Gregory Gives Schumer a Pass for Blaming Debt on GOP But Hammers Cornyn on Afghanistan

Gregory Gives Schumer a Pass for Blaming Debt on GOP But Hammers Cornyn on Afghanistan

By Noel Sheppard (Bio | Archive)
October 25, 2009 - 16:00 ET

A perfect example of liberal media bias occurred on Sunday's "Meet the Press" when host David Gregory absolutely hammered Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) over what the Bush administration did in Afghanistan.

This occurred only a few moments after Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) made absurd comments about the current budget deficit without receiving any challenge whatsoever from Gregory.

Here's what Schumer said that elicited no follow-up questions (video embedded below the fold with partial transcript, relevant section at 4:20):

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

We're trying, in our healthcare bill, to have it paid for so it doesn't raise the deficit a nickel. When they had the big Medicare increase, $400 billion, they didn't even try to pay for it. We're trying to pay. We've said we will pay for the war in Afghanistan. One trillion dollars, war in Iraq, they didn't pay a nickel for it. The debt in January, when George Bush left, voted for by lock, stock and barrel with all the Republicans was much, much greater. Now Barack Obama and we Democrats, this is counterintuitive but true, are really trying to get a handle on balancing the budget and we're making real efforts to do it. That's why health care is more limited than people would want it to be. And we--they say, "Well, it's not good enough." Well, join us and help us. But you sure didn't try to make it all good when you were in power.

Now, if Gregory was a real journalist, he could have taken this statement by Schumer apart.

For instance, the Medicare bill Schumer was referring to, the Prescription Drug and Medicare Improvement Act of 2003, passed the Senate by a vote of 76-21. 35 Democrats voted in favor, including most importantly Schumer.

Mightn't it have been good of Gregory to point out to the Senator that he and 34 of his fellow Democrats in the Senate voted for something he's now blaming the Republicans for?

Taking this further, Schumer's claim, "The debt in January, when George Bush left, voted for by lock, stock and barrel with all the Republicans," was actually more absurd.

After all, the budget in effect in January was approved in the Senate on March 14, 2008, by a vote of 51-44. 49 Democrats joined two Republicans to pass it; Schumer was one of those 49.

When the final conference report moved to the House on June 4, NOT ONE Republican voted for it. Not one.

As such, the fiscal 2009 budget that was in effect when Obama took office was almost exclusively approved by Democrats; Obama was one of them.

Gregory could therefore have challenged Schumer's assertion that the debt in January was "voted for by lock, stock and barrel with all the Republicans."

Alas, he didn't.

Yet, moments later when the subject changed to the war in Afghanistan, Gregory was suddenly feeling feisty and argumentative (relevant section at 1:00):

SEN. CORNYN: Americans are fighting and dying in Afghanistan today as they have for the last seven years. I don't understand, for a president who said this is a war of necessity to now question the recommendation of his lead commander General McChrystal...
SEN. SCHUMER: Mm-hmm.
SEN. CORNYN: ...on resourcing the war in order to be successful and win.
GREGORY: Did President Bush and Vice President Cheney provide enough troops to win in Afghanistan?
SEN. CORNYN: I think we've learned that we need a, a change of strategy as, as, as opposed to just raw numbers.
GREGORY: It's a simple question. Did they provide enough troops to win in Afghanistan?
SEN. CORNYN: Well, obviously we haven't yet won Afghanistan.
GREGORY: Right.
SEN. CORNYN: And winning in Afghanistan may be different from Iraq because of the, of the nature of the country.
GREGORY: But did Bush and Cheney provide the troops to win?
SEN. CORNYN: Well, we haven't won...
GREGORY: Right.
SEN. CORNYN: ...so I guess...
GREGORY: So they didn't. You don't think they did?
SEN. CORNYN: But it's a strategy...
SEN. SCHUMER: Well...
SEN. CORNYN: David, the problem is it's not just--as we saw on the surge in Iraq, it's not just the troops, it's the change of strategy.
GREGORY: But to be, but to be, but to be consistent on this...

