ABC Finds Soldiers in Iraq Backing Candidates: Obama and Clinton

Photo of Brent Baker.
By Brent Baker | April 7, 2008 - 22:55 ET

ABC, which wasn't so interested in 2004 in reporting overwhelming military support for President Bush over John Kerry, on Monday night aired a story on how soldiers in Iraq are split between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton -- with only an afterthought about how “some” prefer John McCain. Relating how “only moments before we talked to them, these troops had been listening to Vice President Cheney give a rousing speech,” but Cheney “didn't change their political preference,” Raddatz played clips from two soldiers backing Obama and two supporting Clinton.

Those endorsing one of the Democrats echoed common campaign themes as Obama's supporters asserted Obama “has our better interests in mind” and “he represents change” while the Clinton backers declared “that her husband did a good job as President” and “that we should have a gradual draw down,” but Raddatz chose to air just this one soundbite from the McCain supporter with a rather narrow self-interest: “Well, Republicans paid my paycheck this far. Might as well keep it going.”

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

The November 2, 2004 MRC CyberAlert item, “Most in Military Back Bush, But ABC and CBS Avoid that Reality,” recounted:

Though it's illegal to poll the military about their voting choices, a National Annenberg Election Survey found that when those in the active duty military were "asked whom they would trust more to handle the responsibility of commander-in-chief, 69 percent...preferred Bush to 24 percent for Kerry" while 69 percent had a favorable view of Bush compared to just 29 percent for Kerry. But on Monday night, CBS and ABC managed to avoid conveying that presidential preference in stories on Marines in Iraq preparing for an assault on Fallujah. CBS's Kimberly Dozier asserted that "most" of the Marines "didn't even know Election Day was almost here." A Lance Corporal declared: "I really don't have any favorites right now. They both got their pluses and their minuses."

ABC's Jim Sciutto, however, found the Marines very aware of the election with "many" having "voted three weeks ago" by absentee ballot. Sciutto featured a political comment from one Marine who echoed Ralph Nader: "I hope that the people try to make the decision on who to vote for take into consideration that this conflict needs to end. And it needs to end now."...

The MRC's Brad Wilmouth corrected the closed-captioning against the video to provide this transcript of the story on the Monday, April 7 World News on ABC:

CHARLES GIBSON: We have heard a great deal from voters in this campaign season. But one block of voters we haven't heard from much are the men and women stationed in Iraq. The war is their key issue, of course, but it's not the only one. ABC's Martha Raddatz has talked with many of the troops about whom they support and why.

MARTHA RADDATZ: The military is not supposed to engage in partisan political activity, making these endorsements by troops in Iraq all the more striking. Who do you want for President?

PRIVATE FIRST CLASS JEREMY SLATE, U.S. ARMY: Barack Obama.

RADDATZ: And why?

SLATE: Because I think he has our better interests in mind. Yes.

RADDATZ: He wants to pull out of Iraq right away.

SLATE: Yes, so.

RADDATZ: You do, too?

SLATE: Well, that would be nice. I'd like to be home. Yes.

STAFF SERGEANT MIRANDA GLOVER, U.S. ARMY: Probably Hillary.

RADDATZ: Why?

GLOVER: Because I think that her husband did a good job as President.

RADDATZ: Only moments before we talked to them, these troops had been listening to Vice President Cheney give a rousing speech. But he didn't change their political preference.

SPECIALIST IMUS LOTO, U.S. ARMY: Obama.

RADDATZ: And why?

LOTO: I think he, it will be something different.

RADDATZ: He wants to pull out of Iraq.

LOTO: Pull me out, too.

FIRST SERGEANT DAVID LOGAN, U.S. ARMY: I'm leaning towards Hillary. I think that we should have a gradual drawdown.

RADDATZ: Who are you supporting for President?

SERGEANT FIRST CLASS PATRICIA KELLER, U.S. ARMY: Barack Obama.

RADDATZ: And why?

KELLER: He represents a change.

RADDATZ: There were some McCain backers. Why is that?

SENIOR AIRMAN JEDIDIAH BRYAN, U.S. ARMY: Why? Well, Republicans paid my paycheck this far. Might as well keep it going.

