About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

MSNBC's Witt aired McCain ad without noting misleading claims about visiting wounded troops, Afghanistan hearings, military funding

July 27, 2008 5:40 pm ET

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.

EMBED

SUMMARY: On MSNBC Live, Alex Witt aired an ad from Sen. John McCain asserting that Sen. Barack Obama "made time to go to the gym, but canceled a visit with wounded troops. Seems the Pentagon wouldn't allow him to bring cameras." But in neither segment did Witt or her guests note that Obama reportedly previously visited wounded troops at Walter Reed Army Medical Center without the media, or that although Obama decided not to visit Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany, he reportedly made phone calls to wounded soldiers there. Nor did they challenge any of the other misleading claims in the ad.

32 Comments

During the 8 a.m. and 9 a.m. hours of MSNBC Live on July 27, anchor Alex Witt aired an ad from Sen. John McCain asserting that Sen. Barack Obama "made time to go to the gym, but canceled a visit with wounded troops. Seems the Pentagon wouldn't allow him to bring cameras." But in neither segment did Witt or her guests, McClatchy Newspapers chief Washington correspondent Steve Thomma and Hill blogger Bob Franken, note that Obama reportedly previously visited wounded troops at Walter Reed Army Medical Center without the media, or that although Obama decided not to visit Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany, he reportedly made phone calls to wounded soldiers there. Nor did Witt or her guests note that according to Obama spokeswoman Linda Douglass, "We told military officials explicitly that Senator Obama had absolutely no intention of bringing any members of the media or photographers in with him to visit the wounded warriors." In addition, while the ad asserts that Obama "made time to go to the gym, but canceled a visit with wounded troops," the accompanying footage shows Obama playing basketball during his July 19 visit with U.S. troops at Camp Arifjan in Kuwait, which neither Witt nor her guests noted.

During the 8 a.m. segment, Thomma asserted that "Obama had a gaffe here by canceling a long-planned trips to visit these wounded troops in Rammstein, Germany." He added, "I think he looked a little weak in the process, and it was a gaffe." During the 9 a.m. segment, Franken said, "I think that the Obama people blew it. Plain, simple, period." He also asserted, "And the McCain ad I think is going to draw a little bit of blood because I believe in the case of Barack Obama, if you live by the photo op, you die of the photo op, or in this particular case, the lack of a photo op."

By contrast, in a July 26 post on his blog Political Punch, ABC senior national correspondent Jake Tapper wrote:

The McCain campaign provides no evidence for the assertion that being told he [Obama] couldn't bring media had anything to do with the trip's cancellation.

Oddly, when discussing Obama's trip to the gym, the ad uses footage of Obama playing basketball with US troops in Kuwait over the weekend.

Tapper also provided Douglass' statement: "We told military officials explicitly that Senator Obama had absolutely no intention of bringing any members of the media or photographers in with him to visit the wounded warriors. In all of our communications with the military, we stressed that this was to be a private visit by Senator Obama."

Similarly, in a July 26 post on the Time blog Swampland, national political correspondent Karen Tumulty wrote, "[T]here's a little problem with this line: 'And now, he made time to go to the gym, but cancelled a visit with wounded troops.' " Tumulty continued, "Sure enough, the accompanying footage shows Obama playing basketball ... with the troops in Kuwait." Tumulty also asserted that "[t]here is absolutely no evidence" for the ad's suggestion that "Obama cancelled the trip because he was told he couldn't bring the media."

Further, in uncritically airing the McCain ad's contention that Obama "never held a single Senate hearing on Afghanistan," Witt did not note that McCain is a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, but reportedly has not attended a single Armed Services Committee hearing related to Afghanistan in 2007-08. Nor did Witt note, in uncritically airing the McCain ad's claim that Obama "voted against funding our troops," that McCain himself voted against legislation funding the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq or that, as Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz wrote, that "Obama has frequently voted to finance the war but was one of 14 Senate Democrats to oppose a war-funding bill last year -- after Republicans removed troop withdrawal deadlines -- saying he did not want to be 'validating the same failed policy in Iraq.' "

From the 8 a.m. ET hour of MSNBC Live on July 27:

WITT: We talked about this new McCain camp ad, and it is releasing it. It's slamming Barack Obama for not visiting the wounded soldiers in Germany. So let's take a little look at it.

NARRATOR [video clip]: Barack Obama never held a single Senate hearing on Afghanistan. He hadn't been to Iraq in years. He voted against funding our troops. And now, he made time to go to the gym, but canceled a visit with wounded troops. Seems the Pentagon wouldn't allow him to bring cameras.

