"Good Morning America" co-host Diane Sawyer on Monday quizzed John McCain on whether the media is gushing too much over Barack Obama's Middle East trip. She then proceeded to cite Obama talking points on the visit. First, Sawyer wondered, "A quick question about the press coverage, if I can. [Obama's] there with a lot of reporters and it's been widely reported--" At this point, the Arizona senator started chuckling to himself.
A surprised Sawyer continued, "You're laughing. Do you think the press coverage is unfair?" McCain wryly responded, "That's up to the American people to decide, Diane. It is what it is." A few seconds earlier, Sawyer appeared to preemptively answer her query on media bias. The ABC journalist prompted, "You have criticized Senator Obama in the past for not going to Iraq and getting a fresh assessment. He is in Iraq as we speak this morning. Does this take care of it?" The subtext of the question sounded very much like "He went to Iraq. Will you leave him alone now?" Never mind the fact that McCain has been to the area eight times and Obama only two.
Sawyer repeatedly borrowed statements from Obama talking points. And at one point, a second question resulted in a laugh from McCain: "You know, his camp has said that in fact he was out ahead of you on Afghanistan [McCain snorts], where the real problem is today." She then observed that "Senator Obama says that he was warning of this all along" and played a clip of the Democrat calling the situation in Afghanistan "precarious and urgent."
This resulted in an exchange in which Sawyer attempted to goad the GOP candidate into using Obama's words: "Do you agree the situation in Afghanistan is precarious and urgent?" McCain concurred that the country faces significant challenges, but didn't use the exact phrasing. Sawyer tried again: "Not precarious and urgent?"
The host also speculated, "Does [Obama] deserve the credit for saying that there should be more troops in Afghanistan?"
So, perhaps Sawyer's question about media bias was rhetorical?
A transcript of the July 21 segment, which aired at 7:05am, follows:
DIANE SAWYER: And we turn now to the race for '08, Barack Obama's opponent, Republican presidential candidate John McCain. He joined us just a few minutes ago from South Portland, Maine. Senator McCain, good to have you with us this morning. Good morning.
ABC GRAPHIC: John McCain One-on-One: His View of Obama's Trip
SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN: Good morning, Diane.
SAWYER: You have criticized Senator Obama in the past for not going to Iraq and getting a fresh assessment. He is in Iraq as we speak this morning. Does this take care of it?
MCCAIN: Well, I believe that he'll be able to -- I know that he'll be able to have the opportunity to see the success of the surge. It has succeeded. This is the same strategy that he voted against. Railed against. Campaigned for his nomination and obtained his nomination in opposition. He was wrong about the surge. It is succeeding. And we are winning and I hope he will, he will agree that he had a fundamental misjudgment of the need for this change in strategy which has succeeded, which is allowing us to win this war.
SAWYER: A quick question about the press coverage, if I can. He's there with a lot of reporters and it's been widely reported-- [McCain starts chuckling to himself.] You're laughing. Do you think the press coverage is unfair?
MCCAIN: That's up to the American people to decide, Diane. It is what it is.
SAWYER: You know, his camp has said that in fact he was out ahead of you on Afghanistan [McCain snorts], where the real problem is today. The level of violence has increased with more U.S. And NATO troops killed in June in Afghanistan than were in Iraq. The Taliban resurging and also Senator Obama says that he was warning of this all along and I'm going to play a bite from yesterday.
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA ["Face the Nation" clip]: I believe U.S. troop levels need to increase. And I've -- for at least a year now -- have called for two additional brigades, perhaps three. The situation is precarious and urgent here in Afghanistan. And I believe this has to be our central focus -- the central front on our battle against terrorism.
SAWYER: Does he deserve the credit for saying that there should be more troops in Afghanistan? And now the chairman of the joint chiefs is saying just the same thing.
MCCAIN: Actually, the chairman of joint chiefs said yesterday it would be very dangerous to do what Senator Obama wants to do Iraq. He said the fragile victory that we're succeeding and gaining would be all placed at risk if we did what Senator Obama wanted. Look, you don't have to choose to lose in Iraq in order to succeed in Afghanistan. Of course, I've been following closely the events in Afghanistan. I gave speeches in Germany talking about the need for more NATO troops, more U.S. troops but it's more complicated than that, Diane.
SAWYER: But--
MCCAIN: It's not just a matter of troops. It's a matter of our relationship with Pakistan. It's relations with a new strategy which will-- can and will succeed. The same kind that worked in Iraq, which he has rejected. And we can succeed there, but, it's going to be tough.