RADDATZ: On visits to Iraq and Afghanistan, we found that U.S. troops are following the presidential race and the issues closely -- issues far beyond the wars they are fighting.

SPECIALIST MATTHEW DURKIN, U.S. ARMY: I'd have to say that education back in the states is one of my main concerns.

UNIDENTIFIED SOLDIER: The economy is a big part. Things like gas prices and looking at the environment and what we're going to be leaving to our children.

RADDATZ: These soldiers, deployed here a year ago, some of them for the second or third time.

SERGEANT JUSTIN SARBAUM, U.S. ARMY: Iran, obviously, a big issue. Here in Iraq for my third time as, you know, is starting another world right now, is that really necessary?

RADDATZ: Immigration. Where does that stand with you?

SPECIALIST GUY ANDREASON, U.S. ARMY: I think that's a big deal. As far as illegal immigrants coming over here and, you know, working under the table.

LIEUTENANT DANIEL HARTMAN, U.S. ARMY: My platoon sergeant, for example, he was born in Mexico. Immigrants do contribute to our society. But I think a lot of people forget that. They just focus on the problem.

RADDATZ: At this remote outpost in Afghanistan, where these soldiers have also spent the last year, many of the same concerns.

LIEUTENANT LEAH WICKS, U.S. ARMY: We do think about, you know, how our family's doing back home. And so that's, those are major concerns, like how the economy is doing and also, as well as, you know, where we're going to be in the future.

RADDATZ: These opinions are likely to matter. In 2004, 73 percent of the U.S. military voted for a presidential candidate. Officials believe it may be even higher this time around. Martha Raddatz, ABC News, with U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The ABCNews.com online version of the Raddatz story, with video of it.

—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Oh yeah, I believe that!

I was born at night, but not last night.

Que'lle crap. 

P.S.  Lieutenants in the Army do not speak like Val Girls.

David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive

 

Traditionally, the military backs the GOP.

Perhaps that won't be true in this election - but I doubt it.  McCain's a war veteran, he has a son serving in Iraq.   

Oh yes,

And the military just loves Hillary Clinton.

She was given the nic "Broomstick 11" on a trip to Iraq several years ago.  And an officer was photographed giving the POW high sign for distress while standing with her Highness.

The incessant media hype, about these clueless democrats, is just beyond belief.

Someone is buying it, apparently.  I don't have a clue, exactly who.....but there must be some dumbass out there somewhere, who believes our military members want the Clintonista harridan as CIC.

Riiiiiight. 

David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive

 

Blonde, I wonder how long

Blonde,

I wonder how long it took ABC to find this “random" sampling of military personal that mostly support the democratic presidential hopefuls.

While we’re in this bizarro parallel universe, how about a story that features university profs, Code Pink members and Daily Kos contributors who, for the most part, support McCain?

But I thought the same thing you did - are there really people walking around after viewing this "story" saying - "Gee, I guess that most folks in the military are gonna vote democrat this year"?

 

Quite, hD

It would be interesting to know how many of the young gentlemen (and ladies) in the service academies are supporting Obama, or Hillary.

An unscientific survey would be most illuminating, wouldn't you agree?   Of course, the REAL numbers would be even more fascinating.

But, you as as a scientist, and me as a data cruncher...might have a bit more to say about all of it than the touchy-feely lib media.  LOL.

Seriously, though, the media must really believe we are STUPID.    Do you possibly suppose the media imagines that anyone believes this garbage?

David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive

 

Blonde, Well, I'm sure a

Blonde,

Well, I'm sure a prof in such a position would be professional enough not to interject things like politics into a classroom setting where it doesn't apply.

Wink.

But unscientifically, we both know the answer to your query.

And the unfortunate part is that there are people out there who are stupid enough to believe this crap. The MSM knows it which is why they do it.

“She’s the greatest

“She’s the greatest First Lady we’ve ever had! I’m ready to spend another year here now.”

.... and they reported this as if he meant it. Soldiers don't believe in sarcasm. <sarc off> 

MSM - shaping all the perceptions you need to believe.

Clarification

Maybe not LTs in the Army...

But, sad to say, I have seen some in the AF who do...

