Skip to comments.Today to McCain: "Are You Playing for the Wrong Team?"; Frets Rudy Treated Too Kindly by 9/11 Comm
Posted on 05/20/2004 4:41:55 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbestEdited on 05/20/2004 4:54:52 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
A solid morning of fighting the good liberal fight for The Today Show.
The opening highlighted doubts about a US bombing raid in Iraq and an Israeli attack in Gaza.
Then, in the first interview, Matt Lauer was on the attack with Rudy Giuliani. The thesis: Rudy was not treated harshly enough in his appearance before the 9/11 Commission yesterday.
Q. Do you understand the amount of anger that some of the families expressed at yesterday's hearing?
A. Yes, people have different ways of expressing themselves, but the real anger should be reserved for the terrorists that did this.
That didn't satisfy Lauer. He cut Rudy off: "but blame and anger. Blame at officials responsible for overseeing the response."
Again and again Lauer returned to the assertion that the response was imperfect and that as a result lives were needlessly lost.
Rudy readily acknowledged that the response was imperfect but made the obvious point that nothing had ever prepared America for something like this, and that while he sympathized with the pain of the families who lost people in the WTC, there were other families to be considered, the families of the fire and policemen who died saving thousands of people.
The Lauer/Today strategy seems clear. With all the doubt about Iraq, the stories of the heroism of the response to 9/11 is one of the remaining feelgood themes we have, and in some way it redounds to Pres. Bush's benefit. So that heroism must be undermined and discredited. Lauer gave his best effort this morning.
Then it was on to a Katie interview with Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller who some time ago made a number of recommendations regarding the way detainees at Abu Ghraib should be interrogated. The Gen. made the point that the abuse was the acts of a small number of people who violated orders and that there was no culture of abuse. Katie was clearly skeptical.
But the key to the inteview was that, **at three separate times during the segment**, Today displayed a series of the abuse photos that we've all seen countless times.
By the way, I also kept careful count of the number of times this morning that Today displayed photos from the butchering of Nick Berg: it was exactly . . . zero.
Finally, a Lauer love-in with John McCain, Today's favorite guest. He readily took up the invitation to dump on Gen. Miller's assertion that there was a limited number of people involved in the prisoner abuse.
But Today's obvious main purpose was to open the wounds between McCain and the GOP with the hope of driving him into the arms of John Kerry.
Apparently McCain had made a comment to the effect that Americans weren't making enough sacrifices, meaning our taxes are too low. Today showed a clip of House Speaker Denny Hastert saying that if McCain wanted to see sacrifice he should visit our wounded soldiers at Walter Reed.
McCain said that he had done that, but that we shouldn't burden those people with big deficits, and anyhow what happened to the Republican philosophy of restraining spending and smaller government? (a fair point).
Lauer let the cat slip entirely out of the bag: "with fellow Republicans criticizing you, and Dem Sen. Joe Biden suggesting that John Kerry should give you a call regarding the VP slot, has it occured to you that you might be playing for the wrong team?"
McCain said no, that he was supporting Pres. Bush, that sometimes tempers got frayed and he understood. Actually a decent statement.
But this is clearly just an opening salvo in the liberal media's effort to help convince McCain to join the Kerry ticket.
For 2 years after 9/11 everyone had nothing but praise for Guiliani as well as the Firemen and police who responded. Now that it is an election year the left is attacking EVERYTHING related to 9/11. They have no shame. I wouldn't be surpised if they attacked the airline industry for the jets not being surivable in building impacts. BTW, the families of the victims have become immensely irritating, as they are willing pawns of the Rat party. They should just take their blood money, shut up and disappear.
I've heard John McCain publicly endorse GW's re-election and because of his support for the war on terrorism.
He considers himself a loyal republican (with a lot of strange friends).
Once more, Matt Lauer does not 'get it'. He really should know better than to badger Rudy Giuliani, that is similar to poking a hornets' nest with a stick.
The only people to blame for 9-11 are the House, Senate and X42.
Not sure if you're being facetious or not. If you're serious, aren't you forgetting Al-Qaeda?
I think you're right, you'd have two insufferable, full-of-themselves, prickly gasbags.
But here's what I think you're leaving out: that is not how The Media would present it, and that means everything. Sadly. The Media would present it as the Dream Ticket. GW Bush is SO BAD that even a loyal Republican, because of conscience and through an agonizing process, just was FORCED to bail on his own corrupt, hopeless party. So shouldn't you really do the same?
And many, many idiot sheeple would.
Your point's a good one. But only if the GOP had the guts to mount a truly aggressive, Clintonlike (if you understand what I mean by that aggressive, 24/7, take-no-prisoners, instant-response-to-everything, spokesmen all over the media) response-campaign.
And where's the evidence that they have that in them?
You have that right! McCain IMO has "zero" integrity -- face time means more to him then anything.
As for the "TODAY" show, I wouldn't watch it if they paid me!
Al-Qaeda qould have been nothing but a memory if the three I mentioned had done their jobs properly and upheld their sworn oaths.
Our Motto: "Sacrificing Our Digestive System Since 2001 So You Don't Have To!"
They all could have done a better job, no doubt, but surely Al Qaeda remains the #1 culprit. If Al Qaeda manages another attack in the US, would you put all the blame on W?
Just a gut reaction on my part. Where am I going wrong?
The elections hinge on the mushy middle. A Kerry/Nader ticket will consolidate the Democratic vote giving them a full 40% of the electorate. The Bush/Cheney ticket will get it's 40%. The mushy middle will then decide the election in the battleground states.
In my opinion, a Kerry/Nader ticket will have more negatives in the minds of the mushy middle. It will force more of the mushy middle to vote for the Bush/Cheney ticket.
IMO .. they don't want McCain as VP .. they are just using him as a cover and a distraction
McCain marches to his own drum and the Dem won't be able to control him
BTW .. I did read an article in The New Yorker awhile back that McCain's old adviser is helping the Kerry campaign .. Does anyone know if this is true?
I'll repeat it. Had the three done their jobs and upheld their sworn oaths Al-Qaeda would be a distant memory.
If Al-Qaeda manages another attack and any of those perpetrating the attack are illegal aliens or aliens with expired passports I will definately put the blame on W as well as the house and senate.
They alone are responsible for the funding and legal changes needed to fight these scumbags.
Not really .. the dems are in the middle of a melt down
After all Rudy did for NY when 9/11 happened .. only desperate people would try to attack him and accuse him of not doing enough
Stop watching it before you go blind. There is way too much stress in today's Islamo-terrorist world to watch these flaming a'holes.
Yeah, but he says it in the same way that Michael Moore says, "I support the troops"
The subtext is, "because if I don't, my party will put me in a home, which is really where I belong."
Krauthammer said yesterday that McCain will go Dem, claiming that the party left him, not he the party. Said this is just laying the groundwork.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.