SEN. CORNYN: A counter...
GREGORY: ...if you say that this president should commit more troops, can't you render an opinion about whether the previous administration that started the war provided the resources to win it?
SEN. CORNYN: Well...
SEN. SCHUMER: Hey, David, we all know the facts here.
SEN. CORNYN: Well, if I can answer the question.
SEN. SCHUMER: Go ahead.
GREGORY: Yeah.
SEN. CORNYN: I think the--my problem with your question, David, is you're assuming that just additional troops will achieve a victory. It will not. What we need is a change of strategy. We need a counterinsurgency strategy such as General Petraeus and General Odierno executed in Iraq.
SEN. SCHUMER: OK.
SEN. CORNYN: If we do that...
GREGORY: Right.
SEN. CORNYN: ...which is what General McChrystal's recommending in Afghanistan, I think our chances of success are good.

Some difference, wouldn't you agree?

Maybe someone at NBC should inform Gregory that if he's going to challenge his guests, he should try to challenge all of them, not just the ones with Rs next to their names.

—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.

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.

"Now, if Gregory was a real

October 25, 2009 - 16:08 ET by d1carter

"Now, if Gregory was a real journalist"....here's the problem. As we all know, NBC is not a real news organization....

→ Gregory

October 25, 2009 - 16:15 ET by Cool Arrow

Was it not the most serendipitous event that, unbeknownst to himself, David Gregory was born with a silver spoon in Barack Obama's butt?

When Gregory gets a scoop, he really gets a scoop!

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

Hypocrisy, your

October 25, 2009 - 16:18 ET by UpNorth

name is Gregory. Or Schumer. Take your pick.

How is it that the president decided in one day that H1N1 is a "national emergency", requiring all kinds of fed intervention, yet he has dithered for almost 80 days on Afghanistan, with no clear idea yet, what he's going to do? And the idea being bandied about by the left is the Biden "magic ninja and remote control bombs" strategy? Maybe Joe should have gotten Murtha on board and the troops could pull back to Okinawa and Germany, except when they mount the "magic ninja" strikes. Of course, they'll have no intelligence available, because the people on the ground will have seen that the US is not serious about fighting the Taliban and AQ, and, therefore, see no future in assisting the US

→ Dry Run

October 25, 2009 - 16:28 ET by Cool Arrow

It's more important for Obama to have a feel for how the American sheeple will react to Martial Law than that he end the War in Afghanistan.

I don't think he really cares as long as he can string out his Afghan decision until after he has a healthcare bill.

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

I think

October 25, 2009 - 17:38 ET by UpNorth

you're right, CA. As long as healthcare gets passed, who in the WH cares what happens in A-stan? And, maybe he is seeing which way the wind blows when it comes to fed proclamations? After all, if he gets away with a "national emergency" over the flu, where and how far will he reach next time?

Thin Skin Shysters dont care

October 26, 2009 - 02:25 ET by Dan The Man 2

Thin Skin Shysters dont care about Afghanistan, but they do about Martial Law.

To me, the most irritating

October 25, 2009 - 16:39 ET by fitzfong

To me, the most irritating part of this segment is not the fact that David Gregory would simply let Chuckie Schumbag filibuster with blatant lies (What else do you expect from NBC?). It's the fact that Cornyn, who is privy to the same information that Schumbag was misusing, tolerates the perversion. Sorry, but the problem that the national Republican Party has right now is the fact that its Beltway "leaders" create the false impression of the legitimacy of pseudo-journalists like David Gregory by appearing on his show and failing to challenge the overt deception of Marxist demagogues like Schmuckie. If the likes of John Cornyn refuse to hold shyster scum like Schumer accountable, how can we expect Schumer's ideological soulmates like David Gregory to do so? Until the Republican Party sprouts a pair, this BS will continue.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

I look forward to the day

October 25, 2009 - 16:57 ET by jkwtrading

I look forward to the day Chuckie Scum bag Schumer has same fate as Mussolini..