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

Unsane, Correct me if I am

Unsane, Correct me if I am wrong here ...  but, does the UCMJ not apply to the US Army as well as the Navy and AF?

Does not the UCMJ forbid serving members from direct participation in political activity?

Is not this interview, by publicly expressing political preferences for later broadcast at home, direct political activity and contrary to regulation?

You can bet that if this were my command I sure as hell would have prohibited this interview.

NL207, your right. The UCMJ

NL207, your right. The UCMJ forbids the direct participation in political campaigns, and also senior members trying to influence, using their rank, the junior members. But it is allowed to discuss and it is allowed for them to voice their opinions. Nothing illegal about asking a soldier political question. But he/she cannot go out and hand out flyers, collect mony or take an other wise active roll.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

Bass, I think making a film

Bass, I think making a film you know or even suspect is going to be used to further a political agenda back home while you are in uniform is direct politcal participation while in uniform.

NL, Im not sure here. A

NL, Im not sure here. A reporter asking questions, and you not knowing if yours will be used or not. I have never faced this situation before, so unsure of exactly where the line is. I know I was told we could not even attend a political event, in uniform. And I dont think any of them spoke aginst the President or sitting powers.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

For NL207

NL - I'm no Legal officer type, BUT I know that Article 88 proscribes those interviewed from saying anything critical of the Commander-in-Chief.  There is an AFI whose number escapes me right now that I have a copy of as I was once a voting officer (helped people vote absentee) which proscribes all sorts of political activities while allowing others. 

I'm not quite sure where this would fall, but if I were a commander, I would strongly encourage my troops to keep political opinions to themselves while at the same time encouraging their participation in the system.  I don't discuss politics in uniform and run from the conversation if it even veers in that direction, if for no other reason than the fact that I know I am deeply opinionated and NEED to keep quiet in certain situations.  (Hell, I cringed when I receivd my absentee ballot in the office with the words "REPUBLICAN PARTY BALLOT" stamped on the envelope.)

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

73% of military voted in 2004, she states-but not how voted!

She states 73% of military voted in 2004, but would not give the stats on what percentage voted R, voted D.  Wonder why?  USA TODAY & CNN both stated military voted 4 to 1 for R over D.

And why?????

Did the Gore campaign screw themselves inside out to throw away the military absentee ballots in 2000?

Hmmmm.... 

David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive

 

Well we get what we get

Difficult to think the military would vote for either of these democrats BUT ....

We get what we get?

We are screwed!

This is propaganda at its

This is propaganda at its most disgusting: cherrypicking the statements of a few soldiers and presenting them as if they're the whole story. The closest this piece of "journalism" ever got to an even neutral presentation of a right wing viewpoint was the inclusion of the "illegals working under the table" comment (and even then that's a stretch; but hey, in the minds of liberals, a statement like that is enough to get you labeled a xenophobe). The one McCain backer they showed came off as a cold-hearted bastard who put his paycheck above human lives. Please. Everyone knows that if McCain has one relatively solid base of supporters, it's in the military crowd, and to run this segment and pretend as if the majority of the armed forces serving in Iraq and Afghanistan support either Hillary or Obama is really nothing short of pathetic and disingenuous damage control for the fractured Democratic Party. Too bad the conveniently uninterviewed McCain supporters over there won't ever see this segment. Most of 'em can't stand anything other than Fox News.


"I think government is a necessary evil, like, say, motion picture agents." -John Wayne

 Oh, yea that's right I

 Oh, yea that's right I almost forgot there was a war going on over there. In fact had I not been watching this:

http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/259635.php

.....when they decided to cut over to the green zone in mid speech, I may have forgotten altogether.

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

                   - Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

                               " The Cake is a lie."   

This is so typical...

The MSM can't stand the idea that the vast majority in the US military lean right politically (always have), so they go looking for the few that lean left. Coming from a military family background on all sides for as far back as anyone knows, I know from personal experience that the Armed Forces have traditionally leaned right. It is so transparent and shameless what the MSM is trying to do, it's almost funny. 

I'm in a whirl from all this spin.......

Raddatz hunts down and focuses on the small percentage of troops that support Obama.  This isn't news.  It's spin.

I am retired military.

