Fox's Williams falsely suggested Obama has changed position in now supporting ROTC on campuses
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: On Fox News, Juan Williams falsely suggested that during the Democratic primary campaign Sen. Barack Obama did not support allowing ROTC on college campuses. In fact, when asked during a January debate, "Will you vigorously enforce a statute which says colleges must allow military recruiters on campus and provide ROTC programs?" Obama responded, "Yes."
During Fox News' coverage of the September 11 presidential forum on national service at Columbia University, National Public Radio news analyst and Fox News contributing political analyst Juan Williams falsely suggested that during the Democratic primary campaign Sen. Barack Obama did not support allowing Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) on college campuses. Citing Obama's comments that Columbia University should allow ROTC back on campus, Williams said:
I thought that the comments about ROTC, and the fact that Obama is willing to take on, I think, the left of his party, which is represented by people at Columbia who are opposed to ROTC going back to the Vietnam era and think that it has no place in an intellectual, academic environment, the fact that he is willing to do that again suggests that he is willing now to sort of run to the middle. I don't think you would have heard that from Barack Obama earlier during the primary campaign against Hillary Clinton.
But Williams' suggestion that Obama has shifted his position on ROTC after the primary is false: When asked by moderator Tim Russert during the January 15 Democratic presidential debate, "Will you vigorously enforce a statute which says colleges must allow military recruiters on campus and provide ROTC programs?" Obama responded, "Yes," and further stated:
One of the striking things, as you travel around the country, you go into rural communities and you see how disproportionally they are carrying the load in this war in Iraq, as well as Afghanistan. And it is not fair.
[...]
But I think that the obligation to serve exists for everybody, and that's why I've put forward a national service program that is tied to my tuition credit for students who want to go to college. You get $4000 every year to help you go to college. In return, you have to engage in some form of national service. Military service has to be an option.
Asked by Time managing editor Rick Stengel during the September 11 presidential forum on service, "Should Columbia and elite universities that have excluded ROTC invite them back on campus?" Obama responded, "Yes. I think we've made a mistake on that." He continued:
I recognize that there are students here who have differences in terms of military policy. But the notion that young people here at Columbia or anywhere, in any university, aren't offered the choice, the option of participating in military service, I think is a mistake.
That does not mean that we disregard any potential differences in various issues that are raised by the students here, but it does mean that we should have an honest debate while still offering opportunities for everybody to serve, and that's something that I'm pretty clear about.
From Fox News' coverage of the September 11 forum on national service:
OBAMA: But it's also important that a president speaks to military service as an obligation not just of some, but of many. You know, I traveled, obviously, a lot over the last 19 months. And if you go to small towns, throughout the Midwest or the Southwest or the South, every town has tons of young people who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's not always the case in other parts of the country, in more urban centers. And I think it's important for the president to say, this is an important obligation. If we are going into war, then all of us go, not just some.
STENGEL: To that end, to get the best and brightest into the military, this university, your alma mater, invited President [Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad of Iran to be here last year, but they haven't invited ROTC to be on campus since 1969. Should Columbia and elite universities that have excluded ROTC invite them back on campus?
OBAMA: Yes. I think we've made a mistake on that.
I recognize that there are students here who have differences in terms of military policy. But the notion that young people here at Columbia or anywhere, in any university, aren't offered the choice, the option of participating in military service, I think is a mistake.
That does not mean that we disregard any potential differences in various issues that are raised by the students here, but it does mean that we should have an honest debate while still offering opportunities for everybody to serve, and that's something that I'm pretty clear about.
[...]
HUME: I think it's fair to say that, if we are looking for differences on the issues tonight between McCain and Obama, there were very few, if any, and indeed they seemed to be shaving the edges off of differences that they might have had on the role of government service versus service generated in the private sector or by individuals and private charities and so on. Indeed, both of them agreed on whether ROTC should return to Columbia University, one of the only moments that seemed to strike any real spark there, because we know that Columbia has had this policy of no ROTC -- no to ROTC, but yes to Ahmadinejad, which caused an enormous amount of controversy for Columbia president Lee Bollinger when all of that unfolded earlier.
But tonight was a night when the two candidates seemed to agree on nearly everything and seemed perfectly comfortable with themselves -- with each other, I should say - as they did earlier when they encountered each other during the observances at Ground Zero in New York today. Nonetheless, it has been an eventful day. And we'll try to review this event and some of the others as well with our panel.
First of all, let's go around the table here with people who are joining me tonight. Juan Williams, your thoughts on this panel, on this event.
