"American Morning" substitute co-host Kyra Phillips pressed former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani on the Iraq war on Wednesday, asserting that her liberal talking point was a fact. When Giuliani defended President Bush’s legacy, that he "will go down as he has protected us against terrorism when nobody thought it could be done," Phillips retorted, "But the Iraq war is not about protecting us from terrorism. It's been the most unpopular and controversial war." When the former mayor challenged this statement as her opinion, Phillips became rather defensive. "Oh, I’m not saying that. No, no, no, I'm not voicing my opinion.... I'm voicing what's out there. I’m voicing the realities" [audio available here].
Earlier in the interview, which began 26 minutes into the 7 pm hour of the CNN program, Phillips asked Giuliani, "[Y]ou’ve got Republicans, leading Republicans in the party saying McCain has got to disassociate himself from President Bush. President Bush has ruined the image of the Republican Party, taken the Republican Party down into the tank. You don't agree with that?" Giuliani responded, "I think President Bush has been -- has not been treated as fairly as he should be, and I think President Bush is going to be a very different President when we look at him from historical purposes...."
Phillips then brought the Iraq war into the discussion: "How is he going to go down in history? You don't think it’s going to be the Iraq war?" Giuliani then gave his "protected us against terrorism" answer, which Phillips followed with her Iraq war assertion.
Giuliani stuck to his point that Phillips was voicing her liberal opinion on the Iraq war. "That’s your opinion, your opinion is the Iraq war is some kind of a big mistake. My opinion is we wouldn't be safe against terrorism if we hadn't taken the action we took in Afghanistan and in Iraq...." He continued that the success against al Qaeda and "other elements" in Iraq has made John McCain, whom Giuliani is campaigning for, look "a lot better than he did a year ago," and made the case for McCain’s "proven commodity" versus Barack Obama’s lack of experience.
In response to Giuliani’s answer, Phillips then brought up how "68 percent of the people here in the U.S. oppose the war in Iraq." Giuliani then claimed that "they do, but also a majority of them don't want us to precipitously to pull out the way Barack Obama does." Phillips’ last words on the matter: "Well, that will be interesting to see how the candidates take on the issue."
—Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I repeat
May 21, 2008 - 15:22 ET by UnsaneOnce again, better to kill the terrorists in Baghdad rather than have the cops in Boston do it AFTER the terrorists have killed a few hundred people.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
I served a year in Baghdad
May 21, 2008 - 16:11 ET by jay_1975I served a year in Baghdad and did not find any terrorists. There were plenty of locals who took up arms against the US. I also served in Mosul and Tikrit during my second tour and saw locals fighting us. Many of us in the military are tired of being in Iraq. I would rather have served in Afghanistan those two years so that I could at least fight those that attacked us. Is it WMD's or terrorists that brought us to Iraq? We should have sent a massive force into Afghanistan in 2001 and then be done with it. Now we are stuck and people still continue the "fight them over there" line. I thought that bin Laden was in Pakistan. Syria, Lebanon and Saudi Arabi have more terrorists than Iraq. When should we go there?
Jay...thanks for your
May 21, 2008 - 16:19 ET by bassndudeJay...thanks for your service. I understand that sometimes it is hard to distinguish between friend and foe. In Vietnam we looked for VC in villages. Those villagers, (locals), that took up arms were, in fact VC. You found terrorists. You just refused to recognize them as such. As for massive force into Afghanistan, military history teaches us that wars in Afghanistan are difficult, to say the least. Notice the might of the Soviet Empire. The lesson here is, you fight your enemy on your terms, your ground. Iraq is much more manageable than the Afgan mountians, and the terrorists are there. I have a nephew in Iraq now, his second tour in Iraq and he served one tour in Afghanistan. There are plenty of terrorists in Iraq. You just have to recognize them for what they are.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Bass, somehow I had a hunch
May 21, 2008 - 16:22 ET by NL207Bass, somehow I had a hunch you'd answer this kid. He couldn't hear this particular message from anybody better on the site.
Thank you NL.. Save a
May 21, 2008 - 16:46 ET by bassndudeThank you NL..
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
You should be proud of your
May 21, 2008 - 16:21 ET by mattmYou should be proud of your service. But whether you found any terrorists or not, they were and are there (only there are far fewer of them now - http://terroristdeathwatch.com/).