Sadly, this is the truth...

October 25, 2009 - 17:05 ET by Thalpy

Sadly, this is the truth. In numbers and in street fighting Republicans, with few exceptions, can always find a way to lose. Honor and principle would go a long way toward solving our political problems, and just showing up isn't good enough. The Left have worked hard and long to come to power using every vile trick available to them, while the Right ( what there is of them) have been coasting and trying to get along. The Left have no intention of ever getting along.

Thalpy... Exactly

October 25, 2009 - 17:12 ET by bigtimer

Thalpy...

Exactly right...

I remember well how the repubs bowed and gave in to the dems over how many members/ratio could be on each committee after we won both Chambers....

They never, ever learn.

Plus...if anyone watches the committees look how rude/outrageous the left treat the right...let alone people testifying before them if they do not like them and they don't kiss their rears.

Boxer and Frank are two perfect examples just for starters.

'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart

Can you feel the White House's patting Gregory's head?

October 25, 2009 - 16:44 ET by KC Mulville

They like Gregory now.

Gregory is usually better than this.

Gregory is NEVER better than this

October 25, 2009 - 16:59 ET by TheHistorian

Gregory is not a newsman; he is a partisan hack who will not explore the whole story. That is why all of these Democrat partisans go on his show; he will let them get by unchallenged with any stupid comments that they make as long as it makes the Bush administration look bad.

Give Gregory a Chance

October 25, 2009 - 16:56 ET by TheHistorian

In about 20 years, if he watches Fox News Sunday and emulates Chris Wallace, he may become a newsman. Until then, the way he is reporting, he is only a waterboy for the Obama Kool-Aid Brigade.

Someone ought to bury Chuck Schumer's lying words right back between his teeth. But Chuck is too smart to go on a show where someone will take on his smarmy, partisan behavior and stick it back to him. Schumer is Carville who has a seat in the Senate because the people of New York are such boobs as to keep electing people like him.

"What experience and history teach is
this - that people and governments never have learned anything from history,
or acted on principles deduced from it."

G. W. F. Hegel

Good boy...good...down, boy...I said DOWN, Greg!!!

October 25, 2009 - 17:05 ET by Tailgunner

There ya go, boy...here's a Scooby Snack for you...good job!

No, Greg...get your nose out of there!

No...no...down...DOWN...you can't hump Barry's leg...(gotta get NBC to get that damn mutt fixed one of these days!)

Hey, there's Michelle Malkin over there, Greg! Sic 'em, Greg...Sic 'em!!

As GUN CONTROL has nothing to do with GUNS, so HEALTH CONTROL has nothing to do with HEALTH.

Tyranny is rarely felt save by those who OPPOSE it. (unknown)

Turned it off

October 25, 2009 - 17:06 ET by Texndoc

And switched to Fox. Gregory let Schumer ramble for hours and cut Cornyn short every time he opened his mouth.

Tex.... I did the same as

October 25, 2009 - 17:14 ET by bigtimer

Tex....

I did the same as well, never looked back.

'Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea'~Breitbart

"Fitzfong"

October 25, 2009 - 17:18 ET by mad53PA

You hit the nail on the head!!

Everytime Schumer spoke what was an obvious lie, Cornyn just took a sip out of whatever he was drinking.

He didn't have the balls to point his finger at Schumer and say "That is just Bull***T!!

He wasn't about to get any help from Gregory (no wonder MTP ratings are nosediving) and Schumer has become so comfortable with lying, he doesn't even bat an eye.

Heaven help us, Malkin has more stones than these idiots!!

