About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Morning Joe let McCain campaign manager describe attack ad as "the truth," despite colleague Mitchell's reporting that it "literally is not true"

July 29, 2008 7:03 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 Morning Joe, Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough did not challenge McCain campaign manager Rick Davis' assertion that a McCain campaign ad attacking Sen. Barack Obama for not visiting wounded soldiers at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany was "the truth," despite reporting by their colleague, NBC's Andrea Mitchell, that the ad's criticism of Obama is "completely wrong, factually wrong" and "literally is not true."

28 Comments

During a July 29 interview on MSNBC's Morning Joe, co-hosts Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough failed to challenge the assertion by Rick Davis, Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign manager, that a McCain campaign ad attacking Sen. Barack Obama for not visiting wounded soldiers at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany is "the truth," despite reporting by their colleague, NBC chief foreign correspondent Andrea Mitchell, contradicting Davis' assertion. Scarborough and Brzezinski played a clip from the July 28 edition of Morning Joe in which Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs reacted to the McCain ad by asserting that McCain "is an honorable man, but running a very dishonorable campaign," and that the ad is "beneath the John McCain that we thought we knew." Asked to respond to Gibbs' assertions, Davis said, "I think that he -- sounds like he's stunned by the truth." Scarborough and Brzezinski did not challenge Davis' assertion, despite the fact that on at least four occasions on July 28, Mitchell appeared on MSNBC programs -- including Morning Joe -- and debunked the false suggestion in the ad that Obama "canceled a visit with wounded troops" because "the Pentagon wouldn't allow him to bring cameras," at one point saying the charge "literally is not true."

Brzezinski did not challenge Davis' claim that the ad was "the truth," although she did say of the ad: "I mean there is some backlash to it. I mean, there are some who would think that the McCain campaign, you and the McCain campaign are basically trying to deflect in any desperate way you can from what was a very good trip for Barack Obama, where he was seen on the international stage with world leaders making it work for him."

On the July 28 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, Mitchell asserted, "There was never any intention -- let me be absolutely clear about this. The press was never going to go. The entourage was never going to go. There was never an intention to make this political." She later said, "And the McCain commercial on this subject is completely wrong, factually wrong." During the 1 p.m. ET hour of the July 28 edition of MSNBC Live, Mitchell asked Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC): "As someone supporting John McCain, I've got to ask you about this new McCain ad. The McCain ad says, literally, that he could've gone, you know, that he did other things -- Obama did other things. He could've visited the troops but not with cameras. That literally is not true." She later said that Obama "wasn't planning to bring an entourage and he certainly visited the soldiers only four or five days earlier when he was in Iraq, and he visited them in Walter Reed again without any notice and without any entourage -- so it just seems inexplicable that this whole thing has become such an issue, but clearly, the McCain campaign wants this to be an issue." In an earlier segment, during the 9 a.m. hour of MSNBC Live, Mitchell stated, "I can attest to the fact that he did visit troops in Iraq only four or five days earlier, that there was no notice of it, that I confirmed that it happened, but they had no video of any type and no reporters. And that he's been to Walter Reed. So let's at least get that off the table."

Scarborough had the following exchange with Mitchell on the July 28 edition of Morning Joe:

MITCHELL: The background on the military flap is that they had clearly planned a trip to Ramstein, they were planning to visit the injured troops, and then the Pentagon explained they couldn't go as part of a political trip. The Obama campaign thought that they could go, leave the press corps on the tarmac, and then take off with military escort and make this one last visit, as he did, by the way, in Iraq. He visited a casualty unit in the Green Zone without photographers as part of the congressional delegation. But the military said that the rules are that he could only go as part of a previously arranged congressional delegation to Ramstein.