Sure, things could have been done better, but this is the first time in the history of the world that this type of war on terrorism (rather than between sovereign nations) has been attempted.
And plenty of progress is being made: http://www.powerlineblog.com/
Thank you for your service. You have made the country safer whether you know it or not.
Iraq
May 21, 2008 - 17:53 ET by UnsaneI just got done with a deployment to Iraq and got shot at, along with my fellow Airmen, repeatedly, by the terrorists, whether they be locals or al-Qaeda in Iraq. Regardless, they all lived short and exciting lives for doing so.
Is all a bowl of cherries in Iraq? No. Is the situation hopeless? No.
I would rather have served in Afghanistan those two years so that I could at least fight those that attacked us. Hey, I'll be sure to grab a hold of some pilots and intel types and relay them the message the Iraqis NEVER attacked us. Yep, the pilots getting shot at and getting locked on and "painted" by Iraqi radar must have been figments of the imagination. Say, why did we go after Germany in WWII? Last time I checked, THEY didn't bomb Pearl.
We should have sent a massive force into Afghanistan in 2001 and then be done with it. Now we are stuck and people still continue the "fight them over there" line. Well, what I would have done would make even conservatives extremely squeamish. So I won't even go there. We DID send a force into Afghanistan. Of course, I could call many a friend of mine over there and let them know that they REALLY aren't there. I'm sure they'd appreciate that as well.
I thought that bin Laden was in Pakistan. Beyond your/our bloodlust and need for vengeance, what will the capture/killing of bin Laden actually accomplish? Killing Admiral Yamamoto in 1943 didn't exactly force the Japanese to surrender, now, did it?
Syria, Lebanon and Saudi Arabi have more terrorists than Iraq. When should we go there? I'm speechless. For one that has been over in the AOR for two years (MAD props to you, by the way!), you sound like any one of NB's resident defeatists. I don't share in that defeatism, and I just got back from there.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Unsane...Good to hear of
May 21, 2008 - 18:26 ET by JerUnsane...Good to hear of your safe return, and thanks again to you and all the "troops" for your service. You are heroes, one and all.
Your Yamamoto analogy is flawed, however. While, he was indeed the strategic genius behind the attack on Pearl Harbor, he was, nevertheless, a reluctant and conflicted realist when it came to warring against the U.S. The same cannot be said about bin Laden.
Jer
Missing the point
May 21, 2008 - 19:00 ET by UnsaneYou miss the point...as the shoot-down of Yamamoto did not equate to the instantaneous capitulation of Japan, nor shall the capture/killing of bin Laden mean the dar al-Islam will magically revert to its best behavior.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Unsane...
May 21, 2008 - 19:17 ET by Jer...nor shall the capture/killing of bin Laden mean the dar al-Islam will magically revert to its best behavior.
Never harbored that illusion...just pointing out that bin Laden has been bestowed with an ideological mantle shunned by Yamamoto. As such, it can be reasonably argued that the former's liquidation might be more crippling to Islamic terrorism than the latter's was to Japanese militarism. That said, I don't dismiss your view--it is one shared by a number of respected experts.
Jer
More information
May 21, 2008 - 19:44 ET by UnsaneJer, I don't share those sentiments because if you remember the 1980s - as I surely do, as a brat that was just getting started in foreign affairs and international relations at a early age - there was Abu Nidal. His marginalization and near capture did not equate to the end of Islamic terrorist activities. Nor did the crushing of the Black September movement, the raids on Entebbe ('76) and Mogadishu ('78), Eldorado Canyon, and so on. So when I say that Osama bin Laden's capture/killing will not end Islamic terrorism, I am drawing on two pools of experience: history and my own witnessing of events from a young age.
Hence, just as Yamamoto's shootdown did nothing to put Japanese militarism on ice, nor shall bin Laden's capture/killing do anything to end Islamic terrorism. He'll have a successor claiming to be the next Mahdi or some such, he'll coalesce the same malcontents, and things will begin anew. Which is why this campaign against Islamic terrorism is going to take awhile - to the point where NO ONE wants to take up Abu Nidal's or bin Laden's mantel, PERIOD.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Unsane!!!
May 21, 2008 - 18:45 ET by RESTLESS 1Welcome back!!! Glad you got back safe. Just in time to watch the Spurs waltz to the championship again.