I am also a conservative. I like John McCain. I would have no problems with a John McCain Presidency.

I don't like Hillary Clinton.

I am starting to understand BDS when it comes to Obama. I really really really am starting to loathe this man.

First it was the flag. The military is big on the ceremony, and the U.S Flag is part of the ceremony.

Every single time he comes close to military matters, he sticks his foot in his mouth.

His latest blunder is the "strike force" that will remain in or close to Iraq. Uh, guess what, no such animal. I hate to say this but google it, it only exist in Ninja Obama's mind. Obama the military expert will have to create one. Navy, Marines, Army, Air Force, Strike Force Death Squad One!

Personally, I think he saw Team America World Police one too many times. 

Yowza, Barak exposed

B Hussein O exposed.

A Tom Clancy fan, apparently.  Just the military genius we need for our times.

Not!

Excellent post. 

David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive

 

 Yea Blonde but Barry

 Yea Blonde but Barry probably didn't gain his foriegn policy experience from Clancy's book's as much as he did playing his  "Rainbow Six" or "Ghost Recon" line of videogames.........and if he did  read the book's, I'll bet he cried when the Russian's lost at the end of "Red Storm Rising":

"G-damn Amerikkka !!!"

You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "

                   - Ben Kenobi on  Liberals, and the MSM.

                               " The Cake is a lie."   

Research

Obviously this poll was conducted using the look until you find what you want method.

...as usual JM. Nothing

...as usual JM.

Nothing new...same ol' same ol'...

"Never murder your opponent when he is committing suicide." ~ W. Churchill

Who supports who?

The lame stream media could did up Saddam, put his head on a post next to him and try and convince the American public that the military supported the return of Saddam to power. Sad thing is, some democrats really would support him and the lame stream media would quote only the few, and I don't mean the few, the proud, the marines. Has anyone ever ask why anyone joins the military if not to fight? As a 22 year vet I volunteered to go where the action was and it's that way today. Just remember you have 'barely' educated media types questioning the mentallity of someone with 10 times the educaton and a hundred times the experience at everything. BDS has ate what little brain they had.

 

Old, Retired and glad of it.

"Has anyone ever ask why

"Has anyone ever ask why anyone joins the military if not to fight?"

Well, I remember during Desert Shield/Desert Storm there was some talk of that. IIRC, an Army (?) member actually tried to get out rather than be deployed. They claimed that they had joined merely to get the help with college, and it wasn't fair to send them off into combat. That wasn't what they "signed up for."

Honest to God. Unreal, huh? 

*brushing aside* No problem with this. Whatever. . .

As long as they count every soldier's vote.  That's all I care about.

MARTHA RADDATZ: The military is not supposed to engage in partisan political activity, making these endorsements by troops in Iraq all the more striking. Who do you want for President?

*double-take*

Wait-wait. . .what? 

I spoke too soon. 

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07

Yeah, trake, I was trying

Yeah, trake, I was trying to reconcile these two lines:

"...it's illegal to poll the military about their voting choices..."

"RADDATZ: Who are you supporting for President?"

Is there some "minimum requirement" for the definition of "polling?" Wouldn't asking this question BE "polling?"

But, hey, it's just some stupid law. We're the MEDIA, dammit!

activity

The key word is "acivity". Answering a moron's question as to how you want to vote is not policital activity. Unless you count your jaw moving when you speak.

In uniform and making

In uniform and making political comments?! I thought that was a no-no.

I trust NB's realizes, their exposure of bias in the msm is having little or no effect on the process, except driving them out of business. Is that a good idea? When does media "by the government, for the governemnt....." become a possible scenario? Soon the government will be the only entity left standing which is just what the commies want. Otherwise, McCarthy would not still be being vilified. 

Officially? It is.

In practice, it seems to depend on just-which opinion. For example, this soldier's blog went "subscription only" when I started linking here to posts supporting his and my libertarian opinions, which may have also gotten him into a bit of trouble (I think so, and something about his frank speech apparently did). Coincidence/other cause? Captain Joe seems to think so, but I found the timing 'convenient,' to say the least.