Clearly, people in the campaign are really angry. They had wanted this to be the final stop on the trip here in Germany, and to do it without the press corps, just to do it on his own. But the objections of the military were that he is now being staffed by campaign aides, not by his Senate staff, which -- who were the people who, of course, were with him when he went with [Sen. Chuck] Hagel [R-NE] and [Sen.] Jack Reed [D-RI] in Iraq. So, you know, the anger here is pretty intense at the Pentagon: They feel that the military are, you know, drawing some lines -- they're not saying this publicly, of course -- but drawing lines that they might not have drawn for other people. He was planning to just go by himself, not with cameras, not with any entourage, as he had done in Walter Reed in the past in Washington, as he did in Iraq, Joe.

SCARBOROUGH: It's -- it's curious, if that's the case, why the campaign didn't make that announcement yesterday and allowed stories go like this. I'm sure there's going to be a lot of "he said, she said" in the days to come about this.

MITCHELL: Well, but they felt that they couldn't win. Yeah, they felt that they -- that they were in a, you know, no-win situation, that the Pentagon, perhaps, the military with cooperation from some Republican operatives -- I mean, that's the -- the sort of scuttlebutt, that there have been some foreign policy advisers of John McCain with connections in the Pentagon who've had something to do with this, but that is perhaps just the normal political paranoia of the season.

As Media Matters has noted, ABC senior national correspondent Jake Tapper and Time national political correspondent Karen Tumulty have each also stated that the McCain campaign has provided "no evidence" to support the ad's assertion that Obama canceled the visit because "the Pentagon wouldn't allow him to bring cameras." Additionally, on July 28, Factcheck.org wrote that the McCain ad's "insinuation -- that the visit was canceled because of the press ban or the desire for gym time -- is false."

On July 28, Media Matters for America noted that MSNBC's Tamron Hall ignored Mitchell's reporting, asserting, "McCain is now taking aim at Obama's character and patriotism, also ripping him for not visiting wounded American troops," before playing the McCain ad. That same day, Media Matters noted that in on-screen text, MSNBC attributed to the Obama campaign the assertion that Obama "met troops in Iraq without American press," even though Mitchell had reported earlier in the day on MSNBC Live that she had personally confirmed that fact. Additionally, on the July 28 edition of Morning Joe, MSNBC political analyst Pat Buchanan asserted that the ad played into "the sense that, you know, Barack is not one of us. He's just not a normal guy who would go see the wounded troops," to which Scarborough replied: "And again, as the McCain campaign's saying, won't see the troops because -- and this is what the Pentagon said: We'll let him go see the troops, he just can't take cameras with him to film it."

From the July 29 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe:

GIBBS [video clip]: John McCain is an honorable man, but increasingly running a very dishonorable campaign. [Senator] Chuck Hagel [R-NE] is right that the ad is simply inappropriate, and it's just simply beneath -- it's beneath the John McCain that we thought we knew.

SCARBOROUGH: All right, with us now talking about that --

BRZEZINSKI: Mmm. Wow.

SCARBOROUGH: Those were some tough words.

BRZEZINSKI: Those were fighting words.

SCARBOROUGH: Ah. Yup. Let's bring in right now McCain campaign manager Rick Davis. Rick, the quote is that you and Senator McCain are running "a very dishonorable campaign." Respond.

DAVIS: Well, I think that he -- sounds like he's stunned by the truth and I think that after this eight-day photo-op tour of Europe and the Middle East, the Obama campaign was very unhappy with the fact that they finished the entire tour with a -- a huge mistake, which was blowing off the troops before coming home.

SCARBOROUGH: You say that he's stunned by the truth. What is the truth as you see it? Why -- are -- are you suggesting that Barack Obama does not value the service of our men and women in uniform?

DAVIS: No, I'm sure he does. And I'm sure that the men and women in our uniform would've valued the -- the visit that he had indicated early on that he was gonna make, you know, when he -- when he arrived in Landstuhl. I don't know what the truth is, because out of the Obama campaign themselves and Mr. Gibbs in particular, there have been probably 11 separate excuses for why they didn't visit the troops. Now if they don't know why they didn't' visit the troops, I'm sure as heck not gonna figure it out.

SCARBOROUGH: And again, what do you think, I -- I'm trying to figure out what the McCain campaign and what John McCain thinks this signifies. What are you all suggesting this means about Barack Obama, his values and what type of commander in chief he's going to be?