Your service is mucho appreciado man. Yours, and everyone else's seving our nation.
SPURS
May 21, 2008 - 19:03 ET by UnsaneDon't get me started on my beloved Spurs! I'm just biding my time right now, waiting for the massacre of the Fakers to begin in earnest!!! :-)
It's great to be back...now I can watch the Spurs at sane times! And I am now fully ensconced within the friendly confines of Spurs Nation!
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Great to see you back,
May 21, 2008 - 19:06 ET by Roger the ShrubberGreat to see you back, friend. Go Spurs!
Thanks and some clarification
May 21, 2008 - 19:13 ET by UnsaneThanks to ALL the NBers out there (Roger, thanks for that wonderful selection of imagery from the 19th of April...every deployed single guy needs a pinup girl!) for their tips o' the hat my way. For those who didn't know, my posts on NB were limited in number due to my being deployed in the sandbox...but now I am back! And it is good to be home.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Perhaps we'll run into each
May 21, 2008 - 19:12 ET by RESTLESS 1Perhaps we'll run into each other at one of the many fine watering holes Spurs Nation has to offer.
Again, welcome home.
(BTW, I'm usually the one arguing with the liberals, or shouting down faker fan.)
ONE FOR THE THUMB!!!
May 21, 2008 - 19:17 ET by UnsaneIf you are in a local watering hole, and if they show a camera shot of Kobe and co. crying like babies towards the end of Game 5, as they are about to get crushed by the Spurs to end the series 4-1, you may see a maniacal fan in a Timmy jersey screaming at the screen "ARE YOU GONNA CRY?????????"
That'll be me. And that is assuming I am stone-cold sober!
Go SPURS! ONE FOR THE THUMB, BABY!!!!!!!
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Good to hear of your return.
May 22, 2008 - 17:24 ET by BDGood to hear of your return.
Restless...sorry to
May 21, 2008 - 19:03 ET by JerRestless...sorry to continue the sidetrack, but damn those Spurs...can't kill 'em with a stick!
Jer
HMMMM
May 21, 2008 - 19:08 ET by RESTLESS 1You have said in the past you are among many conservatives, so you probably not in New Orleans, Phoenix perhaps?
You are right though, just like Barkely said, we're just like cockroaches, you can't get rid of us. :)
Restless...Atlanta--virtuall
May 21, 2008 - 19:23 ET by JerRestless...Atlanta--virtually an NBA irrelevancy. But my Spurs comment actually was a reflection of my admiration for the team--one composed of outstanding individuals.
However...I just can't root for them this year.
Jer
Jer, Is basketball not a
May 21, 2008 - 19:24 ET by Roger the ShrubberJer,
Is basketball not a big deal in Atl? Is it all about the Braves down there?
Rog...Hawks had a bit of a
May 21, 2008 - 19:37 ET by JerRog...Hawks had a bit of a resurgence this year...made the playoffs for first time in something like [seven?] years. I was a season-ticket holder years ago, but miserable drafting and mediocre play finally cooled my enthusiasm.
I can't even say it's "about the Braves", or the "Falcons"...certainly not the hockey"Thrashers".
My assessment after living here thirty-three years is that this city is great for athletic participation, less so for providing a large reliable fan base.
Quick example: Atlanta has the largest amateur tennis association in the nation in terms of membership [ALTA], but hasn't been able to provide tournament attendance figures necessary to support a continuing annual event.
Jer
Interesting. I realize Ga
May 21, 2008 - 19:57 ET by Roger the ShrubberInteresting. I realize Ga Tech is in town, and Athens is not far away (let alone Clemson). Is it all about college football down there?
Rog... Definitely. Both
May 22, 2008 - 17:32 ET by JerRog...
Definitely. Both Tech and especially Georgia [statewide] have a much more reliable and enthusiastic following than any of the pro franchises. That's not to say that the Braves and Falcons haven't drawn pretty well during successful seasons.
Jer
I served a year in Baghdad
May 22, 2008 - 17:02 ET by BDI served a year in Baghdad and did not find any terrorists. There were plenty of locals who took up arms against the US.
So, you only faced armed combatants who openly fired upon you? I find that hard to believe.
While I was in Iraq the second time, most of the energies of the bad guys were focused on attacking OTHER Iraqi's in an effort to brook civil war and make our position in coutry untenable. It never actually got that far, but mobs of folks were killed by terrorists. You might be correct that most were Iraqi Terrorists, but driving a carbomb into a crowded market is terrorism non-the less.