Thanks. I'm so sick of

October 25, 2009 - 19:45 ET by fitzfong

Thanks. I'm so sick of these weenies like Cornyn, Graham and McCain showing up on the Sunday shows simply for self-aggrandizement. They go on knowing that if they challenge partisan hacks like Schumer, Durbin, Leahy, Kerry or any of the other Senate Democrat blowhards, they won't get invited back...and it's more important to them to get invited back and to receive phony compliments than it is to represent the interests of the Party and their constituents. A mannequin would do a better job representing the Senate Republicans on the Sunday shows than Cornyn, McConnell, Hutchinon, Graham, Snowe, Collins, McCain and Lugar do. I'm just glad that arrogant gasbag Chuck Hagel isn't in the Senate anymore...you just know he'd be kicking down the door to get on TV.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

And people wonder why I want to leave NY

October 25, 2009 - 17:32 ET by ChristianRebel

I e-mailed this guy and my congressman about health care...I might as well have talked to the wall.

Hey CR

October 25, 2009 - 17:35 ET by MrShy

Are you in NYC?

No not NYC

October 25, 2009 - 20:29 ET by ChristianRebel

Western NY but I get asked that all the time.

email

October 25, 2009 - 19:21 ET by TheAssessor

I emailed them too. Reply went something like,

'Sorry, but if you don't agree you're an idiot. We know what's best for you but keep writing. We love a laugh.' s/o

I can understand anyone wanting to leave NY. The politicians have zero dignity and the political arena is a cess pool.

Congressman

October 25, 2009 - 20:35 ET by ChristianRebel

Sad but that's about the exact same response I got from my congressman, I couldn't help but feel like the e-mail was written by a secratary though since I got the same reply from my health care letter...twice when I only sent the e-mail once.

It doesn't help that we have annoyingly oppressive gun control laws here. I know quite a few people that want to move for that reason alone.

started the war?

October 25, 2009 - 17:58 ET by sarainitaly

GREGORY: ...if you say that this president should commit more troops, can't you render an opinion about whether the previous administration that started the war provided the resources to win it?

Hmmm - as I recall, Al-Qaeda started the war when they flew jets into the Twin Towers and killed 3000 Americans.

sarainitaly

October 25, 2009 - 20:38 ET by MrShy

Precisely. Disgusting, isn't it?

Leftist hack Gregory can't differentiate between Afghanistan and Iraq. To him, being lazy like that is par for the course when you are simply throwing everything at Bush to discredit him.

POS MSM.

I'll take Bush. Today. Yesterday. More importantly - tomorrow.

October 25, 2009 - 18:49 ET by JWF

This guy JWF looked at how much GWB increased the national debt.

Furthermore, YES FURTHERMORE! Furthermore, if you remove the debt the government owes itself, and only talk about the debt that actual people have in their hands in the form of an IOU. The debt burden of the U.S government went from 33.8% to 40.8%. An increase of 7%. That 7% increase to 40.8 is actually up 20% from the original 33.8 number.

Wow. Up 20%. Wow. But wait...

The per capita GDP was 36,200 in 2001. It rose 11,100 to 46,300 in 2009. A rise of 30%. I said the debt per GDP rose 20%. Income grew faster than the debt. We had 30% more income to pay off the 20% increase in debt.

Ok. But don't we have more people to pay off a bigger debt?

Real Federal Debt Per Capita

If you think about it, the chart below could be sort of encouraging:

JWF note: Please go to the website and look at the graph.

(Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis)

So the national debt hit a peak of $19,360 per person, in 2007 dollars, at the end of World War II. Then it fell, steeply, then slowly, to a low point of $6,759 in 1974. Interestingly, it was falling in the early 1970s even though the government was running deficits, because the deficits were being monetized through inflation. It soared under Reagan, and kept rising, more slowly, under Bush I and Clinton until 1995, peaking at $18,660. After that it started falling, to $13,635 in 2001.

As everyone knows, the deficits rose under George W. Bush. This may be a little overblown however. He's a minor offender compared to Reagan, and didn't increase the debt nearly as much as in World War II, and he was fighting two wars. Although since the war in Iraq was to some extent a war of choice, and fought under a doctrine-- the forward strategy of freedom-- which would get us in a lot more wars if pursued consistently, maybe we had an obligation to finance it in a more sustainable way. Anyway, at $16,712 per person, the debt at the end of the Bush II administration was still lower than its peak under Clinton. Ah, those were the days!...