DAVIS: You know, I think people are going to make their own judgment. I mean, this is the kind of issue that I think is gonna stick around for a while. I think it's up to people who hear the various excuses and evaluate the news reports that you all put out to come to a judgment of their own. I know that John McCain --

SCARBOROUGH: Well, what judge -- what judgment have you come to?

DAVIS: -- said this Sunday on television, which is -- which is I'm sure that the troops were disappointed that -- the fact he didn't go. There's no clear reason why. Blaming the Defense Department didn't seem to work, so now they're jumping through various other hoops to try and come up with a good reason. But at the end of the day, he didn't do it. It was bad judgment. I don't think anybody would defend his actions. I mean, you'll notice that's not what they're doing. So I think it's going to be left up to the voters to figure out. And I think it's probably a bad report card.

SCARBOROUGH: Do you think Barack Obama loves his country?

DAVIS: I'm sure Obama loves his country. I'm sure that --

SCARBOROUGH: Do -- do -- do you think he -- do you think he values --

DAVIS: -- anybody that runs for president does so with the greatest of intentions to -- to do so.

SCARBOROUGH: Do you think he values the troops at work?

DAVIS: I think what we're questioning and I think what the American public would question was what kind of judgment did he exert in -- in -- when he was over there to -- to allow his staff or allow his own judgment to fail him and not go by and visit the troops.

SCARBOROUGH: OK.

DAVIS: As John McCain said --

BRZEZINSKI: What --

DAVIS: "If anybody told him he couldn't visit troops in the field, there would be a seismic event", and I believe that.

SCARBOROUGH: All right. Mika.

BRZEZINSKI: Well, Rick, let me -- let's -- let me ask it to you this way. I mean, I -- I want to get a sense of why you guys decided to do that ad that some consider -- I mean there is some backlash to it. I mean, there are some who would think that the McCain campaign, you and the McCain campaign are basically trying to deflect in any desperate way you can from what was a very good trip for Barack Obama, where he was seen on the international stage with world leaders making it work for him.

DAVIS: I'll be the first one to admit that he's -- Barack Obama has become a global celebrity. I mean, Barack Obama has more fans across the world than Paris Hilton does. I mean, it's just an extraordinary thing.

BRZEZINSKI: Hmm.

DAVIS: And I don't think anybody would underestimate that, but I think when he had an opportunity to make a decision based on, you know, his own experience, which -- or lack thereof, you know, he made the wrong choice. You know Mika, you know, the only backlash that -- that I'm noticing out there on this issue are from people like you and other Obama supporters, you know, who are upset that we would actually point out that there was a flaw in a otherwise perfect trip.

BRZEZINSKI: Now you know what --

DAVIS: You know, I mean I just --

BRZEZINSKI: I take issue with that, Rick. Hold on one second.

DAVIS: I just find it fascinating that -- that --

BRZEZINSKI: Hold on one second. I am not me and other Obama supporters. I'm telling you that this trip went well. It appears that it went well and that -- that was a bad call. I said it on the air yesterday.

SCARBOROUGH: Well -- well, let -- let me ask you this --

BRZEZINSKI: I thought it was a bad call and looks bad. In the grand scheme of things --

SCARBOROUGH: Let -- let me step in here for second.

BRZEZINSKI: I don't think it's going to make a difference.

SCARBOROUGH: Rick, let me ask you this question. Is it not a good thing that after seven years of many people in Europe not holding us in the highest of esteem that you have an American politician going to Berlin, a country that was openly hostile to us in 2002 and 2003 and you saw thousands of American flags waving in the crowd, isn't that good for America?

DAVIS: Oh look, I'm -- believe me, again, I don't know how many times I would have to repeat myself. I think it was great for America's image abroad. I think that it shows what kind of popular celebrity that Barack Obama has become. Look, he's not the first politician to go over there. He's just the first politician with fans. And John McCain goes to Berlin --

BRZEZINKSI: Um. Well.

