Andrea Mitchell falsely suggested that MoveOn.org/AFSCME ad attacked McCain's military service
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: In an interview with Gen. Wesley Clark, Andrea Mitchell stated that "there's a whole issue of whether there is an organized campaign against John McCain's military service, which ... Barack Obama can stand above and say, 'I honor his service.' " Clark responded: "Absolutely not." Mitchell then said: "Take a look at the MoveOn.org ad, the MoveOn.org ad with AFSCME, which has been airing quite widely." But, as Clark stated, the ad "doesn't say anything about [McCain's] military career."
On the July 1 edition of MSNBC Live, while interviewing retired Gen. Wesley Clark, NBC News chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell falsely suggested that an advertisement by MoveOn.org and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) was part of a supposed "organized campaign against John McCain's military service." Mitchell stated that "there's a whole issue of whether there is an organized campaign against John McCain's military service, which ... [Sen.] Barack Obama can stand above and say, 'I honor his service.' " Clark responded: "Absolutely not." Mitchell then said: "Take a look at the MoveOn.org ad, the MoveOn.org ad with AFSCME, which has been airing quite widely," and played the MoveOn.org/AFSCME ad.
In fact, as Clark stated in response to Mitchell, the ad "doesn't say anything about [McCain's] military career."
From the 1 p.m. ET hour of the July 1 edition of MSNBC Live:
MITCHELL: Well, let me -- let me point out what some of the critics from the Republican side have pointed out, that there seems to be an organized campaign and, whether or not you played into this -- that also on Sunday a liberal blogger, John Aravosis, on AmericaBlog.com wrote: "Honestly, besides being tortured, what did McCain do to excel in the military?" That was the title of the blog. Down in the blog, he said, "Getting shot down, tortured and then doing propaganda for the enemy is not command experience."
Now, first of all, there's a factual issue there because no one has proved to my satisfaction that John McCain ever did any propaganda for the enemy. To the contrary, he resisted all efforts to use him as a tool, with his father being the admiral in charge of the fleet and refusing to let himself be --
CLARK: Mm-hmm.
MITCHELL: -- released and become, you know, a tool --
CLARK: Yeah.
MITCHELL: -- of the North Vietnamese at the time. That said, there has been an argument --
CLARK: I agree. He was a very honorable prisoner of war.
MITCHELL: He was an extraordinary man, and he showed a great deal of courage and has --
CLARK: Absolutely.
MITCHELL: -- had a career since he was a prisoner of war, which he can be judged on, his Senate career.
CLARK: Right.
MITCHELL: But there's a whole issue of whether there is an organized campaign against John McCain's military service, which --
CLARK: No.
MITCHELL: -- Barack Obama can stand above and say, "I honor his service."
CLARK: Absolutely not.
MITCHELL: Take a look at the MoveOn.org ad, the MoveOn.org ad with AFSCME, which has been airing quite widely. Let's play that.
UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN [video clip]: Hi, John McCain. This is Alex, and he's my first. So far, his talents include trying any new food and chasing after our dog. That, and making my heart pound every time I look at him. So, John McCain, when you say you would stay in Iraq for 100 years, were you counting on Alex? Because, if you were, you can't have him.
MITCHELL: Now, I know that John McCain said that --
CLARK: Well, Andrea, that doesn't say anything about his military career, that has something to do about John McCain's judgment, and I think that's a very legitimate issue, but there -- look, what I said had nothing to do with the Barack Obama campaign. I've been saying those things for months. I simply answered a direct question from the interviewer. And the clip you showed me is really about judgment, and I think that is a very important issue in this campaign.
Is Andrea Mitchell that stupid
Yes. And don't forget who she snuggles with every night.
Ewwww, please, I just ate
"Is Andrea Mitchell that stupid..."
Yes, and Andrea Mitchell is also a lying right wing conservative Republican, and Mitchell wants Liar McCain to be elected president, as does her GOP-GE-NBC bosses, as does her husband Alan Greenspan.
that is a well done ad directly aimed at McCain's desire to be in Iraq for a hundred years. Andrea Mitchell's attempt at creating something that isn't there is childish. That ad is very well done and for someone not to understand it, and who is being presented as " Chief Foreign Affairs " correspondent is an affront to journalism.
Dead on, Oscar.
This whole thing about soundbite campaigning has gone beyond silly...to dangerous. McCain's comment was clearly distorted by MoveOn.
On the other hand, it's no different than the conservatives lampooning Gen.Clark over his comment. They have also clearly distorted his words. He praised McCain's military service and then made his statement in direct response to Schiefer raising the question.
These pathetic media shills deserve a reservation at that lovely spa inhabited by McMurphy...hosted by the lovely nurse Ratched.
I feel it's legitimate to examine his comments since he made the comparison between the situation in Iraq and post WWII Europe. After the surrender of Germany and Japan, hostilities ceased. Very few Americans were in harms way.
