The mainstream media and Democrats will do anything to try to get their candidate into the White House.
Today in the Washington Post former Clinton official Jamie Rubin wrote a dishonest hit piece about Senator McCain:
Despite his reputation in the media as a charming maverick, McCain has shown that he is also happy to use Nixon-style dirty campaign tactics...Later today The whole interview was released and it showed that Rubin was cherry-picking clips from the discussion to twist John McCain's words.
McCain, meanwhile, is guilty of hypocrisy. I am a supporter of Hillary Clinton and believe that she was right to say, about McCain's statement on Hamas, "I don't think that anybody should take that seriously." Unfortunately, the Republicans know that some people will. That's why they say such things.
But given his own position on Hamas, McCain is the last politician who should be attacking Obama. Two years ago, just after Hamas won the Palestinian parliamentary elections, I interviewed McCain for the British network Sky News's "World News Tonight" program. Here is the crucial part of our exchange:I asked: "Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have in the past, working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is now in charge?"
McCain answered: "They're the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so . . . but it's a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that."
Here is the whole segment of the interview between Rubin and John McCain (1 minute 13 seconds) including the part that was omitted by Rubin and the WaPo:
Here's the transcript:
Jamie Rubin: “Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have been in the past, in working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is in now charge?”Obviously, this is completely different than what Jamie Rubin reported today in the Washington Post.
Sen. John McCain: “They’re the government and sooner or later we‘re going to have to deal with them in one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas is because of their dedication to violence and the things they not only espouse but practice, so, but it’s a new reality in the Middle East. And I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and a decent future then they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that.”
Rubin: “So should the United States be dealing with that new reality through normal diplomatic contacts to get the job done for the United States?”
Sen. McCain: “I think the United States should take a step back, see what they do when they form their government, see what their policies are, and see the ways that we can engage with them, and if there aren’t any, there may be a hiatus. But I think part of the relationship is going to be dictated by how Hamas acts, not how the United States acts.”
Also... Senator McCain also held an interview with CNN that same day in Davos, where McCain stated this on Hamas:
John McCain Says Hamas Must Renounce Its Commitment To The Extinction Of The State Of Israel.This was from CNN's "Saturday Morning News," on 1/28/06.
CNN'S BETTY NGUYEN: " All right, let's shift over to the global front. The Bush administration is reviewing all aspects of U.S. aid to the Palestinians now that Hamas has won the elections. And I do have to quote you here. A State Department spokesman did say this: 'To be very clear' – and I'm quoting now – 'we do not provide money to terrorist organizations.' What does this do to the U.S. relationship with the Palestinians?"
MCCAIN: "Well, hopefully, that Hamas now that they are going to govern, will be motivated to renounce this commitment to the extinction of the state of Israel. Then we can do business again, we can resume aid, we can resume the peace process."
** Here is Fred Hiatt’s e-mail address at the Washington Post.
I urge you all to ask Fred (politely) to retract this dishonest hit piece:
hiattf@washpost.com
UPDATE: Good for Lou Dobbs for smacking down political hack Jamie Rubin tonight for his dishonest report on McCain.
The Weekly Standard Blog has the transcript.
Without the lies and hyperbole they would have too little to say, everyone would realize their irrelevance and they would swell the ranks of the lame.
ReplyDeleteJamie Rubin is married to CNN's Christiane Amanpour.
ReplyDeletelink:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F02E3D8103BF93AA3575BC0A96E958260
Slightly OT but pertinate.
ReplyDeleteBarack Obama: the new Great Redeemer
To be fair, the Newsweek credo was only the latest and perhaps most shameless phase of the pro-Obama liturgy in the media. Some cable TV channels prostrate themselves nightly before him. Most newspapers worship at the altar. They have already set up a neat narrative for the election between Senator Obama and John McCain in November - the Second Coming versus Old Grouchy, The Little Flower of Illinois up against the Scaremongering Axeman from Arizona.
There's a special irony here. Senator McCain is the Republican who has received probably the single most favourable treatment from the media in the past 40 years. He has been a favourite because he conformed to the first law of contemporary political journalism: the only good conservative is a bad conservative. His willingness to defy his party on everything from taxes to global warming, to take on George Bush, has earned him at least an honourable mention in the martyrology of American politics of the past 40 years.
But now that he's up against Oh! Bama! he will have to be recast in the more familiar Republican mould of villain and scaremonger-in-chief.
This media narrative is not only an outgrowth of the journalists' natural enthusiasm for a Democrat such as Mr Obama. It is also a clever ploy to pre-emptively de-legitimise any Republican critique of the Democratic nominee. It is designed to prevent Mr McCain from asking reasonable questions about Mr Obama's strikingly vacuous political background, or raising doubts about his credentials for the presidency.
Of course the Obamaniacs are over at the Times right now flogging Mr. Baker for daring to say anything negative about the Obamamessiah.
Here is the contact information for the Washington Post ombusdman, Deborah Howell
ReplyDeleteombudsman@washpost.com
Remember, rudeness is not persuasive. If you can't keep it clean, please do not use this address, because she will write a column about those nasty people sending the emails, and the original subject matter will be lost.
That anonymous was me.
ReplyDeleteValerie
Nahanni's comment is exactly right. Prior to this election cycle, leftists loved to site McCain on any of a number of issues where he defied the conservative wing of the Republican Party, but now that he's running against them, he's suddenly the devil incarnate.
ReplyDeleteThe media and leftists alike propped McCain on a pedestal as a symbol of a "good Republican". This rhetoric was hallow support and done out of nothing more then political expediency at the time, apparent now that they are facing McCain.
On more then one occasion I've seen comments on leftwing blogs that only validate that, with concerns expressed by leftists that they praised and used McCain in the past, and are now forced to swallow their previous sins.
McCain is going to whitewash Obama in the general election. Not as bad as 1980, but I've never been more convinced that Obama will lose badly then I am today.
There was a time when I wanted to give Obama the benefit of the doubt. But more and more, speech after speech, its always the same non-message with no substance. Neither is his background vetted. A pattern of manipulation of the American voter is occuring, where Fast Barry is never looked at, nor his background. No experience; and socialistic leanings. Arabist friends. Assumptions about redistributing wealth - as if he had the right. This man is hiding something, which is always why he can't give no details in his messages - this is too great a risk, electing him, for he resembles the true marxist predecessor and pathmaker. Say any candy to get them to elect you - and then you can create the communist classless, equal-wealth, racelss society. The trick is, it doesn't resemble the old communism - its a new communism cloaked always in seeming ideals that can appeal to the naieve. When he said that average whitey voters cling to religion, he was repeating Marx's "religion 'as the opiate of the people.'" No, I cannot trust this man, his Arabist and Socialist mentors - he should at the least have had 8 years in the Senate. But all we have to go on for his record is a hundred state legislature votes where he like a chicken merely said, "Present" instead of taking a stand. He can attract the crowd with slogans, leftist activists like Kos, or African Americans prepared to ignore the record...but we had better wake up to what's going on here - his new age cultlike statements, "we are the one's we've been waiting for!" and allowing the young to chant in a drone-like way, "Obama-Obama-Obama-Obama-Obama" well, I say I can't go for this kind of false messiah crap and i'm going to McCain. THe MSM Liberal media can go bugg off.
ReplyDelete