Many of us in the military are tired of being in Iraq
Yes, after my first tour in Sudi Arabia/Kuwait/Iraq, I was eager to return home.
Afte My second tour I was liewise eager to come home.
If asked again, I will go. Am I tired? Not as tired as I will be if evil triumphs ala Saigon 1975.
Is it WMD's or terrorists that brought us to Iraq?
Actually, it was the sixteen seperate rationale presented to both Joint Session of Congress and the UN that led us into Iraq. You should read them sometime.
The assumption that "It is only one thing" is narrow-minded.
We should have sent a massive force into Afghanistan in 2001 and then be done with it.
By the time "The massive force" as you put it would have been incountry, the AQ and Tali's were already cowering in the tribal areas of Pakistan.
I keep hearing people say that we should have had a mechanized Infantry/armored Division in country from the start. And ya gotta ask "How would we get them there." How would we resupply?
Hell, I am pretty sure we could not have even moved the entire 82nd Airborne into country and kept it resupplied by air adequately. Transportation assets for such just do not exist anymore.
In the end it turned out that they were not needed as a handful of SF ODA took the country away from the Tali/AQ by themselves.
I thought that bin Laden was in Pakistan.
Could be.
Syria, Lebanon and Saudi Arabi have more terrorists than Iraq.
But Iraq is more conducive to providing the necessary start point for our use of democracy as a weapon against Islamo fascism. (yes, look it up in the Joint Session of Congress/UN speeches. Its in there.)
A successful effort in Iraq will mean we will NOT have to do similar missions into Saudi Arabia, Lebanon (Sort of happening there now until Hezzies freaked) and Syria.
so then what the hell is it about????
May 21, 2008 - 15:36 ET by wizardjrI guess "OIL", eh?
OK, let's do the litany:
1. Bush is an idiot
2. Bush is an evil Machiavellian genius
3. there were no WMD, even though Sadam used them in the Iran/Iraq war and on an entire village of Kurds
4. we went to war for:
a) a lie
b) oil
c) Haliburton
5. Bush is a war criminal
6. Cheney is a war criminal
7. there were no terrorists before President Bush invaded Iraq
8. the high price of oil is to make Bush's friends rich
9. the world hates us (which is why Germany and France elected America-friendly leaders) and it's all Bush's fault
I'm sure I left out something, but my finger is getting tired typing this.
As Bugs would say, "What a maroon!"
Yes, let's just conclude
May 21, 2008 - 15:46 ET by fitzfongYes, let's just conclude that Kyra Phillips, who doesn't even know that you're supposed to kill your live mic when you go to bathroom, is the real expert on what the Iraq War is "about".
"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." -Ronald Reagan
Kyra Phillips
May 21, 2008 - 16:00 ET by KrisIf she didn't want people to take her comments as her own opinion, then perhaps she should have prefaced her remarks with "other people have said", "the polls say this", and then ended her statements with "how do you respond to those who have come to these conclusions". Doesn't she know how to play devil's advocate after all these years in the business of journalism? I think Kyra is another liberal hack.
Kyra in the Bathroom?
May 21, 2008 - 16:04 ET by MeanderingI can say I don't know the story of her and her mic in the bathroom. Sounds as stupid as her opinions wrapped as facts in this piece.
Phillips' claim to fame
May 21, 2008 - 16:33 ET by Matthew Balanhttp://newsbusters.org/blogs/megan-mccormack/2006/08/29/oops-cnn-airs-anchors-girl-talk-over-bush-speech
thanks for the memory
May 21, 2008 - 16:58 ET by wizardjrLOL, completely forgot she was the one. What a hoot.
"I'm not voicing my
May 21, 2008 - 15:56 ET by mattm"I'm not voicing my opinion.... I'm voicing what's out there."
Typical MSM dodge. Funny how they only seem to voice "what's out there" when it's the Lefty opinion.
"Carthago delenda est" - Cato
Giuliani Puts Her in
May 21, 2008 - 16:03 ET by Meanderingher place! It is not mentioned enough that these liberal reporters use their opinions and state them as fact. I've had enough of it and someone like Rudy stating up for Bush is great. Good for you RUDY!