DAVIS: John McCain goes to Berlin every year to talk to a series of defense ministers called the Verkunda Conference.

SCARBOROUGH: Uh huh.

DAVIS: He talks about substance. He pushes back on the Russians. He talks about NATO. He talks about Afghanistan. He doesn't go there and give a flowery speech that has no real substance to it and have 200,000 people. Does that make him any less -- more important to our American fabric abroad?

SCARBOROUGH: All right. Hey, Rick, thank you so much for being with us.

BRZEZINKSI: Thanks, Rick.

SCARBOROUGH: We appreciate your insight.

From the July 28 edition of MSNBC's Hardball:

MITCHELL: And the other thing is, did he make a bad call in deciding not to go to Ramstein? He had every right to go to Ramstein --

MIKE BARNICLE (guest host): To visit the --

MITCHELL: -- to visit the troops in Landstuhl.

He had already been to visit the troops in Iraq without cameras, without an entourage. And he got, I think -- his people, rather, got so backed off by warnings from the Pentagon, now, be please careful, and don't bring your military aide, because he's now a political aide. The Pentagon was way too aggressive probably in that.

And they got so nervous, oh, well, this is going to look political, and they were damned if they did or damned if they didn't. They --

HOWARD FINEMAN (Newsweek senior Washington correspondent): Obama had --

MITCHELL: Let me just finish one -- just one point.

FINEMAN: I'm sorry.

MITCHELL: There was never any intention -- let me be absolutely clear about this. The press was never going to go. The entourage was never going to go. There was never an intention to make this political.

But by tacking it on to the tail end of a political -- the political leg of the trip, they opened themselves up, they feared, to the criticism. And, if they had gone, they would have been criticized. And not going, they were criticized.

And the McCain commercial on this subject is completely wrong.

BARNICLE: Well, well --

MITCHELL -- factually wrong.

BARNICLE: Let -- let's watch the commercial. And tell us where it's wrong. Here's -- here's the new John McCain ad about this topic.

NARRATOR [video clip]: He voted against funding our troops. And, now, he made time to go to the gym, but canceled a visit with wounded troops. It seems the Pentagon wouldn't allow him to bring cameras.

BARNICLE: Well, that wasn't the entire ad. It was enough to give you an idea of it.

Here's Chuck Hagel, senator from Nebraska, his take -- he's a Republican -- on that John McCain ad.

[begin video clip]

BOB SCHIEFFER (host of CBS' Face the Nation): Do you think that ad was appropriate?

HAGEL: I do not think it was appropriate.

SCHIEFFER: You do not?

HAGEL: I do not.

[end video clip]

MITCHELL: Well, first of all, the picture, the image that they use of him playing basketball is with the troops shot by a -- an Army cameraman. That was DOD footage that the -- the Pentagon shot of him in Kuwait shooting hoops -- and a three-pointer, I might add.

BARNICLE: Yeah

MITCHELL: So --

BARNICLE: Swish.

MITCHELL: -- when he went to see the injured troops in the Green Zone, he did not bring a camera. There was no Pentagon camera. He did not even confirm to those of us covering by -- covering that he had gone. I had to find out that he had gone through other sources, military sources.

I mean, the fact is that he was never planning to take the press corps. The press corps was going to be on the tarmac, locked up on the airplane while he went off by himself.

The only issue was whether he could bring a political aide, who was a retired military -- retired Air Force general.

From the July 28 edition of MSNBC Live at 1 p.m.:

MITCHELL: As someone supporting John McCain, I've got to ask you about this new McCain ad. The McCain ad says, literally, that he could've gone, you know, that he did other things -- Obama did other things. He could've visited the troops but not with cameras. That literally is not true. Let me play a bit of Robert Gibbs, the spokesman for Barack Obama reacting to that McCain ad today.

GIBBS [video clip]: John McCain is an honorable man, but increasingly running a very dishonorable campaign. Chuck Hagel is right that the ad is simply inappropriate, and it's just simply beneath -- it's beneath the John McCain that we thought we knew.