I just hope I haven't now gotten him into even more trouble by telling the truth about why internet users can't read words like this unless those words somehow found their way elsewhere. Hate Dr. Ron Paul and his supporters all you want, but from here it sure seems like some political-speech by military guys pigs get media treatment that's more-equal than other very similar political speech pigs. Bias, as in the same antilibertarian variety I always bust here? I think so, but feel free to tell me how it's not.
JMR

The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.

We dont "Hate Dr. Ron Paul

We dont "Hate Dr. Ron Paul and his supporters all you want" we just think he is unfit for being President.  As a congress critter he can be an idiot and do nothing as long as he brings home the bacon, which he does, for his district.  He has no idea of what is good for teh country.  He is worse tahn Obama and Clinton in his foriegn policy.  I do like some of his other ideas about the UN and treaties but overall he is like the crazy uncle no one wants to be around.

Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.

Coulda fooled me...

I saw a lot of hysteria and hate here, sorry, so I guess it's in the eye of the beholder. Generally, as with this time (see your own words) I get name calling and 0 substantive conversation or disagreement, so it immediately degenrates from a policy argument to a fight. Claim it's intellectual disagreement all you want. I still say it's mindless hate, especially since I've seen 0 answer/discussion of this. And I fully stand by my double-standard speech-allowed acccusation, but you all probably knew that...
JMR

The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.

No hysteria, just a lot of

No hysteria, just a lot of Prescience....

I'd say plenty of whining & namecalling...

With close to 0 substantive policy debate. Want an example? See above.
JMR

The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.

Sarc: I used to

Sarc: I used to present Pauls policies on foreign and Defense policy that he claimed as his, and pointed out that they made him incapable of being of president and doomed for failure in his campaign.

You then claimed I was a "Whiner".

You want hysteria?  THAT was hysteria

Nope.

You did, however, predict better results for Rudy than he got here in FL, where his ass got handed to him, literally, by a competing RINO.

Anyway, I don't recall you or anyone else answering the Bin Laden unit guy's questions, for some reason. As for prescience, it's hard not to talk about Dr. Paul's prescient words regarding the Federal Reserve, since they literally seem to define the word, but let's focus on foreign policy. I've seen nothin' but whining so-far.
JMR

The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.

Once again....charges of

Once again....charges of whining from SARC.

Sarc speaking to FDR on December 8th.  "Hey Roosevelt, Quite your WHINING....."

Sarc speaking to Eisenhower on June 5th 1944....  "Hey Ike, quite your whining about this Great Crusade in the invasion of Normandy thing."

Sarc speaking to Reagan at the Brandenburg Gate "Hey, Ronnie, wuite your WHINING!!!!  Nothing says this wall should come down."

Now there's a substantive

"Hey, I know, I'll try to put words in his mouth!" 'answer'...
JMR

The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.

You are the one accusing ME

You are the one accusing ME of whining.  Nicht war?

Well, you have yet to answer

Much less address, the questions at the URL. Oh, yeah, you don't click stuff...And I'm sure nobody here has ever whined about Paul instead of answering questions honestly, either. No need to worry, he answers his own questions quite well, IMO.
JMR

The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.

What has Mike Scheurs

What has Mike Scheurs comments have to do with your constant assertion that I whine? 

By the way, Scheur has never asserted that I whine, so there goes that...

Ok, let's say you've never whined.

You've certainly never answered his questions. In fact, you haven't even come close. It's safe now, go ahead. My guy and your ghoul both lost, the RINO won, so why not deal with the questions?  (Or maybe that should read: "whine not, deal with the questions!")
JMR

The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.

Please list your questions

Please list your questions and I will endeavor to answer them.

Once again

I am sure that Mr. Paul is a great guy to hang around with. I for one don't hate him, in spite of your insistence that I do (I find that hilarious after reading your whining to BD that he was putting words in your mouth; I guess your falsely ascribing emotions to others is OK???).  Pure and simple, my first concerns when I vote for President is foreign policy.  Paul fails miserably there.  I will not vote for someone who believes that all the world's ills are the fault of the United States and that we should turn ourselves into a whiny, pathetic, powerless nation and a world laughing stock that can be overrun by the combined armies of Andorra and San Marino.  No thanks. 

All you need to do is to deal with it. 