Hostilities won't cease as long as we stay in Iraq. They will not cease when we leave Iraq. McCain's support for the war and his accusations of the Democrats as having a surrender mentality only fuel the hostilities and help recruitment for the other side.
McCain should explain his comments if he doesn't want them mis-interpreted. How will we be able to stay and not have American personnel used as targets?
His view that we should stay as long as Americans are not injured and killed requires a lengthy explanation. It reminds me of Nixon's proposed plan to bring peace to SE Asia in 1968. The plan he eventually put into place cost the lives of more than 20,000 Americans.
We need specifics. The past week has shown that the nation's wounds from the War in Vietnam have never healed. One of the reasons is that we were never given specifics. No obvious plan, no obvious goal, no obvious tactics. The governments secrecy and the street theater aspects of the anti-war movement did nothing to bring the nation together then.
There needs to be an open dialog between the factions. There needs to be less of the "with us or against us" talk. There needs to be NO questioning of anyone's Military service unless the questions are asked by those who serve with the person whose conduct is being questioned.
We need to hold everyone's feet to the fire on this, Republican, Democratic or Independent.
McCain's comment was clearly distorted by MoveOn.
Even if that were the case (I don't personally agree), it's a far cry from attacking his military service record.
This "organized campaign against John McCain's military service," as Mitchell put it, simply doesn't exist and never has.
Dishonest is dishonest...rotten is rotten...no I don't see a huge difference.
I can't excuse the distortion by MoveOn just because "we all know" they have a partisan agenda. Their is no place for this behavior on supposed straight news shows or opinion shows.
They are all guilty as charged...and I find it disgusting.
But there are still two huge differences: Moveon.org does not have a television station much less the five or so that have been spreading the distortions about Clark. I don't excuse Moveon, but to say that both are the same underestimates the impact and reach that the networks have that Moveon doesn't.
MoveOn doesn't need to own a television station...they run the ad all over the networks...maybe even the same five you're talking about.
Until you know the demographics and reach, you're argument is moot. It's an opinion, but a moot argument never the less on that point.
As to the point about using this tactic...I guess we agree that it's scurrilous.
Wesley,
I think its a pretty fair guess to say that the newscasts reach more people than a moveon.org ad. I would also guess that most people view news shows as more impartial than moveon.org.
Suit yourself if you want to try to determine degrees of guilt. Those who have distorted McCain's statement and those who have distorted Clark's statement are guilty of dishonest politics.
A bank robber is a bank robber...makes no difference if the bank robbed is a small country bank or a big metro bank...when they're caught they're charged with bank robbery.
The difference is, to use your bank robber analogy, that one of the robbers was a career criminal (Moveon, a partisan group expected to take one side) and the other was a group of police officers (the media, charged with being impartial and bringing us facts and analysis, not propaganda).
Allow me to throw in another analogy to show how McCain's 100 years comment is worthy of ridicule: it is if he said that he will continue to use heroin for the next 100 years as long as it is not addictive or physically damaging. We all know it never will be, making his comment either disingenuous or asinine or both.
MITCHELL: But there's a whole issue of whether there is an organized campaign against John McCain's military service, which --
CLARK: No.
MITCHELL: -- Barack Obama can stand above and say, "I honor his service."
CLARK: Absolutely not.
MITCHELL: Take a look at the MoveOn.org ad, the MoveOn.org ad with AFSCME, which has been airing quite widely. Let's play that.
What a liar she is.
This is pretty sad...
ROSE: Do you think that this — Korea, South Korea is an analogy of where Iraq might be, not in terms of their economic success but in terms of an American presence over the next, say, 20, 25 years, that we will have a significant amount of troops there?
MCCAIN: I don’t think so.
ROSE: Even if there are no casualties?
MCCAIN: No. But I can see an American presence for a while. But eventually I think because of the nature of the society in Iraq and the religious aspects of it that America eventually withdraws.
I actually agreed with McCain's previous stance; the underlined statement gives the precise reason as to why the U.S. cannot maintain a stable long-term presence in that area.
And finally, he switches back:
We’ve been in South Korea … we’ve been in Japan for 60 years. We’ve been in South Korea 50 years or so. That would be fine with me. As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. That’s fine with me...
Worse yet is that he offers no clear explanation as to why his position has changed.
I don't think it's a question of not forgetting -- more of not caring.
http://www.amazon.com/Bullshit-Harry-G-Frankfurt/dp/0691122946/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1215058427&sr=1-1
He says what works in the situation. Despite his service, he's the quintessential pol.
They Don't Report News; They Create It
This is day 5 with this issue. Why is it getting this much press? It is obvious; the people at MSNBC are doing what they do all the time: Lying.
