On the December 10 edition of ABC's This Week, Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) explained to host George Stephanopoulos his emotional statement on the floor of the Senate, in which he denounced the Iraq war as the result of “turning on the news” on December 6 and “hearing that yet another 10 of our soldiers died the same way that several thousands have ... through roadside bombs.” Similarly, on the December 11 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, Smith told host Wolf Blitzer that he had changed his mind because he had believed that the war was about “taking out a tyrant and a terrorist and ridding him of weapons of mass destruction and establishing democracy” but had now turned the United States into “street cops in a sectarian civil war.” Asked why he had changed his position, Smith referred to “a number of books” he had recently read that “got me thinking and stirred up” and cited again “the news that 10 more of our fighting men and maybe -- a woman” who “were killed, again in another roadside bomb.” Neither Stephanopoulos nor Blitzer challenged Smith to explain why he waited until after the November 7 midterm elections to denounce the war.

Additionally, neither asked Smith about the assertion by Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-DE) before the election that two Republican senators had told him that they planned to denounce the war after the election.

As Media Matters for America has documented, most of the media ignored ABC News senior national correspondent Jake Tapper's October 6 weblog post, in which Tapper wrote that, according to Biden, “two other Senate Republicans” in addition to Sen. John Warner (R-VA) will “break with the White House Iraq strategy,” but only after the election when “the need to protect the president will be nonexistent.” Stephanopoulos was one of the few media figures who actually did take note of Biden's reported claim, mentioning it on the October 8 edition of ABC's This Week. On the November 5 edition of CBS' Face the Nation, Biden repeated the claim, saying that "[b]efore we left for the election cycle, two of my senior Republican colleagues contacted me, and said when we get back they wanted to join me in coming up with a bipartisan plan."

On December 7, Smith gave a Senate floor speech, in which he declared: “I, for one, am at the end of my rope when it comes to supporting a policy that has our soldiers patrolling the same streets in the same way, being blown up by the same bombs day after day.”

But notwithstanding Stephanopoulos' recognition of Biden's statement, and notwithstanding the fact that more than 2,900 U.S. service members had already died in Iraq when Smith heard about the 10 on December 6, Stephanopoulos did not challenge Smith on the timing of his statement. He did not ask if Smith was one of those Republicans who reportedly decided before the election to denounce the war after November 7. While Stephanopoulos did say that "[c]ertainly, a lot of Republicans following the election feel more free to oppose President Bush," he also characterized Smith's reversal as “deeply personal” and reflecting “a dramatic change of heart.”

From the December 10 edition of ABC's This Week:

STEPHANOPOULOS: That was clearly a deeply personal speech, and it showed a dramatic change of heart. What triggered it?

SMITH: Waking up the other morning and turning on the news, and hearing that yet another 10 of our soldiers died the same way that several thousands have --

STEPHANOPOULOS: Wednesday.

SMITH: --Wednesday, through roadside bombs -- and I went from steamed to boiled. And I felt I had to speak out because if we're going to be there, let's win; if we're not, let's -- let's at least fight the war on terror in a way that makes sense.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You said in that speech the current policy may be criminal.

[...]

STEPHANOPOULOS: You think it's time to leave?

SMITH: I believe that we have an ongoing interest in -- in the war on terror, and Iraq is one of the battlefields. But I believe we need to reposition ourselves in a way that allows us to take on the murderers and the weapons of war that come across the borders of Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. Ultimately, we want the Iraqis to make the political decisions that will ultimately allow a government to emerge.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator Biden, this seems like a watershed moment.

BIDEN: It is. Look, George, two incredible things happened: one, the election on November 7th; two, the Baker commission -- my friend here and others in the Republican Party, as well as Democratic Party. And what they're saying when you cut through it all: “Either figure out how we're going to have traded a dictator for stability or leave.” And that's a gigantic shift.

Everyone from [Sen.] John McCain [R-AZ], who says it a different way, to Joe Biden, to -- across the board, is saying: “We have one last shot to figure out how to deal with the chaos in Iraq.” If we can't, you better get out. And my view is, if you can't deal with the chaos -- and I have a formula how I would propose doing that, it's not apart from the study group's recommendations -- but if you can't, you better disengage and contain.

[...]

FAREED ZAKARIA: The whole history of these troop surges, and we have done them, we did one in Baghdad three months ago, is that you suppress the violence. The bad guys go into hiding. The minute you leave, they come out again because the fundamental cause of the violence is the political discord between the Sunnis and Shias over who controls Iraq.

STEPHANOPOULOS: And that's the point that Senator Smith made, as well. Cokie -- the politics of this. Certainly, a lot of Republicans following the election feel more free to oppose President Bush. You heard Senator Smith have a position somewhat like Senator McCain's. What it makes me wonder is: Is Senator McCain going to be driven by the logic of his argument in one month, two month, three months, four months to be for getting out?

From the December 11 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:

BLITZER: Senator, a powerful emotional statement, I know, coming from your gut, coming from your heart. Why the about-face?

SMITH: Well, Wolf, if you have the privilege of representing one of the United States, and you have a voice and a vote, now is the time to speak up, and I felt duty-bound to say what was on my heart, and to describe how this war had mutated from one thing to another -- from taking out a tyrant and a terrorist and ridding him of weapons of mass destruction and establishing democracy to now being street cops in a sectarian civil war. That's not what I voted for. That is not what the American people are for.

BLITZER: So, you've concluded this is now a civil war in Iraq?

[...]

BLITZER: Was there one issue, one thing that happened that pushed you over to deliver this remarkable address on the Senate floor?

SMITH: Well, I've read a number of books recently that got me thinking and stirred up, and then I woke up Wednesday -- I believe it was -- to the news that 10 more of our fighting men and maybe -- a woman, I don't know -- but they were killed, again in another roadside bomb, and I -- I just simply hit the -- the end of the rope, if you will, and I felt I had to speak up because if these sacrifices are being made in pursuit of a policy that cannot succeed, then we need to admit it and readjust in a way that the American people and our soldiers find worth the sacrifice, and this is not.

BLITZER: You used the word “criminal” in that statement -- a very sharp, pointed word. If, in fact, some of the actions committed by the U.S. were criminal, who should be held accountable?