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

So that's why he voted

For military force in Afghanistan? You're just annoyed that he was right on Iraq. Deal with it.
JMR

The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.

Blimp sighting!

At the scrapyard I thought I just saw the infamous BLIMP!  Geez, with all the free monies RP raised I would have thought he would have got IT repaired!

Another

Reply with substance. For the umpteenth time, the Blimp was a way around McCain-Feingold censorship. Something "free speech conservatives" used to claim to be 'against.'
JMR

The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.

Did it WORK?

That's not the point.

Did the blimp WORK?

Apparently not, for your reactionary candidate lost.

(By the way, I think McCain-Feingold sucks too, contrary to whatever you may believe.) 

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

"That jaundiced pipsqueak wants to be President?" - Unsane's old man, after seeing Ron Paul in debate

Annoyed, you say? Once again ascribing emotions to people...

Actually, he wanted to use Letters of Marque in Afghanistan, being the reactionary that he is.  Yeah, that's the idea, announce to the world what we are going to do.  That ALWAYS works in matters military.

(Interestingly, Thomas Jefferson neither used Letters of Marque or a Declaration of War against the Barbary States, but Libertarians all like to overlook that minor inconvenience.)

And as for my being annoyed, the only thing that annoys me are people telling me that  "You're just annoyed that he was right on Iraq" when, from my position in what is referred to as "the AOR", it seems he was not.  While Iraq is not a bowl of cherries, things are going as well as can be expected from what I am able to see.  But I don't expect a Libertarian who wishes above all else that the United States simply hide from the world in the hopes that it just goes away to grasp that.  Hell, why a Libertarian wishes to engage in discussions in military matters and foreign policy is a mystery to me.  Perhaps they wish for me to brutally embarrass them, who knows.

Anyways, one of the reasons your favorite reactionary lost was that he wants America to be as weak and whiny on the world scene as possible, and you want the same thing.  Most people in America DO NOT want that, much to your dismay.  Deal with it.

One more thing to deal with, for I am not in the f$#!ing mood: you are an absolute embarrassment to your own cause.  That you refuse to acknowledge that makes it worse.  But the sooner you grasp that, the sooner you might make headway with others.  "til then...

Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.

(Click on Sarcasmo's links above as he contorts himself to the point of inflicting extreme pain on himself in order to turn an public health and safety dilemma into a civil rights issue.)

answering questions

Answering questions in a combat zone where there is no "out of uniform" is allowed.

You can not appear in campaign videos in uniform, show up at rallies in uniform, use government resources to promote candidates. stuff like that.

You are allowed to be a private citizen in your off time. You can say to anyone anywhere, uniform or not, that Obama is really Carter II, and John McCain is most awesomeness embodied!

You are also allowed to question the sanity or mental capacity of peoples like sarcasmo. You are also freely allowed to request he grab a big tall ice cold glass of shut the frell up and sit the frell down!

 

Just waiting to see what

Just waiting to see what happens when debate season comes around, see what comes out.

 

 

------------------------------------------------------------

Grizzly Bear '08

Question

I am curious as to when the Iraq portion of the segment was taped.  To me, it looks like the crowd I was with for a recent visit by the VP.  Indeed, I saw Miss (or Mrs.?) Raddatz there and even got the pictures to prove it. 

They really didn't want to talk to me.  Had they, I simply would have said "My first, second, third and fourth concerns are foreign policy, foreign policy, foreign policy, and foreign policy."  And I would have left it at that. 

"I speak to you for the first time as Prime Minister in a solemn hour for the life of our country, of our empire, of our allies, and above all, for the cause of Freedom." - Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965), on 19 May 1940 on BBC radio

Bush sold the military down the river

Haditha 6

restrictive rules of engagement

not using air power for fear of civilian casualties causing more dead GI's

Accepting Irans supplying of IED's & not bombing those **sholes for doing it, thereby causing needless American deaths

Allowing Al Sadr to run his own militia & not taking him out

it goes on & on..if the commander in Cheif would back his boys to the hilt, & not play Johnson / Mcnamara ala Viet Nam, his support wouldn't dwindle among the military (although I agree ABC slanted the hell out of the story)

You're right that we need to

You're right that we need to remove some of the restraints, but I blame the Libs for this. They are the ones who have neutered the American military. However, that is not why Bush is losing support among the military - if that's even true. ABC didn't just slant this story, they manufactured it. This is pure DNC propaganda. It's not news in the least.