MITCHELL: Now, the point is that Obama had no intention of bringing any cameras with him. I was there. I can vouch for that, so, why put up an ad that says that that's the reason that he didn't visit the troops. They claim the reason they didn't go was they were concerned that it would seem too political since that was the political leg of his journey.

SEN. RICHARD BURR [R-NC]: Well Andrea, I -- I am also the ranking member of the Veteran's Affairs Committee. I visit our wounded troops frequently. I've never been denied access to them, and I -- I believe if I were, it would be a national issue. And I think that's what John McCain stated, that no commander would have made that rule without a fight. And I'm not sure what happened on the ground in Germany, but clearly, this was designed to be a political trip and the context of it might have scared the military, but I'm sure that if Barack Obama had wanted to visit those soldiers, he could have visited those soldiers. But not with the entourage he had.

MITCHELL: Well he wasn't planning to bring an entourage and he certainly visited the soldiers only four or five days earlier when he was in Iraq, and he visited them in Walter Reed again without any notice and without any entourage -- so it just seems inexplicable that this whole thing has become such an issue, but clearly, the McCain campaign wants this to be an issue. Wants to paint him as someone who is unfeeling about the troops.

From the July 28 edition of MSNBC Live at 9 a.m.:

MITCHELL: Should you have guts-ed it out and gone anyway, given the fact that you were damned if you did and damned if you didn't?

GREG CRAIG (Obama senior foreign policy adviser): Well that's the -- there's -- obviously, Senator McCain had two press releases prepared, one -- if we had gone and seen the troops, he would've criticized us for politicizing and exploiting the troops in a political advantage. But we decided that that was something that we did not want to be criticized for, and so we didn't go, and now he's criticizing us for not going. There are about three or four factual misstatements --

MITCHELL: I can attest to the fact that he did visit troops in Iraq only four or five days earlier, that there was no notice of it, that I confirmed that it happened, but they had no video of any type and no reporters. And that he's been to Walter Reed. So let's at least get that off the table.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by snoopy (July 29, 2008 7:12 pm ET)
      1  
      Thank god for Andrea Mitchell!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by leftinmississippi (July 29, 2008 7:20 pm ET)
      1  
      Thanks, MMfA, for calling attention to this. Politicians, campaign spokespeople and political commentators all tend to be much more reckless in this early morning time slot and it does bear watching as Morning Joe's ratings appear to be on the rise.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by wzwriter (July 29, 2008 7:32 pm ET)
         
      Ever get the feeling we would all be much better off today of Joe Scarborough's body had been found in his congressional office instead of that intern?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by foghornleghorn (July 30, 2008 1:52 pm ET)
           

        This morning he had the Florida governor on, and he asked him repeatedly if it was dirty politics to say that Obama would rather win a campaign than win the war.

        Crist appeared to be vying for the Veepee spot because he dished out a different talking point every time and not once answering the question.  Cuppa Joe gets kudos for repeatedly asking the questions, but when he didn't get an answer, he simply said "thanks Mr. Governor" and went to commercial.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by oscar the grouch (July 29, 2008 7:53 pm ET)
         

      Is this the same Andrea Mitchell that has been berated here in the past for "advancing" the conservative agenda through omission and commision?

      Report Abuse
      • Author by skeptical (July 29, 2008 8:04 pm ET)
        1  

        Hey Oscar,

        You can't blame her if she finally see's the light!

        Report Abuse
        • Author by oscar the grouch (July 30, 2008 12:10 am ET)
             
          And the next time she is highlited here for "misinformation" or "uncritical" reporting, she will have regressed???
          Report Abuse
          • Author by mary59 (July 30, 2008 7:22 am ET)
            1  
            Huh? See Bottleblonde's comment below yours. She was on the trip so she saw first hand that Obama did indeed visit and spend time with soldiers.

            That doesn't mean that she won't also be part of the media that unconsciously or not parrots right wing themes. People aren't "bad" or "good" in this regard (unless you have someone like Karl Rove & Company, who are professional liars.)
            Report Abuse
            • Author by neondesert (July 30, 2008 11:32 am ET)
                 

              Now hold on just a doggone minute, there.