It will have spiked up in 2008, and even more in 2009. However, here's the possibly semi-encouraging thing: both of the previous super-spikes in the national debt, during World War II and during the 1980s, had fairly robust GDP growth. Who knows? Maybe things aren't as bad as we think.

- from Freethinker blog

Yes. GWB grew the debt. But he also grew the GDP, average national income, population, and the money we borrowed was at an insanely low interest rate.

Now under BHO, we have a shrinking GDP, angry taxpayers going Galt, possibly shrinking incomes, a growing population, a lot of which are demanding more government services and a President and Congress agreeing with them, and the interest rate to borrow money about to skyrocket.

Yea. I'll take GWB. At least we survived him. The book is still out on BHO.

Sincerely,

a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.

The GOP's/Bush's

October 25, 2009 - 19:35 ET by RR GOP

The GOP's/Bush's culpability in the economic situation and the bailout schemes isn't going to be defended by this Republican-they surely got the ball rolling, and much of the spending, earmarks and pork was going on before the Democrats took over Congress.

I keep saying that anyone can join any political party they choose to...their choice doesn't necessarily mirror their political ideology.

It is better for the GOP to lose elections running conservative candidates than it is for the GOP to win running RINOs.

One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 86% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.

as a Texan

October 25, 2009 - 20:38 ET by jon_torlin

I'm embarrassed by the lack of spine and balls that Sen Cornyn apparently showed here. I wouldn't care where I was(Meat to the Press enemy territory), I would have called Schumer on his BS. Because of this, I can't find it in me to respect this guy as someone from Texas, let alone someone who is supposed to represent Texas.

-Jon

Gregory has always been a partisan hack.

October 25, 2009 - 21:20 ET by pbthinker

Gregory has always been a partisan hack and he proved it as the White House correspondent for NBC and on numerous occasions on everyone's favorite MSNBC. Now, I can remember a news story coming out how he'd had some sort of epiphany and had determined he was just being too mean. All I could think was someone actually told him he was supposed to be a reporter. Anyway, it seems he's forgotten again what reporters do and seems to be back into being the media wing of the Democratic Party. I never watch Meet the Press any more and haven't since Russert died, because of my opinion of Gregory. Of all the people available, he was probably one of the worst. I'm not sure who would be better, especially in the crop of reporters NBC has, but there just has to be someone better than Gregory.

In the long run, with the media being in the tank for Obama, it just doesn't make any difference. They're in the tank and will continue to be so until events force them to actually say something about this administration. With Emanuel and Axelrod there, this administration is going to keep doing strange, thugish things like they do in Chicago, and will eventually go so far over the line the press will have to report it.

Election 2008-God's way of showing us that elections count.

Biased beyond belief

October 25, 2009 - 22:58 ET by nadadhimmi

Gregory is a well known presstitute of the lowest order. He ply's his trade Sunday Moring instead of Saturday night as is the norm.

This is

October 26, 2009 - 10:00 ET by jessieH

This is the very reason Americans are switching to Fox. We can't get the truth from any other network news. It's the same thing on every network, lies, lies & more lies.

Meet

October 26, 2009 - 10:03 ET by jessieH

Meet the Press needs to change their name to Meet the Puppets.

→ Schmooze the Press

October 26, 2009 - 10:25 ET by Cool Arrow

I think somewhere, Tim Russert must be smiling.

He has been replaced with an able-minded journalist. That journalist is Chris Wallace. I can mention Russert and Wallace in the same breath.

Gregory is just riding a gravy train down from its past height.

LYDSEXICS UNTIE!

I can't believe it!!

October 26, 2009 - 12:17 ET by Patriot II

What do these morons smoke? Blame the debt on the GOP? How far up their respective butts do they have their heads? This 9 month administration has spent more than all the presidents in history? Time to "impeach and imprison"!! imho