Political Maven and mattm...

Right and Right.

This story is pure manufactured propaganda. And the libs have hamstrung our war efforts from the very get go, on EVERY front.

These journalists think of themselves as part of the story; they're out to change the world, and if they have to create news as they go, for the good of the cause, then so be it.

Our nation is going to be under such an intense onslaught from our enemies, both foreign and domestic, in the run-up to the election. How far is the MSM going to go to get a Dem voted into the White House? As far as they need to?

Are we going to have to ignite some serious political action, such as calls for treason, against some of our own constituents? Shouldn't we have already?

 

the LIBS are to blame for military restraint??!!

What part of Commander in Chief don't you understand?

And if Bush is showing restraint because of the press/media, it simply
makes my point that he is scarificing the blood & limbs of our boys
for politics!

Can't anyone take a moral stand anymore? We have to have tens of
thousands of maimed GIs & thousands of dead ones because bush is
scared of that tart Kati Curic? Give me a F**ing break!

 

I don't necessarily

I don't necessarily disagree with you.  But, there are many things to consider.  It's a balancing act.  He has to get congressional support and international support and be able to justify every little thing.  He's commander in chief, but he's not absolute military dictator (as some of the Left have accused him of).

I merely added a point about how the Libs and the Media (no difference) have made this balancing act even more difficult. But still, I agree with your overall sentiment.

Bush sacrifices our GIs onthe alter of Politics

but I do see your point..libs make it harder to be a man & defend your boys

Bush sacrifices...

OK, political maven...

Your true colors are starting to shine through.

You probably don't know what its like to defend something by putting your life on the line. Many libs, including most in the MSM, feel like they're being "patriots" by playing "devil's advocate" on EVERY issue that could be seen as "pro-American", "pro-Bush", or "pro-Republican".

Yes, journalists are supposed to be watchdogs of our government...but they're supposed to be objective, fair, and honest!! The way most of them report, write, and speak, you'd think that they have a vested interest in the defeat and subsequent subjugation of our nation to invading "progressive" forces.

Get your head on straight...George Bush is not America's enemy, as much as many would like to believe.

Commander in Chief...or King George?

"Can't anyone take a moral stand anymore?"

Isn't that EXACTLY what George W. Bush has been villified for? For taking a moral stand against radical Islam?

His actions as Commander in Chief are not free from legislative, executive, or judicial reproach. Our President has many expansive powers, especially over the military, but he is not a King.

 

NO McCain in the online version

I didn't see the video report, but the online version, to which I was directed via Drudge, includes ZERO mention of John McCain. You would think that they were referring to a general election between Obama and Hillary. Sickening.

In the comments section, there are comments from a self-described Hillary supporter in Iraq who agrees that the report is biased. He says that there are (unsurprisingly) more McCain supporters than Obama or Hillary supporters over there.

I gotta stop reading/watching/listening to the media. It's disgusting.

Valley Girls

Blonde,

I would really like to say you are correct.  However, there are a number of less than desireable women serving as leaders.  The really sad part is that women like LT Leah, detract from the great job that others are doing. 

http://thelazytriathlete.blogspot.com/

i sure hope those troops are appropriately reprimanded

i seem to recall in my military stint that as a soldier in uniform you were absolutely not suppose to stump for a political candidate or express political opinions to the press. out of uniform off duty on your own time you have %100 legal right to express your political beliefs to the public, but in uniform and, and especially to the media, i believe there is a part of the UCMJ that states you keep your mouth shut. this falls along the same line of expected integrity that you are suppose to follow the orders of the command and chief despite whether or not you voted for him, accordingly it also applies to saluting the president(which i had to begrudginly do to clinton) because you are saluting the office of the president, not the man per se.

someone correct me if i'm wrong about that, but i think they violated the ucmj while being dazzled by by the lights of the camera and the chance to be the next american idol.

lunaticcringeradio

you said the key word

  You are not allowed to stump. Attend rallies in uniform, pass out flyers, host rallies using your military status, use government resources such as the base for rallies, stufff like that.