              Are you really trying to claim that people aren't inherently good or evil?  If that was true, bad guys wouldn't wear black hats, spies wouldn't have eastern European accents, and drug addicts wouldn't transact their business with their housekeeper dealers at Denny's.  Terrorists would be white, pimps would drive Toyotas, and perverts would only tap their feet to the muzak in airport restrooms.  Your priests could be child molesters, your doctors could be killers, your entertainers could be impotent, and your vice-presidents children could be gay.

              How on earth would we fight evil if that was true?  You seem to be deluded by some crazy liberal idea that there's some sort of thick fuzzy line dividing the devine from the satanic.  You're living in a liberal hollywood movie, for crying out loud.  Wake up.

              Report Abuse
      • Author by archfiend (July 29, 2008 8:34 pm ET)
        1  
        Yeah, what is it about right-wingers that they think if we criticize someone's behavior, then we have to continue to criticize them even if their behavior changes?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by eddy3957 reregistered (July 29, 2008 8:53 pm ET)
          1  
          Yes, it is only they as the real Americans and their dupes, who are out for the good of America. The rest are foreign germs which must be destroyed by the real American autoimmune system.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by IRONY 101 (July 30, 2008 8:37 am ET)
             

          Some of us have previously been critical of Andrea Mitchell's reporting...I tend to attribute her occasional missteps to sloppiness. It wouldn't surprise me if Mitchell is mindful of periodic criticisms of her reporting. I'd bet someone points out to her when sites such as MMFA criticize her.

          This is admittedly conjecture, but I get the impression that many reporters such as Mitchell have had their fill with the dishonesty of the Bush/Cheney administration and are most likely offended by the same pattern they see emerging from John McCain's campaign. That might explain why Mitchell went out of her way to dispute the veracity of McCain's ad with some of her own first-hand knowledge.

          With that said, I also get the impression that some reporters are bending over backwards to appear unbiased and to prevent the impression they are pro-Obama. They probably feel it is not their job to refute everything that John McCain's campaign says about Barack Obama...that's the job of Obama and his people. That is perhaps one explanation, at least a partial explanation, of why reporting on the campaigns has been somewhat inconsistent.

          Report Abuse
      • Author by mefirst (July 29, 2008 8:45 pm ET)
           
        that would be the same one, oscar.  the same one who took shots at john kerry after one of the debates in 2004 when kerry criticized alan greenspan.  and mitchell is also mrs. greenspan, which she did not mention.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by my4cents (July 29, 2008 9:28 pm ET)
           

        Yes.

        I have done it too and am still surprised that she told the truth. I expect her to issue a retraction and / or slowly wriggle away.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by BottleBlonde (July 29, 2008 10:19 pm ET)
        1  

        Media Matters for America put in place, for the first time, the means to systematically monitor a cross section of print, broadcast, cable, radio, and Internet media outlets for conservative misinformation — news or commentary that is not accurate, reliable, or credible and that forwards the conservative agenda — every day, in real time.

        Andrea Mitchell might be a fairly frequent fount of misinformation that helps further the conservative agenda, and when she or anyone else does it, it gets pointed out. That doesn't mean she's the antichrist and all bad though. When she does something wrong, it's pointed out.

        Why is that so difficult for some black and white thinking righties to ..... never mind. I just answered my own question.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by IRONY 101 (July 30, 2008 8:52 am ET)
          1  

          Why is that so difficult for some black and white thinking righties to .....

          Ideology, ideology, ideology...

          Ideology trumps everything for people on the right...even country. Listen to Sean Hannity now saying that even if Barack Obama wins the presidency that his Stop The Radical Obama Express campaign will continue. Instead of supporting a new president and giving him the breathing room to do what's best for the country, Hannity and his empty-headed follwers are already prepared to undermine an Obama presidency.

          Ideology, ideology, ideology...

