NY Times reported McCain's criticism of Obama plan without noting McCain recently said 16 months is "a pretty good timetable"

In a July 28 New York Times article, reporters Michael Powell and Susan Saulny reported that during an interview on ABC's This Week, Sen. John McCain criticized Sen. Barack Obama "for proposing to withdraw American forces from Iraq within 16 months" and accused Obama "of putting his electoral prospects ahead of the right military policy in Iraq." But Powell and Saulny but did not mention that only days earlier in a July 25 interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, McCain responded that 16 months is "a pretty good timetable," saying: "I think it's a pretty good timetable, as we should -- or horizons for withdrawal. But they have to be based on conditions on the ground." Moreover, on This Week, when host George Stephanopoulos noted McCain's use of the word "timetable" in his CNN interview, McCain denied to Stephanopoulos that he had used it. Yet Powell and Saulny not only failed to mention McCain's comment about a timetable, they did not report that McCain denied having used the word "timetable" when asked about it by Stephanopoulos.

When Stephanopoulos asked, "So you shouldn't have used the word 'timetable'?" McCain replied: "I didn't use the word 'timetable' that I did -- if I did --" But when Stephanopoulos said, "Well, you said 'pretty good timetable,' " McCain replied: "Oh, well, look. Anything is a good timetable that is dictated by conditions on the ground. Anything is good." Later McCain said: "I like six months, three months, two months. I like yesterday. I like yesterday, OK? That seems really good to me. But the fact is, the conditions on the ground have not dictated it."

From the July 28 New York Times article:

Senator Barack Obama signaled on Sunday that he would return his focus to the economy after a whirlwind foreign tour, but Senator John McCain's eyes remained very much fixed on national security, as he repeatedly attacked his rival.

Mr. McCain criticized Mr. Obama for proposing to withdraw American forces from Iraq within 16 months and for having opposed the 30,000-troop buildup known as the surge. Mr. McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, once again accused Mr. Obama, his Democratic counterpart, of putting his electoral prospects ahead of the right military policy in Iraq. Mr. Obama's preferred course, Mr. McCain said, would have led to genocide and an emboldened Iran.

''He doesn't understand what's at stake here,'' Mr. McCain said in a taped interview on the ABC News program ''This Week'' broadcast Sunday. ''And he chose to take a political path that would have helped him.''

Mr. McCain attacked his opponent's burnished foreign policy credentials after Mr. Obama completed a weeklong trip to the Middle East and Europe.

From the July 27 edition of ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos:

STEPHANOPOULOS: As Barack Obama wrapped up his week away in London, McCain returned from stops in several swing states to his ranch in Cottonwood, Arizona. We sat on the porch yesterday afternoon for a conversation that ranged from the economy to gay adoption, and his apparent embrace of a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.

[begin video clip]

STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator Obama was in London this morning, and he was responding to your comments from yesterday where you said that 16 months might be a pretty good timetable in Iraq. He said, "We're pleased to see that there's been some convergence around proposals we've been making for a year and a half."

McCAIN: That's really good. Look, it's not a timetable, as I said. I was asked, "How does that sound?" Anything sounds good to me, but --

STEPHANOPOULOS: But you never used the word before.

McCAIN: No, the point is -- no.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You made a point of never using the word before.

McCAIN: I never -- look. I've always said, and I said then, it's the conditions on the ground. If Senator Obama had had his way, we'd have been out last March. And we'd have been out in defeat and chaos, and probably had to come back again because of Iranian influence. It's conditions on the ground. The way that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said. The way that General [David] Petraeus has said. Conditions on the ground, so that the Iraqi government can have control, can have the sufficient security so that we don't have to come back. Senator Obama said that if his date didn't work, we may have to come back. We're coming home in victory. We're coming home in victory.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But it does seem --

McCAIN: But it is a -- it is not a date. I want to make it very clear to you. It is not a date. It's conditions on the ground.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So you shouldn't have used the word "timetable"?

McCAIN: Pardon me?

STEPHANOPOULOS: You shouldn't have used the word "timetable"?

McCAIN: I didn't use the word "timetable" that I did -- if I did --

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, you said "pretty good timetable."

McCAIN: Oh, well, look. Anything is a good timetable that is dictated by conditions on the ground. Anything is good. But the timetable is dictated not by a artificial date, but by the conditions on the ground. The conditions of security. And by the way, our ambassador to Iraq basically said we have succeeded. We have succeeded in this strategy.

Now, look. Senator Obama doesn't understand. He doesn't understand what's at stake here. And he chose to take a political path that would have helped him get the nomination of his party. I took a path that I knew was unpopular, because I knew we had to win in Iraq. And we are winning in Iraq. And if we'd have done what Senator Obama wanted done, it would have been chaos, genocide, increased Iranian influence, perhaps Al Qaeda establishing a base again. Now we have a stable ally in the region, and it is not based on any date.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But it does seem like you --

McCAIN: I like six months, three months, two months. I like yesterday. I like yesterday, OK? That seems really good to me. But the fact is, the conditions on the ground have not dictated it.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But what's the difference between your positions now? He says, "OK, here's the timetable I want. That's the mission."

McCAIN: Yeah, yeah.

STEPHANOPOULOS: "If the commanders --"

McCAIN: Yeah.

STEPHANOPOULOS: "-- come and tell me the conditions have changed dramatically, if Iraq's going to be unstable, I'll take that into account." You also say, "Timetable sounds great, but it's on the conditions on the ground."

McCAIN: Senator Obama said that he would come out no matter what.

From the July 25 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:

BLITZER: But if Maliki persists -- you're president, and he says he wants U.S. troops out, and he wants them out, let's say in a year or two years or 16 months or whatever, what do you do? Do you just -- do you listen to the prime minister?

McCAIN: He won't. He won't, he won't.

BLITZER: How do you know?

McCAIN: Because he knows it has to be condition-based.

BLITZER: How do you know that?

McCAIN: Because I know him. And I know him very well. And I know the other leaders. And I know -- I've been there eight times, as you know. And I know them very, very well.

BLITZER: So why do you think he said --

McCAIN: And the point is --

BLITZER: So why do you think he said that 16 months is basically a pretty good timetable?

McCAIN: He said it's a pretty good timetable based on conditions on the ground. I think it's a pretty good timetable, as we should -- or horizons for withdrawal. But they have to be based on conditions on the ground. This success is very fragile. It's incredibly impressive, but very fragile.

So we know, those of us who have been involved in it for many years, know that if we reverse this by setting a date for withdrawal, all the hard-won victory can be reversed. We're not ready to set -- to do that. Too many brave young Americans and their families have sacrificed too much. But we will be out. And the difference is, we'll be out with victory and honor, and not defeat.

Senator Obama has said there's a possibility under his plan we may have to go back. I guarantee you, after they withdraw under what we are doing, we'll never have to go back.