WITT: Well, the Obama camp says that Senator Obama scrapped the plans to visit those troops after the Pentagon raised the concerns it might involve the troops in politics. So, I'd like your reaction to this new McCain ad, considering everything.

THOMMA: Well, I think Senator Obama had a gaffe here by canceling a long-planned trips to visit these wounded troops in Rammstein, Germany. He says -- his campaign says -- they gave several explanations, Alex, but the bottom line was, they said, "The Pentagon told us not to come."

You know, Senator Obama says he wouldn't take the orders of the Pentagon on issues like whether to get out of Iraq, but somehow he'll take their orders from a junior PR guy at the Pentagon about whether to visit wounded troops. I think he looked a little weak in the process, and it was a gaffe.

WITT: OK, I'm curious, though, Steve. Do you think there's a chance Senator McCain can overplay this hand?

THOMMA: Yeah. Yeah, it's well-put, Alex. I think Senator McCain personally should have left this to surrogates and/or the media to cover. [unintelligible] been a lot of coverage of this screw-up not visiting the troops, and I think it would have been best left to others.

WITT: OK. Steve Thomma, not leaving anything to others. We're having you with us next hour, as well. Thanks so much.

From the 9 a.m. ET hour of MSNBC Live on July 27:

WITT: Let's talk about what McCain is doing now by releasing this stinging new ad slamming Obama for not visiting the wounded soldiers in Germany. Let's take a look at part of it.

NARRATOR [video clip]: Barack Obama never held a single Senate hearing on Afghanistan. He hadn't been to Iraq in years. He voted against funding our troops. And now, he made time to go to the gym, but canceled a visit with wounded troops. Seems the Pentagon --

WITT: Well, the Obama camp says that Senator Obama scrapped the plans to visit the troops after the Pentagon raised all those concerns that it might then involve the troops in politics. But I'm curious about your reaction, Bob, to this new McCain ad.

FRANKEN: Well, they blew -- first of all, I think that the Obama people blew it. Plain, simple, period. And if they were smart, they would just come out and say, "You know, we made a mistake." And the McCain ad I think is going to draw a little bit of blood because I believe in the case of Barack Obama, if you live by the photo op, you die of the photo op, or in this particular case, the lack of a photo op. The truth of the matter is, is that he had sort of gone unchallenged all week by the adoring media who were singing "Obama Mia" throughout the week. So finally, when he made a misstep, it was amplified quite a bit because of all the easy going that he'd had in the other photo ops.

WITT: "Obama Mia." May I quote you on that and attribute you when I do? Anyway --

FRANKEN: Yeah, you don't want to accept blame for that one, do you?

WITT: No, but I'll give it to you. But the question with John McCain now. Do you think he might overplay his hand here with this? Is there a risk of that?

FRANKEN: Oh, probably. I suspect he will overplay it. But subtlety has never been a part of any kind of campaign. One could argue that the whole Obama trip was an overplay of a major proportion, and John McCain has to sort of match that. So what you always get in a campaign is exaggeration. So, sure, he's going to overplay it. That's what politicians do.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by magnolialover (July 27, 2008 6:04 pm ET)
         
      And here we have the main talking point for the next 2 weeks.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by snoopy (July 27, 2008 6:15 pm ET)
         
      McCain even flip flopped on not doing personal attacks. No surprise there, he can't articulate a vision for america when he doesn't have one.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by onewing663773 (July 27, 2008 6:28 pm ET)
         

      I don't get it?! What was misleading about the McCain AD? Obama did NOT visit wounded troops but did have time to go to the gym..

      Nothing misleading about the AD what so ever...

       The AD did not mention anything else you stated in this "Story" because the AD did NOT pertain to what you mentioned...

       

       

       

      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 28, 2008 12:41 pm ET)
           

        You know, considering how often your lot makes the "out of context" claim, you'd think you'd understand the value of the missing context here.  But then: your lot are a bunch of self-rightous hypocrits, so I guess I should have expected this kind of post.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by Brabantio (July 28, 2008 12:53 pm ET)
           

        Alright, so your grandmother dies and you take three days off of work for travel.  In your next performance review you're criticized for taking that time off of work, without noting the reason.

        I'm sure you wouldn't consider that "misleading", right?