You are allowed to respond to questions such as whom you prefer for President, in or out of uniform.

Not if the interview is

Not if the interview is being recorded for later use, possibly as a political endorsement, which is what this amounted to.

Again

Again, answering a question about who you prefer in an election is not against regulations and/or the UCMJ.

 If this interview were to be used in a political ad later, that would be a hit on the ad makers. These people consented to be interviewed by an journalist, not to have their faces plastered every where by anyone for any purposes.

Take any of these quotes

Take any of these quotes with a grain of salt.  As someone mentioned, the randomness of the selection of people to interview is probably questionable, or at least those that made it into the aired segement.

  Remember the soldier that said Murtha had total support of our troops in Iraq after his cracks about murderers and thugs, turned out to be the cousin or brother of the Democrat state representative from Murtha's home district in Pennsylvania and was a Democratic precinct committeeman himself.   

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."  - Sir Winston Churchill

I caught a glimpse of this

I caught a glimpse of this this morning, and I thought that ABC edited out the soldiers who expressed support for McCain. After all, ABC stands for "All Barack Channel", doesn't it?

I have to agree with the other commentors here, I didn't think you could express your political views if you were in uniform.

Raddatz is a dishonest skank & no journalist

Wonder how many GIs the ABC crews interviewed before they got the "right" answers----the MSM lie, distort, and simply fabulate with impunity.  Probably three out of four are for McCain, but skanky Martha, who looks like Skeletor's wife, wouldn't convey that REALITY!

the LIBS are to blame for military restraint??!!

What part of Commander in Chief don't you understand?

And if Bush is showing restraint because of the press/media, it simply makes my point that he is scarificing the blood & limbs of our boys for politics!

Can't anyone take a moral stand anymore? We have to have tens of thousands of maimed GIs & thousands of dead ones because bush is scraed of that tart Kati Curic? Give me a F**ing break!

 

The left is not responsibe for the nations woes.

Thx for not blaming the left for everything that is wrong with America today. There is wrong on both sides. You are also right about the Commander in Chief part.

As answered above

I don't necessarily disagree with you.  But, there are many things to consider.  It's a balancing act.  He has to get congressional support and international support and be able to justify every little thing.  He's commander in chief, but he's not absolute military dictator (as some of the Left have accused him of).

I merely added a point about how the Libs and the Media (no difference) have made this balancing act even more difficult. But still, I agree with your overall sentiment.

An Endorcement?

"The military is not supposed to engage in partisan political activity, making these endorsements by troops in Iraq all the more striking. Who do you want for President?"

If the troops were endorsing ANY political candidate, that's a clear violation of UCMJ rules. I'm not sure this could be considered an endorsement, but that would be for a conduct review board to figure out.

"RADDATZ: There were some McCain backers. Why is that?"

Hay Raddatz, how many is "some" and why do you only show ONE McCain supporter? Wouldn't balanced reporting require you to show just as many McCain supporters as the number of supports of Hillary and Obama you highlight? Or is balanced reporting too much to ask?

"SPECIALIST GUY ANDREASON, U.S. ARMY: I think that's a big deal. As far as illegal immigrants coming over here and, you know, working under the table."

That's bull. I highly doubt that illegal immigrants are rushing to Iraq for jobs as contractors. I know damn well that illegal immigrants are not deployed there in the military. The military investigates every single person who enlists and it would be next to impossible to hide your immigration status from a thorough background check.

I'm pretty sure that military contractors working in Iraq are investigated just as thoroughly as the members of our military are. How many American businesses that are contracted to supply services in Iraq would be willing to risk exposure of illegal hiring practices? I doubt very highly that any business would send “undocumented” workers into a volatile and highly scrutinized working environment like Iraq. The MSM would be all over any story about illegal immigrants working for "Bush's War" in Iraq.

Oh, that's a new one,

Oh, that's a new one, Martha.  Haven't seen that one before...or at least since Pravda.  Cherry-pick a handful of soldiers who support Democrats and get them on TV...then somehow project them as if they represent a majority of the military in Iraq.  Just when you thought the partisan dishonesty of the media couldn't get any more blatant, may I introduce you to: Martha Raddatz.