Yesterday, it was Dave Abrams. Over and over, he kept emphasizing the real "hurtful" comments was when Wesley Clark said “John McCain's war experience does not qualify him to be president." After 4 news cycles, this is still being put before would be voters. There are two very important dynamics being played here:
1. At this point, this is being advanced by MSNBC; it is not reporting news. It is clearly an attempt to create negative talking points to hurt Barack Obama.
2. And this is the most important point of the two. Recall Hillary Clinton ran into funding problems. In actuality, she raised record amounts of funding; still, she came up short. The reason Clinton ran short of money is because she could not out spend the endless amount of money the right-wing media has. When Obama has to spend money and time countering issues being advanced by the media, he too will come up short -- just like Clinton.
My second point brings home a much unseen unfair dynamic. The media is actively trying to force one candidate to spend money to counter their claims. It is their goal to get Obama to spend more money then he has risen. How far should the media be allowed to go?
The issue and point the right is trying to make has poor logic. It is obvious to me someone saying a war experience does not qualify you for president is not an attack. MSNBC knows this.
At this point, the media must be confronted by this dynamic and asked if their involvement have true "reporting" intentions. They must be asked why is this an issue and why are they making it one.
Joseph
Excellent points. Thanks.
MITCHELL: But there's a whole issue of whether there is an organized campaign against John McCain's military service, which --
Andrea, pay attention! An organized campaign against a presidential candidates military service happened in 2004. Have you forgotten Republicans Bob J. Perry, Weymouth D. Symmes, Bill Lannom, Robert A. Hahn, Alvin A. "Andy" Horne, Tom Wyld, Harlan Crow & family. John O'Neil and don't leave out Merrie Spaeth. You want to talk about "organized campaign", check with John Kerry, he can tell you all about it.
General Clark said what others, including McCain himself have said, military service is not a requirement for President. Clark just further explained that flying a fighter jet and getting shot down doesn't earn you "extra credit".
I think that what's worse than her claiming that the ad besmirches McCain's military service is her claim that there is a collaborative effort to talk down about his military service.
She says "MITCHELL: Well, let me -- let me point out what some of the critics from the Republican side have pointed out, that there seems to be an organized campaign..."
There's no evidence of that, though. Just like Pearlene says, he should not get "extra credit" for being a POW when he is being evaluated for the job of President. It happened to him, and it sucked out loud, but it wasn't something he did or he accomplished that demonstrates his fitness for the job. You don't 'earn' the presidency on a sympathy vote because a crappy thing happened to you 40 years ago.
This is a fine example of her presenting this like a "he said, she said" argument. She's falling down on the job when she does that. If she were to say that the Republicans say that there's an organized campaign to take a swipe at McCain's service, but there's no evidence of that, then's it okay to mention it with that qualifier. Anyone in the media who mentions that the Republicans are claiming a conspiracy to smear McCain has to say two additional things or they're furthering the conservative agenda. They have to say that there's no evidence of a campaign. They also have to say that what has been said hasn't been a swipe at his service. It's been legitimate people saying that his POW status isn't a qualification.
When she didn't do that, she forwarded the conservative agenda.
And let's not forget the latest member of Team McCain, Bud Gay. Not to mention all those purple heart Band-Aids at the Repub National Convention. And exactly what was the MSM doing with all that? Questioning Rove?
But I guess to the MSM only libs can besmirch a soldier. Even when they don't.
Mitchell baselessly attacked John Aravosis for saying that McCain provided propaganda to the enemy:
"Now, first of all, there's a factual issue there because no one has proved to my satisfaction that John McCain ever did any propaganda for the enemy. To the contrary, he resisted all efforts to use him as a tool..."
Here is what MCain himself wrote in U.S. News & World Report:
"I held out for four days. Finally, I reached the lowest point of my 5½ years in North Vietnam. I was at the point of suicide, because I saw that I was reaching the end of my rope.
I said, O.K., I'll write for them.
They took me up into one of the interrogation rooms, and for the next 12 hours we wrote and rewrote. The North Vietnamese interrogator, who was pretty stupid, wrote the final confession, and I signed it. It was in their language, and spoke about black crimes, and other generalities. It was unacceptable to them. But I felt just terrible about it. I kept saying to myself, "Oh, God, I really didn't have any choice." I had learned what we all learned over there: Every man has his breaking point. I had reached mine."
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/2008/01/28/john-mccain-prisoner-of-war-a-first-person-account.html?PageNr=8
When that ad with the baby first came out, I heard some right wing pundits on TV exclaiming how 'over the top' it was. huh? They failed to explain why it was 'over the top' in their opinion.
I think it is adorable and felt exactly the same way about my son who was draft age when the bombs first started falling on Iraq.