WILLIAMS: Well, you know, again, I thought there was no news here, but if you wanted to come down to the heart and soul of it, I thought that the comments about ROTC, and the fact that Obama is willing to take on, I think, the left of his party, which is represented by people at Columbia who are opposed to ROTC going back to the Vietnam era and think that it has no place in an intellectual, academic environment, the fact that he is willing to do that again suggests that he is willing now to sort of run to the middle. I don't think you would have heard that from Barack Obama earlier during the primary campaign against Hillary Clinton.
Are you crazy? He’s close to if not the most liberal senator.
Look at Rev Jeremiah Wright .. the guy is a leftwing radical nutcase yet is sane enough to be Obama’s pastor for 20 years and baptize his kids?
Come on; Obama is a leftwing extremist with nice clothes and an ability to hide his true agenda.
I'll stack up Obama's church against Palin's any day.
The rest of your talking points are old and worn thread-bare and unworthy of a response.
Exactly.
Prove to us Max that Obama is some sort of left wing radical. Guess what? You can't do it. Why? Because the policies he wants are what most of, as in the majority of, Americans want.
Okay, you go follow that nut Wright and his "God Damn America" rhetoric, but expect to loose the love and admiration of everyone outside that church and this message board.
Prove to us Max that Obama is some sort of left wing radical.
That’s like trying to prove to a flea that the dog on which they ride isn’t the center of the universe.
Because the policies he wants are what most of, as in the majority of, Americans want.
I disagree. I think what Americans want is a change from the George Bush.
Fortunately for the Democrats Obama arrived on the scene just in the nick-of-time to satisfy that itch. The unfortunate part of the story though is that Obama has failed to deliver anything of substance. His lofty blatherings are falling short of what Americans truly want and they are loosing interest.
What Americans want is change they can believe in, and fortunately we have John McCain and Sarah Palin with not only the experience and charisma to deliver the message of change to the American people, but the wherewithal to get it done.
I am Max Dharma and I approve of this message.
When we go to the polls in November it will be based on what we believe to be true. You won’t have Google there to research your thoughts at the time you pull the lever; you will need to do it based on what you believe on that day.
I speak from what I believe today, not my latest internet search.
Max wrote:
>> I speak from what I believe today, not my latest internet search.
Yup. We have a true, stupid freeper. You are admitting that you are not going to let facts get in your way. And yet you post here and probably demand respect. If you don't want a factually based argument, why bother debating, or even living in a democracy? Even a monkey can base a decision based on gut instinct. I would hope more from a human.
You know guys, none of this has anything to do with Juan Williams. You're letting trolls throw the thread.
Back to Williams-- don't you just love it when guys like Williams, who have never served, get all high and mighty about the ROTC?
What hypocrites.
What is it with you righties and your inablility to focus on a single topic? You spit out one talking point, then go skipping from talking point to talking point, like a kid hopping from rock to rock across a stream.
I had a friend ("had" - he apparently found me unsaveable, a "godless f**k" in his exact devout christian words) who was exactly the same way. Start off talking about how Wright was an America-hater, and 90 seconds later be ranting about the liberal media. Every time, always the same, barely a syllable variance.
I don't think you people are sick. Not really. I think it's just intellectual laziness. And after 8 years of it, it's caused mental atrophy.
That’s like trying to prove to a flea that the dog on which they ride isn’t the center of the universe.
Give it a shot anyway.
His lofty blatherings are falling short of what Americans truly want and they are loosing interest.
In your opinion, what do Americans truly want?
*cracks knuckles*
Well!
I think Americans more than anything want to be able to focus on their lives and the health and happiness of their families and friends. They do not want to worry that the country’s leadership is corrupt or making terrible decisions whether locally or abroad.
The American people want to see that those in true need are taken care of while at the same time assuring that they are not taken advantage by freeloaders and the lazy.
Americans want to see true representation in government of their wants and needs instead of the faux representation we have today with professional politicians.
To summarize, I think we all want the same things .. conservatives and liberals all want the same day-to-day health, happiness and security; we just have different ways of approaching the problems we face today.
So, if McCain and Palin are the "agents of change" that you so desire; why are their stances on just about everything the same crap we've been seeing from Bush since 2001? John "I voted with Bush 90% of the time" McCain is an agent of change? Please.
As I said before, show me some of Obama's policies that are allegedly far left radical stuff, and I might agree, but the sad thing is, is that you can't do it. Why? Because most of his policy positions are the ones that most Americans agree with, you know, the majority. Things such as health care for everybody, ending the war in Iraq, providing for our war veterans through improved vetern benefits, lower taxes for 95% of the country, stem cell research, pro-choice, and so on and so forth. You don't have, well, anything Max, and you have to admit to yourself that you're a far right conservative. That's what you want, and sure enough, most of the country is further to the middle, or left leaning in their opinions and what they think is right.