SAWYER: But--
MCCAIN: It is very tough. If we had lost in Iraq, the complications in Afghanistan would have been enormously more difficult.
SAWYER: But the chairman of the joint chiefs says I need the surge. I need the additional brigades. But "I don't have troops that I can reach for to send into Afghanistan until I have reduced requirements in Iraq." So, in the sense, they are linked. The troops in Iraq and the availability of troops for Afghanistan. My question is, when will you have enough troops to send to Afghanistan?
MCCAIN: Oh, I'm sure fairly soon. But it will be dictated by the conditions on the ground. Look, it's like any counter-insurgency or strategy that succeeds. We will be able to free up troops to go to Afghanistan. But if we abandon Iraq and have specific dates for withdrawal-- We would have been out last March, this previous March, if we had done what Senator Obama wanted to do. He was wrong then. He was wrong now. And he should admit that he was wrong. That might help us succeed in Afghanistan, and we will free up additional troops as we succeed in Iraq and come home in victory and honor.
SAWYER: Do you agree the situation in Afghanistan is precarious and urgent?
MCCAIN: Well, I think it's very serious. I think it's a serious situation.
SAWYER: Not precarious and urgent?
MCCAIN: Oh, I don't know exactly-- run through the vocabulary. But it's a very serious situation. But there's a lot of things we need to do. We have a lot of work to do and I'm afraid that it's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq/Pakistan border. And I would not announce that I'm going to attack Pakistan as Senator Obama did when he was-- during his campaign. But most importantly, he railed against, voted against and said the surge wouldn't work. He said it wouldn't work and couldn't work and has failed to acknowledge. It did work and we have succeeded. Thank God.
SAWYER: I can't let you leave, Senator McCain, this morning, without making one more valiant attempt at the vice presidential question. Can tell me anything new about your timetable and how many people on your list now?
MCCAIN: Diane, I would love to, but I can't. And I'm sure you understand. But I also understand why you try.
SAWYER: If you'd love to, why not give yourself a break this morning and just tell us.
MCCAIN: Thank you, Diane. We're still going through the process.
SAWYER: Senator McCain thanks so much for being with us.
MCCAIN: Thank you, Diane.
SAWYER: Good to have you.
—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Nice how Diane
July 21, 2008 - 12:16 ET by fonzie2178Sawyer thinks she knows more about the situation than John McCain does. Very condescending and expected from the MSM. I thought he handled it well. She may as well have said, "John, after I used all Obama's stances to argue with you, do you still think we're biased?" The irony here is outstanding! LOL
"Green, the new Red."
And Scott...she didn't ask the question.
July 21, 2008 - 12:20 ET by Gary HallAnd Scott...she didn't ask the question. One would think that any reporter interviewing either McCain or Obama in this moment, with the current situation in and future of Iraq on the media's table 24/7 that they would ask the question of both. The question:
Not that Sawyer needed McCain to raise the subject to bring it up, but he did.. :
..and what did we get from Sawyer? A follow up to explore the issue of whether or not Obama got it wrong here, and McCain got it right? Oh no, Sawyer quickly changed the subject. She, like most of them, will not allow a substantive discussion the issue.
Bottom line - Sawyer is so wanting the situation in Afghanistan to be "precarious and urgent," again -- you know -- back to the way it was in the mid to late 90's when we had a president by the name of Bill Clinton, who looked the other way as the country of Afghanistan became "precarious and urgent," when it fell into the hands of the oppressive radical Taliban - become yet another hell-hole on earth. Carter and Reagan both would have reached out to protect the people of Afghanistan against the invaders - but not Bill Clinton.
(;~/ gary
Last Week
July 21, 2008 - 14:51 ET by JDWRasmussen polls supported McCain's strategy on both Iraq and Afghanistan.
Another Rasmussen poll overwhelming supports the view that oil prices are the most significant threat to our economy.
Why pander to the Obama foreign play school when America wants solutions to oil problems? McCain needs to interview truckers, America's rural, airlines, farmers, drilling rigs...
JDW
SAPPY NEWS
DAILY WAVE
McLame.....get used to this
July 21, 2008 - 12:23 ET by oldArmyMcLame.....get used to this kinda treatment from the MSM from now on. Your blossom of love has bloomed.....now your against THE man!!
Winning is not an option...until Nov.
July 21, 2008 - 12:29 ET by txcoThe MSM only wants to cover a war they can spin as us losing. Things are going so well in Iraq that they are now focusing on Afghanistan to try and conjure up some bad news. It is a shame they took the recent battle in Afghanistan that killed 9 of our soldiers and are trying to spin it into....WE"RE LOSING....OBAMA WAS RIGHT!!!