        Report Abuse
      • Author by mefirst (July 28, 2008 9:01 pm ET)
           
        the ad clearly implies that instead of going to the hospital he decided to play basketball.  that didn't happen.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by unionave (July 27, 2008 6:28 pm ET)
         
      Nothing like being fair and balanced . The electorate has to be intelligent and well informed or ignore the corporate media's barrage of cannon fodder thrown at Obama . If Sen Obama wins this presidential campaign he will have done the impossible . Is this what HRC meant when she told the delagates "he can't win" ?  The corporate media has their reasons for wanting to be in control of the  electorate's mental facilities and cover up's and lying is all part of the game . The sad thing about this contention between the campaigners is the media side have no scruples and the other side has scruples .
      Report Abuse
    • Author by wolf kotenberg (July 27, 2008 8:50 pm ET)
         
      Mccain made time to go to a fundraiser ( his own ) but not to go vote for the GI Bill.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by chamay0 (July 27, 2008 9:48 pm ET)
         
      This is no more than the typical right-wing MSM way.  They have no intention of reporting the truth.  They will continue to skew the facts to present McCain in a less glaring light.  The American  people do not have a hope or prayer of seeing any of the MSM (exception to Keith Olberman, Jack Cafferty and Rachel Meadow) report anything concerning this election with neutrality.  There is no chance that they will allow real pundits to have a real say.  They will continue to invite every neocon, right winger or weak liberal to be their talking point to justify their position.  In a parallel universe it would be nice to see this action reversed and McCain being challenged for some of his gaffes, geography, and inconsistencies.  That's not going to happen; so, thank goodness for the internet.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (July 27, 2008 10:47 pm ET)
           
        I think you'll find this article about how the MSM isn't really liberal and how the right is pissed off about studies proving it quite interesting.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mary59 (July 28, 2008 12:14 am ET)
             
          The MSM doesn't report much real news, either.  They like the horse race and when there isn't much new there, they just beat the horse 'til it wheezes, and only the news junkies pay any attention.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (July 27, 2008 10:00 pm ET)
         

      So what you always get in a campaign is exaggeration.

      LOL... Talk about the understatement of the week.

      What bothers me is that if anyone on TV is going to analyze a particular ad by a candidate then they it would seem they have an obligation to give all of the circumstances and particular facts regarding the issue the ad purportedly raises. MSNBC is not obliged to give an in-depth defense against an ad against any candidate. But if they elect to show the ad and analyze it then I think they do have an obligation to provide the full picture in defense against the ad. To do otherwise is to give at least some partial validation to the ad in question. Either they should do it right or nor not do it at all.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by steeve (July 28, 2008 6:13 pm ET)
           
        Your request just highlights the humor of MSM's complaint that there isn't enough news to fill a 24-hour cycle. God forbid they fill that time with detailed fact-based analysis and careful attention to major policy questions.

        It's amazing how few political talking points exist in a week of cable news. Hundreds of hours add up to roughly 12 sentences.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by cArn (July 27, 2008 11:05 pm ET)
         

      What bothers me is that if anyone on TV is going to analyze a particular ad by a candidate then they it would seem they have an obligation to give all of the circumstances and particular facts regarding the issue the ad purportedly raises.

      We are a nonpartisan, nonprofit, "consumer advocate" for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. We monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews, and news releases. Our goal is to apply the best practices of both journalism and scholarship, and to increase public knowledge and understanding.

      That quote came straight from factcheck.org's mission statement. Why the hell can't the MSM be more like that, dammit? 

      Report Abuse
      • Author by IRONY 101 (July 27, 2008 11:13 pm ET)
           

        Why the hell can't the MSM be more like that, dammit? 

        Combination of laziness, incompetence and/or partisanship...depending on the circumstances.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (July 28, 2008 2:41 am ET)
             

          Best take on Obama's European visit (and by "best" I mean most ridiculous & entertaining) was on Fox this weekend with that Banderas Bimbo (Julie or Julia?)

          She had a guy from the Daily Telegraph, a Fox favorite, somebody with a British accent so the redneck ideas sound more sophisticated.Trying to explain Obama's reception in Germany, Banderas dumbed it down to this;Europeans hate Bush, so they're naturally going to cheer for Obama.(At least she acknowledged the fact that McGrampy is just the new version of Bush).

          Then she wandered off into Crazytown, asking the British Fox hack how this "Un-American" and "Anti-American" mood was going to translate back here.

          Which, going by recent polling regarding Bush's approval ratings, would make 2/3 to 3/4 of U.S. citizens Un-American or Anti-American.