Over 80% of our country think we're on the wrong path. And McCain and Palin are the ones who are going to change it? Don't you, you know, have to have someone with different ideas before we can change? McCain wants to not only keep the Bush tax cuts, he wants to cut more. He wants to overtturn Roe V Wade. He wants to stay in Iraq for, possibly, ever. He wants to appoint Supreme Court justices in the mold of Thomas, Roberts, and Scalia. He thinks that our economy is doing just fine thank you very much. How is that change?
Oh, and Wright has nothing to do with this, and he's not anti American (he's SO anti American he served as a US Marine during the time when the military forces were still segregated that's how un-American he is). And, again, I keep repeating this, but I think that it is worth repeating. What else have you ever heard from the Reverand Wright, aside from the 20 seconds of his sermon that you knuckleheads like to yack about, that was even close to what he was saying in those 20 seconds? You keep talking about the man preaching hate for whitey and America for 20 years, and all that you have is 20 seconds of an impassioned sermon? In other words, you jokers have got nothing.
I'd like to get some video of Palin's pastor / priest, or whatever it is they have in her church? Why? I'm pretty sure we'd hear a lot of anti homo talk, gay bashing, speaking in tongues, and other crazy things like that, but I'm sure that IOKIYAR in this case, as is most things with folks like yourself.
Oh my goodness! Have you SEEN them? And those shoes?
They. Are. FAAAABulous!
Well, that’s just insane; but this is coming from one of those rightwing kooks that doesn’t believe the US Government invented AIDS to kill off the black man.
Max, What about her involvement with the AIP. Her husband was a member for seven years, even if she wasn't. I think Husbands are much more influential than Pastors. AND she spoke at one of their conventions, AND she's on tape saying what a good job the leader was doing. you know, the leader of the Party that said he hated America and its institutions.
What I have said here about Jeremiah Wright is a well documented fact.
Forgive my skepticism, but what you are asserting here sounds like leftwing wishful thinking; hope against hope that some dirt, any dirt can be uncovered to tarnish Gov Palin (whereby making Obama look a little more appealing.)
look these up, max,
youtube.com/watch?v=zwvPNXYrIyI
latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-aip32008sep03,0,6399468.story
nytimes.com/2008/09/04/us/politics/04party.html?ref=politics
youtube.com/watch?v=zwvPNXYrIyI
Youtube says “The video you have requested is not available.”
latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-aip32008sep03,0,6399468.story
NYT says
“Page Not Found
Sorry, the page you requested could not be found.”
nytimes.com/2008/09/04/us/politics/04party.html?ref=politics
interesting, thank you; although it’s hardly the smoking gun you hint at.
On Tuesday, though, the party’s chairwoman, Lynette Clark, said the earlier statement was false. Ms. Clark said that she had based it on information another party member had given her, but that a review of the records showed only that Ms. Palin had attended the 1994 conference.
Ms. Clark added that while the review confirmed Todd Palin as a member, it did not indicate that Ms. Palin had been one.
On Wednesday, Ms. Clark released a corrected statement, saying, in part, “I, foolishly, repeated and accepted as fact what an officer of this membership shared with myself, and husband Dexter Clark, over a year ago.”
“I humbly apologize to Governor Palin, and to both national and local press and media,” she added.
- and -
Ms. Clark objected to descriptions of her party as secessionist, saying it advocates “states’ rights” and “state sovereignty.”
Ms. Clark said she interpreted Ms. Palin’s attendance at the 1994 convention as reflecting an interest in hearing a variety of perspectives. “Her heart is very Alaskan,” she said, “and we have Alaskan issues.”
Ms. Clark added that while the review confirmed Todd Palin as a member, it did not indicate that Ms. Palin had been one.
And Rev. Wright baptized Obama's kids.
Hmmm.... I wonder who would have more influence? Someone who baptized your kids, or the person you've slept with for 20 years and for whom your loins have borne 5 kids?
Hmmmm...
We Know Obama attended that church for 20 years and thought enough of the man to have him baptize his kids.
We have no idea if Todd Palin ever attended more than one meeting/convention, gave them money, or believes any of their (supposed) negative doctrine.
Furthermore, Mrs. Clark denies they are secessionist and instead argues they believe in States Rights.
And by the way, I post on Media Matters For America; does that make me a leftwing lunatic? No, I just like knowing how the other side thinks ;)
Neon, you assume way too much.