Truth is we're winning in both countries..period.
I like McCain's approach
July 21, 2008 - 12:40 ET by Hoosier DaddyI like McCain's approach - laughing at the stupid questions. I hope he continues to do that and eventually just says, "What a stupid question!"
They are stupid questions. I
July 21, 2008 - 13:30 ET by mjgThey are stupid questions. I can't blame McCain for laughing at them.
Quit laughing, John...it ain't funny anymore
July 21, 2008 - 13:08 ET by SickofLibsSawyer: what a bitch. And not in a good way.
This happens over and again to McCain. He should just say outright "Knock it off, because I am not going to parrot back to you the words you are trying to put in my mouth no matter how many times you push it. Next question."
UPSET SPECIAL: B. H. OBAMA WILL LOSE
July 21, 2008 - 13:50 ET by reelman46UPSET SPECIAL: B. H. OBAMA WILL LOSE
Remember
where you heard it first..its July 21, 2008 and BHO is being hailed by
the lib-media and their fellow socialist pacifists like the coming of
the “political Jesus”. The pandering, the fawning, the stilted
covering, the backing and filling has broken biased records thought out
of sight.
But, alas, the voters are not quite at ease as the pundit herd thinks.
The same pundit herd that was so convinced Kerry was “in for 8 years”.
Terrorism, gas prices, higher taxes plus more lefty nuts on the SC have
many millions worried. BHO soars to new levels of arrogance weekly. BHO
takes flights of frightful foreign policy fancy (a la Jimmah C). The
second highest corporate tax rate in the world and BHO wants to hit
them again? The Bush tax cuts for half the wage earners taken back by
BHO?
Time is not on BHO’s side and neither are the debates. These will
reveal even more of this empty-suited rookie. McCain will fumble around
but still score big points on major concerns like terror, taxes, the
surge and energy. BHO has no real alternatives except the failed
expensive old liberal non-solutions.
The polls were the same in June as versus Kerry. In July the polls
indicated a tie. Democrats always peak early on because the simple
fantasy non-solutions by their Monday morning QB seem (key word seem)
just so do-able, so real, so possible….seem until the fog of emotion
slowly lifts. The live debates will bypass the biased media and that
will decay BHO support also. He will be challenged. He can’t kiss it
off or walk of the stage. Pacifist secular socialism will have to be
defended. Jimmah C scammed us all with it. Then he was crushed and his
party was crushed again four years later. How can growing gov-ment,
raising taxes on half of the voters and exploding the budget be easily
defended? Many voters are not in the mood for more fluff and smiling
deception. Class warfare, wealth envy, victim worship yada yada
recycled again.
BHO is not a debate guy, he is a pontificator, an arrogant smiling
radical lecturer who cannot stand up under serial questioning. BHO is a
certified coward who will not go on Fox News but only goes to the
fawning networks of like mind. What does this tell you? Listening to
kooks with money to get a nomination is not the same as telling ALL
voters you will do kooky things to their country, to their lives, to
their futures. As BHO is revealed to be the radical socialist he
is…many millions will get that “gut feeling” this guy is dangerous.
Horndog Klinton faced two weak inept mushy Repubs but still could not get 50% of the vote. What does that tell you?
I see the results as JM 48%-ish BHO 47%-ish and the rest 5%.
(Fall back position: Democrats in congress get creamed in 2010 with BHO
hammering your pocketbook and trashing your values then MR shames BHO
with a 45 state rout in 2012 due to a NG game plan as the
implementation of strident secular socialism once again horrifies a
country into sanity)
Doug Schexnayder, Ph.D. (theconservativecrawfish)
"(Fall back
July 21, 2008 - 15:30 ET by ckc1227"(Fall back position:Democrats in congress get creamed in 2010)"
I know this is your fall back position, but I believe Dems could lose seats in 2008 *if* Repubs played it right. I hope so, because Obama & Company could do a lot of damage in 2 years.
Any chance the "subtextof
July 21, 2008 - 15:59 ET by balboaAny chance the "subtextof the question" will differ depending on who's watching? I know it's a longshot, but I thought I'd ask.
Sawyer Sauce
July 21, 2008 - 17:25 ET by GoodieSAWYER: You have criticized Senator Obama in the past for not going to Iraq and getting a fresh assessment. He is in Iraq as we speak this morning. Does this take care of it?
"Well Diane from the "First Black President" It depends on what the word "it" means.