Both my sons served in Iraq
May 21, 2008 - 16:37 ET by rbosqueBoth my sons served in Iraq and they both caught Iranians, Syrians, Turks, and Saudis there with weapons. They all came there to fight us. My brother also served there (Navy Commander) also told me the same story. Both my sons will return there. Better there than here.
thanks
May 21, 2008 - 16:56 ET by wizardjrThank your sons for their service and may God look over them while they are in-country until their safe return.
same thoughts
May 21, 2008 - 21:42 ET by jaywlSemper Fi
Time served nothing learned
May 21, 2008 - 17:24 ET by TjexciteWhat is worse Kyra did time in Iraq at least twice. She must not have left the Green Zone to see all the stuff that war is doing to make it safe here and over there. And still say that it is not doing any thing is just sad.
What about Rudy for VP or is AG a better fit.
McCain / Giuliani 08
Reporters in Iraq
May 21, 2008 - 17:59 ET by UnsaneTj - BD first reported that he never saw reporters a single time in various places he has been in the AOR. I can personally attest to that.
The ONE time I saw a reporter at my location - and I have pictures to prove this - was when Martha Raddatz was at my base covering the VP's visit there, and during that time, from what I saw on both ABC News and on NB, was that all she cared about were not, say, the three (IIRC) soldiers who got Bronze Stars personally pinned on by the VP - but rather, finding enough military members who would gush about how they can't wait to vote for Obama. And here's betting the only reason SHE was there was because she drew the shortest straw.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Confirm - never saw a
May 22, 2008 - 17:26 ET by BDConfirm - never saw a Civilian journo while in theater. (Did see some Uniformed types.)
"the most unpopular and controversial war"
May 21, 2008 - 18:07 ET byPsst, Kyra, ever hear of the Civil War?
History
May 21, 2008 - 18:54 ET by doug1950That would require knowing a little history, something many of the talking heads have little or no knowledge of. When I watch these folks it is very plain to see where they get their News....off the Evening News. It is regurgitated back at you verbatim with little or no effort on the "journalists" part to get to the truth, the facts or the bigger story. Just read it off the prompter, the laptop or the script.
No, no, no, I'm not
May 21, 2008 - 19:12 ET by general companyNo, no, no, I'm not voicing my opinion.... I'm voicing what's out there. I’m voicing the realities"
As we have been telling you for the last few years, geez
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
Certified Airhead
May 21, 2008 - 19:53 ET by Del DolemonteFrom Kyra's wiki entry
"On January 30, 2008, Phillips joked about making a "reverse oreo" with black co-host Don Lemon and white female colleague Gerri Willis. Phillips used the term with sexual overtones (stating, "yeah, good time"), much to the "visual embarrassment" of Willis."
U.S. Deaths
May 22, 2008 - 11:44 ET by MSD6Just in case the MSM misses this little fact. We are on track (keep your fingers crosssed and pray) to have the fewest monthly US deaths in IRAQ since the war started. I'M SURE THAT WILL BE PLAYED UP BIG-TIME AT THE NYT, LAT, MSNBC, NBC, CNN, ETC. Don't hold your breath. THE DEMOCRATS and the MSM MAKE ME SICK. They would rather score political points than do whats best for America. And yes, the Repubs aren't much better.
Curator: Want some more
May 22, 2008 - 17:28 ET by BDCurator:
Want some more predictive analysis?
MSD6 is ontot something here. The MSM will NOT WANT to publish this story. Might be forced to when FOX or WSJ leads with it and embarrases them.
House and Senate and dozens of Intel orgs wrong?
May 22, 2008 - 23:09 ET by wdhorningIf CNN report is right, then 2/3 of the House and 3/4 of the Senate that voted for war with Iraq were wrong? Also that means dozens of intelligence organizations from within the USA and from around the world were all wrong? And did CNN forget that there were 21 reasons listed for war with Iraq in the Joint War Resolution on Iraq, not just WMD and terrorists ties.
And since we are fighting al Qaeda and other radical terrorists that do exist in Iraq, then we are not having to fight them on U.S. soil. And now we have Iraqi soldiers and police doing most of the fighting with US soldiers only as backup for worst case scenarios.
Besides we should no more refrain our military from going after anti-US terrorists anywhere in the world (within reason), than we would refrain our police from going after a gang of murdering thugs.