I have to thank you, Max. For nearly 4 years, I've been wondering how on earth Bush could get re-elected. I could never understand the mind of those who would cast a vote for 4 more years of the worst president in history.
But in one fell swoop, you illustrated the detached logic necessary for a people not normally inclined toward masochism to subject themselves to yet one more term of catastrophic buffoonery.
You, sir, in a nutshell (and I mean that literally), have confirmed my pessimism.
I have to admit, Neon, that was a very compressed bit of wingnuttery.Asking Max to make a judgement between two choices, and she explains her choice by citing the relation to a third unrelated choice.
I had to read it twice, and I usually don't even read her posts once, as their just the garden variety kooky.This was different.
Q. Which is bigger, an apple or a car?
A. Definitely an apple. It's much bigger than a thumbtack.
I love Republicans.
I was impressed with it as well, Col.
The way Max' mind sped toward the ramps of assumption in a blaze of smoke and fury, each one launching it clear across the vast logical gaps without abandon nor second thought... Well, if Joey Chitwood built a human brain in his garage, I think this would be it. And he would be proud.At a news conference the following April 29, Barack Obama decried Wright's latest remarks as "a bunch of rants that aren't grounded in the truth".[51] He accused his former pastor of exploiting racism and "giving comfort to those who prey on hate." He characterized Wright’s National Press Club appearance as a “spectacle” and described its content as "outrageous" and "destructive."
"After seeing Reverend Wright's performance, I felt there was a complete disregard for what the American people are going through and the need for them to rally together to solve these problems," he said. "What mattered to him was him commanding center stage." Obama said he was "particularly angered" by Wright's allegation that the candidate was engaging in political posturing when he denounced the minister's earlier remarks. "If Reverend Wright considers that political posturing, then he doesn't know me very well," Obama said. "Based on his comments yesterday, well, I may not know him as well as I thought, either."[52]
On May 31, 2008, Obama announced that he had resigned from his membership in the Trinity United Church of Christ, of which Wright had previously served as pastor. [53]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Wright#Political_controversy
Perfect, absolutely perfect. You cannot be wrong under any circumstances; you cannot be wrong. And … when you are wrong, it is STILL the fault of the (imbeciles) on the right.
You realize it’s that type of rationalization that leads conservatives to believe liberals like you are a tad mental right?
Well, you don't believe what Mini Drama Believes, and what he believes is more important that all these 'facts' that you Godless liberals all put your faith in.
Got it?
Obama had a political responsibility to distance himself from Wright, thanks to the imbeciles on the right.
I disagree somewhat. Wright did a fantastic job in the interview with Bill Moyers and I think Obama expected him to continue with that tone or to fall below the radar. Then came the disastrous press conference and Wright (knowingly or unknowingly) threatened Obama's chance at winning the Democratic nomination by acting tactless and thoughtlessly. When a friend does that to you, it's time to get rid of him.
That was pretty much my thinking, which is why I think NOT denouncing Wright would have been political suicide. Thus a political responsibility to distance himself.
The fact is that guilt by association is a common, cheap political tactic, and the right used it in this case flawlessly. If the majority of American citizens were informed and introspective, the cons smearing of Wright wouldn't have been effective. However combine a "God DAMN America!" quote with a black face and a few "baptized his children" bumper sticker verses, and you've got yourself an America-hating terrorist abettor in Obama.
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTg3ZTI1YTBiOTZmNzU0MzViNzU0NzljNWVjNWE0ODU=
Obama taught at the University of Chicago 20 years after the Vietnam War. Just what was he supposed to do about it?
Your link doesn't work.
Apparently you have no kids, or a reasonable funny sense of humor.
His position doesn't include forcing colleges or universities to do something they don't want to do. And I don't think ROTC should be allowed on any campus when republicans are in charge. All they do is abuse the troops and send them on unnecessary missions which could result in their deaths.
The question you have to ask yourself is this Max.
20+ years after the ROTC was kicked off of that campus; was it even an issue? Did it ever come up when Obama was a professor there? Probably not. Why? It had been established, and they were gone. And had been for a long time.
Maybe if students hadn't been killed by the military on a college campus more colleges would have allowed ROTC and/or recruitment.
Barack Obama then spoke and said “Be not afraid, for I am the chosen one.
Everything about our country is broken and I alone know how to fix it. Bush is evil, and I am good. I will talk with all world leaders and see that we regain the love and admiration that I know you all need so dearly. I will provide healthcare for one and all, and make sure that the wicked rich man pays and pays.