          Report Abuse
      • Author by jinxer (July 30, 2008 10:30 am ET)
        1  

        Oscar

        This is a case for responsible journalism....Andrea is doing exactly what's she's suppose to do as a journalist, which is, call a lie a lie when confronted with a candidate who obviously realizes that they had better find something negative, AND FALSE, to grag onto.

        He saw the troops at every stop AND we(being informed individuals) all know that to be the truth....this steadfast determination by Grandpa & his camp to portray this as something else is only going to bite them in the kiester.       

        Report Abuse
      • Author by historygeek001 (July 30, 2008 11:26 am ET)
        1  
        Perhaps you don't understand--this is not a site that smears people.  When the media provides Conservative misinformation, this site corrects it, irrespective of who says it. 
        Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (July 29, 2008 8:43 pm ET)
         
      Generally they refuse to reconsider any source that they've disgarded once. That this might be stupid in several ways, is just another astounding wingnut fact of life.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by MangyDog (July 29, 2008 9:44 pm ET)
      1  

      Mika seems like a nice person, but I wish she would show up better prepared to counter the continuous garbage that emanates from the insufferably smug Morning Blowhard, Joe Scarborough. It isn't that hard to predict what his talking points will be... I'm sure the RNC emails them to him every morning. I think she thinks she's being "a reasonable liberal" by constantly trying to make nice and be a peacemaker, but clod Scarborough just ridicules her and whoops it up with Boy Wonder Willie Geist.

      Get some self-respect and fight back!

      Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (July 29, 2008 9:44 pm ET)
      1  

      I think we are reaching a point with this fabricated faux issue that, unfortunately, Barack Obama may have to address it personally...and I think it's time that Obama speaks candidly and expresses his disappointment with John McCain and his people for outright lying. And he should use that word...lying.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by mary59 (July 29, 2008 11:26 pm ET)
         

      Now how many days can the press, goaded by the Republican attack machine, flog this stupid talking point?  Here's a diversion:  Remember when Reagan visited the cemetary where dead Nazi S.S. troops were buried  in Bitburg?*

      I don't believe for a second that Reagan had anything but disgust for the Nazi cause, but when he was urged to rethink his visit to the cemetary in Bitburg, he dug in his heels and made the trip despite a large outcry from the Jewish American community.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by BottleBlonde (July 29, 2008 11:47 pm ET)
         

      And does everyone know that according to one news report I saw, this ad actually only ran a grand total of 5 times?

      It was produced to act just like the SwiftBoat Vets press releases and ads were - they got much more airtime from the news media than they ever got through paid advertising.

      McCain produced this ad to smear Obama.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Governor (July 30, 2008 11:28 am ET)
         
      Washington Post: McCain Charge Against Obama Lacks Evidence
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/29/AR2008072902286.html?sid=ST2008072902360&pos=
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Governor (July 30, 2008 11:32 am ET)
           

        I screwed up that link.  Anyway... love this part:

        A reconstruction of the circumstances surrounding Obama's decision not to visit Landstuhl, based on firsthand reporting from the trip, shows that his campaign never contemplated taking the media with him." McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds told the Post that the campaign sticks by its allegation, citing media reports as its evidence. "Asked repeatedly for the 'reports,'  Bounds provided three examples, none of which alleged that Obama had wanted to take members of the media to the hospital."

        Report Abuse
    • Author by eniobob2631 (July 30, 2008 12:26 pm ET)
         

      Well:

    • Editorial: Low-Road Express
Report Abuse
  • Author by jinxer (July 30, 2008 2:42 pm ET)
       

    Perhaps you don't understand--this is not a site that smears people. 

    Oh contrare, I know exactly what this site is all about....I just don't get  the bloggers who come here(just to incite a reaction) to shoot the crap w/others & the issue/conversation gets off point.

    What I DO like about this site is that MMFA will try(I use this word lightly) to keep both sides honest(and realitively fair)in their presentation of various broadcasts. 

        

    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.

    Feed IconRSS Feeds

    Get personalized rss or email alerts

    Connect & Share

    Facebook Twitter Digg YouTube Reddit