Mr. McCain said he thought remarks like General Clark's were "unnecessary."
In a conference call, a number of Mr. McCain's former colleagues in the military and former prisoners of war in Vietnam also stood by his record and assailed General Clark for impugning Mr. McCain's heroism.
Senator John W. Warner, Republican of Virginia, a former Navy secretary and former Armed Services Committee chairman, said he was "utterly shocked" at General Clark's comments.
Mr. Warner said it was "an exercise in poor judgment" for the Obama campaign to employ General Clark as a surrogate.
Right here:
"As he campaigned in Pennsylvania, Mr. McCain said he thought remarks like General Clark's were 'unnecessary.' "
Obviously, the liberal mainstream drive-by media included that quote only in an attempt to paint McCain as an elitist, implying that his lofty status so far above the level of the majority of citizens made him oblivious of their ignorance and the necessity of Clark's comments to clarify an elementary postulate.
Well I for one am not about to sit by passively while some unpatriotic General calls the American citizens ignorant postules...
McCain should be applauded for his humanitarian response to this situation. Despite his stereotypical republican opposition to taxes, he put aside - nay, RISKED - his personal ideology and public integrity to flip flop and pay his property taxes in full, just to keep his San Diego condo off the auction block thereby preserving the property values for the less fortunate in San Diego.
They should be grateful, but I'll bet the liberal Barack media plays this up to be a BAD thing...
My opinion on this has evolved somewhat since yesterday, although I still believe Clark's comments devalued McCain's service, I also think the media is making way too much of this. They love to manufacture controversy, and in the scheme of things, this is being way over-hyped.
However, this particular article is fair in its presentation of the facts. If you read the whole piece, particularly the little [...] left out by MMFA, the article does not warrant the "uncritical" label given it here.
It most certainly does and it does so right here:
In a conference call, a number of Mr. McCain’s former colleagues in the military and former prisoners of war in Vietnam also stood by his record and assailed General Clark for impugning Mr. McCain’s heroism.
"Senator John W. Warner, Republican of Virginia, a former Navy secretary and former Armed Services Committee chairman, said he was "utterly shocked" at General Clark's comments"
What do you this is Governor?, are you that literal that you don't think this is one of McCain's supporters doing just that, assailing Clark for impugning McCain's heroism.
This article is perfectly fair, your feelings about Clark's comments are clouding your judgments of a perfectly balanced article.
You could have had a "push" in that argument, Gov, but you got too specific. The article DID take it upon itself to forecast the reaction to Clark's statements:
...General Clark's comments on the CBS News program "Face the Nation" -- that being shot down in Vietnam was not a qualification to be president -- raised the possibility that Mr. McCain's military record would face scrutiny.
Clark's comments didn't raise that possibility - it was always there. But this was an opening for some reporter to imply that Clark started it.
The truth is that this article uncritically passes on a false meme about what Clark did yesterday. He didn't ever impugn McCain's record.
And, in fact, this author buys right into that false meme by saying
General Clark’s comments on the CBS News program “Face the Nation” — that being shot down in Vietnam was not a qualification to be president — raised the possibility that Mr. McCain’s military record would face scrutiny.
Clark was not raising scrutiny about McCain's military record. He was saying that getting shot down is not a qualification. Those who are willfully ignoring the fact that there's a huge difference between
1. raising scrutiny of his military record and
2. denying that a small portion of his military history is relevant to the job he's applying for
are ignoring reality.
This article furthers the conservative agenda by uncritically reporting that some say that his record was impugned. The conservative agenda is to deceive people about what Clark really did. This journalist helps them do that. Media Matters is right on target.
Absolutely brilliant analysis, I must say.
And I also must say that I did NOT intentionally plagiarize you in my comment above. However had I read your comment first, I would have. Shamelessly.
Clark’s argument that military service is not sufficient alone to be president is an argument that has been made by McCain himself:
Excellent post.
Well researched, referenced, and utterly damning of McCain and the pearl-clutching crybabies who are jumping on Clark.
Clark's point, even if he didn't word it very well, is perfectly valid. Military service, in and of itself, doesn't necessarily qualify someone to be president..... and lack of military service doesn't disqualify anyone, either. Seems relatively simple, to me.
Some of our best presidents never served, and some of our worst did serve.
So has any major news outlet failed to carry on about this like 80 year old spinster exposed to something erotic?
MSM's main critria for worthyness of military time served seems to be which political party they now belong to.
I agree.
I don't remember a great outrage from the press or the Republican leaders over the purple heart band-aids worn at the Republican convention.
The implication by Clark that McCain's heroism is irrelevant is so politically tone deaf that it is indeed insulting.
It reminds me of Bill Bennett's comments a while back about aborting black babies. While being factually correct, he innocently impugned blacks.
The same holds true here. His reply was innocent enough but still insulted McCain's sacrifice.
See these links for more:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200509300008
http://mediamatters.org/items/200601270001
Ok.... but AA's point that Bennett's call for racist abortions is a lot like Bob Scheffer's claim that Obama's at a disadvantage due to his failure to get shot down by a fighter plane is certainly a valid.
(wa wa huh?????)
Sort of like the media is doing with the Clack/McCain issue.
It reminds me of Bill Bennett's comments a while back about aborting black babies. While being factually correct, he innocently impugned blacks.
Anutter American
Innocently inpugned blacks? You are freakin' kidding me, right?
McCain's heroism is irrelevant
Not "irrelevant."
Just not enough, on its own, to merit him the Presidency.
That is the entirety of Clark's comments.
It's a fair point. Obama was right with his comments rejecting Clark's statement, and McCain should have accepted it and moved on. Instead cable TV gets a hold of it and milks it from every conceivable angle with every pundit they can drag in off the street to give their seasoned "analysis", and it gets a life of its own throughout the sensationalized media hypers.
Enough, on to matters that matter.
Speaking of military service and fundraising:
Largely as a result of “dissatisfaction with the course of the war under President Bush and with the treatment of veterans returning home,” Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) is collecting more in military contributions than is Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). The AP reports, “Among people who have donated at least $200 to a presidential campaign this election cycle, Obama has collected more than $327,000 from those identifying themselves as military personnel, while McCain has collected $224,000.” Even many wealthy donors who contributed to Bush in 2004 have been reluctant to donate to McCain because of his Iraq policies.
Oops!
John McCain on Tammy Duckworth:
Arizona Senator John McCain campaigned Monday for fellow Republican Peter Roskam at what was billed as a rally of veterans for Roskam. Several of the vets attending are from the same Illinois National Guard unit as Roskam foe Tammy Duckworth.
Their message is that while Duckworth deserves recognition for her service and sacrifice in Iraq, that doesn't make her qualified to serve in Congress.