Yes, I am here for you. Come snuggle under my wing and I shall take your to a higher place.”
How was that?
hehe
Thing is, the only people calling Obama the Messiah, are you guys. Nobody else is doing it. So he has a lot of people following him. God forbid that a possible president of these here United States actually is, you know, popular with people. God forbid people flock to hear him speak, and want to listen to what he has to say. God forbid that he might have some good ideas in there, and want to, you know, help the country. You guys are ridiculous, trying to play off Obama's popularity like it's a bad thing. You know damn well that if McCain could actually get 80,000 people to fill up a stadium to hear him speak, they would be doing it every single day of the week, and that's all we would hear about for months on end.
You guys are ridiculous, and essentially are bankrupt of new ideas.
That’s the problem Maggie, he says nothing except:
1. What’s wrong with America
2. What’s wrong with the current administration
3. And how “this is the moment”
It’s so empty, can’t you see that?
He’s got a pair of 3s, that’s it.
Liberals and Conservatives differ in a very fundamental way; Conservatives look at what’s right with America and Liberals look at what’s wrong with America.
This is why I (a true Conservative) turn away from the doom and gloom message of Barack Obama.
Conservatives look at what’s right with America and Liberals look at what’s wrong with America.
There it is in a nutshell folks, a prime example of the ignorant electorate. You know, Max, in order to make things better, you have to identify what's wrong. But you can keep blissfully whistling at the moonlight. When the positive change comes, we'll bring you along with us. That's the kind of people we are.
Oh, it goes waaaay beyond just conservatives looking at what is right with America. They can sit there and actually (this is true, we've seen it in real life) they can actually SAY that something that is not right IS right, and it becomes right! It's a doggam miracle, I tell ya.
Remember how bad the economy was day before yesterday? Well, hannity said it was good, unemployment was the lowest it's been in 30 years, GNP is up, the economy gained 1.3%, and BOOM - yesterday, the economy was good. All those people got their houses back, Fannie and Freddie went back to private holdings, Bear Stearns turned their electricity back on, the DOW hit 14000, and gas was back to $2/gallon...
That kind of thinking is what brought us soup lines and bank failures in 1929.
Max, you’re right wing "conservitive" party turned away from the doom and gloom (or adult) message of then President Carter about the countries need to end our Middle East oil dependence/energy crisis and instead decided to delude yourselves along with the rest of the populace buying instead the Reagan "Morning in America" or bury your "tiny little heads" and don't listen to that mean ol Democrat political snow job. And with a smug self righteousness Reagan then proceeded to rip the solar panels of the white house and, in effect began to plunge us back into that same dangerous dependant world Carter had warned about that we are now locked in to two wars, maybe three if Bush has his way with Russia, trying to defend or some might argue control. That's what your kind of optimism gets the rest of us.Weak.
Even for a conservative.
For private tutoring, get in touch with Col. Harlan Sanders. He's no miracle worker, but he stands a better chance than anyone...
Hey, don't be sending your problem students my way, I've got my hands full as it is. Besides, I just see the bad in everything.
I think maybe this goes along with the cons love of authority, always looking for a daddy.I'd guess that many conservatives were raised by parents who only saw what was right with their kids.
And everybody knows those are the best parents, the ones who never see any fault in their little miracles. It gives those kids a chance to go find the dominant figure they never had, whether they find it in a pimp, Republican leader, cellmate, priest or dominatrix.
Max, you obviously have never ACTUALLY LISTENED to an Obama speech. You only spout Repub's talking points. I know the right likes to ignore reality, it does have a liberal bias after all. To make a statement that Obama is "doom and Gloom" and to say the Liberals "look to whats wrong with America" is just silly. I don't remember who said it, but I like this statement. The right wing looks at America like a five year old looks at their parents. To a five year old, their parents can do no wrong, never lie and always do the right thing, and never need any help. Their parents are the be all, and and all. The left wing looks at america like an adult looks at their parents. They see the flaws, and undrestand that their parents are human, and occasionaly need some help with some things, but they love them anyway. This whole right loves America/ left hates America just shows how simplistic, bankrupt the rights views are.
Incorrect. I am the original RINO-CON(tm)
That is: a Republican In Name Only - Conservative.
I’m more independent than Republican.
I watched the entire DNC and thought Hillary’s was superb. I also thought Bill was quite good.
I thought Barack was weak and empty.
Don’t tell anyone, but I would prefer 1 Hillary to 5 Barracks.
The old standard dodge, "I'm really more of an independent than I am a Republican".
Yep. It's a classic. Why do some people think that labeling themselves as an independent somehow makes their arguments any less stupid?