          The Brit, being obviously a little brighter than Banderas, if no less a whore, tried to run defense for her, interjecting his comment that he wouldn't describe Obama as "anti-American".

          Banderas clarified herself, saying that of course, Obama wasn't anti- or Un- American, just his supporters.

          OK, I'll give her "Un-American", regarding the Germans. They are not American, though that smear is usually reserved for Americans who don't respect the principles of the U.S, and not to describe people who are simply not U,S. citizens.

          But to describe a 6 figure crowd, waving American flags, and cheering an American presidential candidate as "Anti-American", probably based on their dislike (not hatred) of a current U.S. President who has shown a general disrespect for many American ideals, and their approval of Obama,had to be one of the most ridiculous bits of propaganda I've heard in quite a while.

          Wingnuts, relax about Obama's warm reception in Europe. I think they skew a little younger, a little more educated, and more experienced through their own history (Germany especially). The polls in this country still have McCain and Obama pretty close. Our electorate is , on average, older, less educated, more ignorant, and less familiar with history.In general, more scared of the unfamiliar. Grampy McCain still has a pretty good shot, thanks to the stupid and weak vote.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by rob2007 (July 28, 2008 12:39 am ET)
         
      CBS' "creative" editing, now Alex Witt? I scanned channels and inadvertantly landed on CNN with Kitty Pilgram filling in for Dobbs and I almost slit my wrists. God these MSM people are so tiring. Is that the strategy? To simply wear us down to protect their not so subtle racism? Honestly, there can be no other explanation, can there? Or are they stupid, as in ignorant? Or maybe greedy? Is a McCain presidency somehow tied to their salaries and I'm missing it? Is it a combination of these? I just don't know what to think, and would like to ask these MSM's why, exactly, they prefer this man--who they continue to cloak in protection--to be their leader? Reasons independent of Obama, as if Obama is not even running. Take the Obama factor out of it and tell me: "What do you like about McCain as leader of the free world? What is so attractive to you about that prospect?"
      Report Abuse
      • Author by BottleBlonde (July 28, 2008 1:12 pm ET)
           

        Kitty Pilgrim - you reminded me. She was terribly biased the evening I saw her. She was biased against Obama, and then she was interviewing Republican Jim DeMint. He was there trying to claim that the Senate was holding votes in secret. They mentioned that big long bills were getting passed but that no one could have read through them. Like that's something new! It's not new at all, but they don't have any ammunition to use so they are throwing the kitchen sink at the Dems. She claimed that this action made the Democratic-controlled Senate different than other sessions, adn then said that this was one of the reasons that Congress has a low approval rating! Congress doesn't have a low approval rating because of the votes the Senate recently had taken.

        It'd be great if the Republicans weren't being obstructionist on all bills. It's like my niece who wouldn't put on her clothes in the morning when she didn't want to go to school. My sister sent her to school in her pajamas twice, and now my niece puts her clothes on in the morning when she's told to.

        The reason the bills are being passed the way they are being passed is because of the <a href="http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=HoldItems.Home"> holds </a> that the Republican Senators are misapplying and overusing! It's the Republicans who are misbehaving. My niece tried to claim that her mom was embarrassing her too instead of acknowledging she was embarrassing herself.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by BottleBlonde (July 28, 2008 1:13 pm ET)
             

          The link didn't work.

          http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=HoldItems.Home

          This is Senator Tom Coburn trying, but failing, to justify the overuse and abuse of the "hold" process.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (July 29, 2008 12:19 pm ET)
             

          Republican Jim DeMint. He was there trying to claim that the Senate was holding votes in secret. They mentioned that big long bills were getting passed but that no one could have read through them.

          I'm sure DeMint read the entire PATRIOT Act, too, in the few hours before it was submitted and voted on.