NBC NIGHTLY NEWS CONTINUES TO BACK MCCAIN
Here are a couple of posts I submitted to their blog, The Daily Nightly:
#1
NBC spent another night doing John McCain's dirty work for him. First, they did a hit piece on Obama.The piece was introduced with the words "some reporters on the Obama campaign say they are seeing." Those words signaled that the piece was not about objective news but instead was just the opinions of reporters who don't like Obama.The report started out with an attempt to make Obama look like he's saying two different things to two different groups. Describing the scene as "before a conservative audience" Obama was shown talking about reaching out to all types of people. That's not a talking point just for conservative audiences. Its the signature theme of his entire campaign. What does saying it before a conservative audience prove?Then NBC said Obama had to appeal to types of people like NASCAR dads. In other words, Obama must have the support of white Republicans to win. Blacks or female folk music fans don't count. Why are NASCAR dads more important?Then a right wing hit job artist from the sleazy on-line publication The Politico came on and said that Democrats don't want to win elections. That's news to me. The hit job artist said Obama was different. The hit job message was that if Democrats want to win they have to appeal to white Republicans, but Democrats don't do that because they want to lose. Does NBC really believe Democrats want to lose elections? For an experiment, try saying some night that McCain has to appeal to black Democrats to win. See how that goes over. Say that McCain has to do that or it will show he doesn't want to win.Obama was described in your report as a "chameleon on plaid." I'd love to compare lists with NBC to see who has switched more positions, Obama or McCain. Of course, no hit job about McCain running to the middle aired on NBC.Then there was the part about Obama's FISA vote. Obama has the same position he always has had. He supports the FISA bill now because it represents a compromise. Obama has sold himself since the beginning as an individual who is willing to compromise.With no evidence whatsoever, NBC attributed Obama's FISA position to political considerations outweighing his own real views. Then the report ended up with a declaration that only two possible explanations exist for Obama's recent campaigning - opportunism or pragmatism. Both those explanations are accusations that Obama puts political expediency ahead of his own convictions. The terms question if Obama has convictions at all. The RNC supplied the term "opportunism." Which term was selected from the Obama campaign or the DNC? None, of course.#2
NBC sanitized a story about McCain tonight - the shake-up of his campaign staff.For contrast, here is what NBC said when Hillary Clinton shook up her campaign staff:"Campaign aides said Solis Doyle made the decision to leave on her own and was not urged to do so by the former first lady or any other senior member of the team. But it comes as Clinton struggles to catch Obama in fundraising and momentum and faces the prospect of losing every voting contest yet to come in February. On Sunday, Obama also won the caucus count in Maine."McCain is running behind in all the polls, a few by wide margins. The web site electoral-vote.com has McCain behind 317 to 221 in electoral votes. Nothing was mentioned in the shake-up report about McCain having campaign problems.Responsible media outlets reported that McCain's shake-up was a result of widespread Republican dissatisfaction with the way McCain's campaign has been run. McCain's own campaign managers told him that he'd lose the election to Obama unless the campaign organization was changed.McCains campaign was organized around 11 independent regional managers. The operation made no sense to anybody who looked at it, except I guess to McCain.McCain's previous managers are being replaced with Karl Rove associates. That a signal that the McCain campaign is going even more into the gutter than it already is. Lately they've been distorting legitimate questions about McCain's qualifications to be president into reprehensible attacks on McCain's war record. That's straight out of the Karl Rove "you are attacking the troops" playbook.The only thing NBC had to say about the shake-up tonight was that someone was replaced and more replacements are expected. There was nothing about the rest of it. Perhaps NBC didn't have enough time to expand. After all, time was needed to groundlessly report that Obama lacks convictions and will take on positions just to please targeted electoral groups.It's not just GOP-GE-NBC News that's backing Liar McCain.
GOP-Viacom-CBS, GOP-Disney-ABC, GOP-CNN, The Right Wing Conservative New York Times, The Right Wing Conservative Washington Post, GOP-Time, The Right Wing Conservative Los Angeles Times, etc., are all backing Liar McCain.
They're part of McCain's Media, or as I call them, McCain's Corporate Conservative News Media.
Andrea Mitchell is a right wing coorporatist conservative Republican Hate Hag in the employ of the equally right wing conservative Republican GOP-GE-NBC. BOTH GOP-GE-NBC and Mitchell want Liar McCain to get elected.
Pretty dumb to play the ad right after she misrepresented it's content. Did she not watch it beforehand? Or is she just a pinhead.
This isn't the first time I've seen Mitchell with her head up her @ss.
The Republicans obviously did not think that McCain's Vietnam service made him worthy of being President because, in 2000 they chose a draft evader over McCain; and in 2004 they went out of their way to discredit Johy Kerry's very honorable and heroic service in Vietnam, and again chose the draft evader over the war hero.
Then there is Max Cleland, whose sacrifice makes McCain's seem like a walk in the park. But that didn't stop the Righties from equating him with Osama.
These Righties are cry babies; and the corporate media allows them to cry louder - and get away with it.