          Yeah, right.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by princeofwheels (July 28, 2008 2:56 am ET)
         

      Can't waited until the Obama crowd or the 527's? start hacking away at JohnBoy.  Just a touch of talking to the North Vietnamese while a prisoner along with the fire on that aircraft carrier etc. Just a hint of it...just like McCains ads. And he said NO personal attacks...Excuse for McCain..it is not personal, it is about his character....yea, right and you gave the name of the Steelers defensive lineman to your captives or was it the Packers defensive linemen...Get ready everyone, I think that right after the Convention, there will be an onslaught on McBush, the non-Catholic, and he will throw a hissy fit.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by eniobob2631 (July 28, 2008 7:33 am ET)
         
      "and the beat goes on"
      Report Abuse
    • Author by eniobob2631 (July 28, 2008 7:36 am ET)
         
      Subject: FW: Fw: Are You Voting For Him Because He Is Black?
      >
      >
      >> HERE IS THAT QUESTION AGAIN ...AND A DARN GOOD RESPONSE!!
      >>>
      >>>
      >>> > This older white guy asked his older black friend, 'Are you voting
      >>> > for Barack Obama just because he's black'? So the older black guy
      >>> > fires back and says, 'Are you not voting for him because he's black?
      >>> >
      >>> > Why can't I vote for him just cause he's black?
      >>> > Hell in this country men are pulled over everyday just cause they're
      >>> > black, passed over for promotions just cause they're black,
      >>> > considered to be criminals just cause they're black, but you don't
      >>> > seem to have a problem with that .
      >>> >
      >>> > This country was built with the sweat and whip off the slaves back,
      >>> > and now a descendent of those same slaves has a chance to lead the
      >>> > same country where we were not even considered to be people,
      >>> >
      >>> > Where we were not allowed to be educated, drink from the same water
      >>> > fountains, eat in the same restaurants, or even vote, so you damn
      >>> > right I'm going to vote for him! Not just because he's black,
      >>> >
      >>> > But because he is hope, he is change, and he now allows me to
      >>> > understand when my grandson says he wants to be president when he
      >>> > grows up, it is not a fairy tale but a short term goal,
      >>> >
      >>> > Because he sees, understand, and knows, he can achieve, withstand,
      >>> > and do anything despite the fact that he is black!
      >>> >
      >>> > No, I'm not voting for Barrack Obama JUST because he is black; I'm
      >>> > voting for him because he is the best candidate -- who just happens
      >>> > to be black.
      >>> >
      >>> > Unknown Author
      >>> >
      >>> > *For All To Read, Please Keep this Article Moving... May God Bless
      >>> > Our Children!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Clevenative (July 28, 2008 9:00 am ET)
         

      All of us political junkies are like a bunch of folks standing around a kettle of water minutes after the flame is lit- just watching in boredom, to casual to heated conversations, and finally anticipation of the boil.

      The campaigns are still in simmer - things will heat up fast during and after the conventions - and then many of "the sleepers" will get involved. These people are those little bubbles you see on the side as the kettle heats up - just sitting there doing nothing really dramatic until things hit the boiling point. These are the Americans that will make the difference in this election. What it will boil down to is the people - and how many turn out to vote.

      We will have some of the most brilliant people in the history of American politics going at each other in '08 - and thanks to development and diversity of technology, the media hype and spin will be at an all-time high. The winner will be the ones who can separate the truth from the fiction before the voting deadline.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (July 28, 2008 10:51 am ET)
         

      When I think sleeper, I think of provocative acts by imbeded agents.

      I think your meaning is viable. I just remember what nixon and friends did in 68. Rush says he wants to see something like that, or worse.

      The recent news of peace and envirenmental groups being infiltrated by state agencies. If mere state wingnuts do this, it doesn't take much imagination, to wonder at what the wingnuts in the federal level have arranged for Denver. 

      Report Abuse
    • Author by MizAudrey (July 28, 2008 11:37 am ET)
         

      If Obama had gone, he would have been slammed for exploiting the troops for political gain.  Time to get used to everything being wrong...

      Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (July 28, 2008 12:19 pm ET)
           
        True, oh so true. We all know, truly we know, if he had gone, McCain and company would have busted on him for using the troops, the wounded troops, for his campaign. Of course, they have done the same things over the years since the Afghanistan and Iraq started, but they fail to see the difference of course. Because IOKIYAR to use the troops to further your political career, but not OK for us liberal anti American, troop hating democrats.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Brabantio (July 28, 2008 12:56 pm ET)
           
        Exactly.  It's much like how being well-received in Europe is a bad thing, while being unpopular there would have inspired people to say he shouldn't be President because he has no credibility around the world.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by shaggles (July 28, 2008 11:43 am ET)
         
      Why are they airing campaign ads as part of a news segment anyway?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by juliajayne (July 28, 2008 1:09 pm ET)
           

        Yeah, airing ads at all (and airing them uncritically on top of that) is pretty shoddy journalism. That's why I don't watch the TV for my news. You have to unlearn everything you see/hear. It's a waste of time.

        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.