(Note: I didn't see this diaried yet. If it has been I'll delete this one.
I've been posting about our local fundraising efforts the past few days, but this smear by Republicans John Boehner and Eric Cantor seemed more important.)
While it's despicable that GOP "leaders" such as Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) and Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) would choose to slice out only the few phrases that would make the presumptive Democratic nominee for president look bad (and they have to actually ignore those phrases' real intent even at that), it's equally deplorable that a well-respected journalist such as the Sun-Times' Washington Bureau chief and political columnist Lynn Sweet would let them get away with the distorted half-quoting via her own half-baked he-said/they-said stenography at her to-the-minute blog.
[FYI, Lynn Sweet has been a Chris Matthews regular as she has covered the Obama campaign from one of his hometown papers for well over a year.]
To wit:
-
A Lynn Sweet 5/12 blog post links to
The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg interview with Obama on Israel. In it, Sen. Obama is asked and replies:
JG: What do you make of Jimmy Carter’s suggestion that Israel resembles an apartheid state?
BO: I strongly reject the characterization. Israel is a vibrant democracy, the only one in the Middle East, and there’s no doubt that Israel and the Palestinians have tough issues to work out to get to the goal of two states living side by side in peace and security, but injecting a term like apartheid into the discussion doesn’t advance that goal. It’s emotionally loaded, historically inaccurate, and it’s not what I believe.
JG: If you become President, will you denounce settlements publicly?
BO: What I will say is what I’ve said previously. Settlements at this juncture are not helpful. Look, my interest is in solving this problem not only for Israel but for the United States.
JG: Do you think that Israel is a drag on America’s reputation overseas?
BO: No, no, no. But what I think is that this constant wound, that this constant sore, does infect all of our foreign policy. The lack of a resolution to this problem provides an excuse for anti-American militant jihadists to engage in inexcusable actions, and so we have a national-security interest in solving this, and I also believe that Israel has a security interest in solving this because I believe that the status quo is unsustainable. I am absolutely convinced of that, and some of the tensions that might arise between me and some of the more hawkish elements in the Jewish community in the United States might stem from the fact that I’m not going to blindly adhere to whatever the most hawkish position is just because that’s the safest ground politically.
I want to solve the problem, and so my job in being a friend to Israel is partly to hold up a mirror and tell the truth and say if Israel is building settlements without any regard to the effects that this has on the peace process, then we’re going to be stuck in the same status quo that we’ve been stuck in for decades now, and that won’t lift that existential dread that David Grossman described in your article. (link original to Atlantic article)
The notion that a vibrant, successful society with incredible economic growth and incredible cultural vitality is still plagued by this notion that this could all end at any moment -- you know, I don’t know what that feels like, but I can use my imagination to understand it. I would not want to raise my children in those circumstances. I want to make sure that the people of Israel, when they kiss their kids and put them on that bus, feel at least no more existential dread than any parent does whenever their kids leave their sight. So that then becomes the question: is settlement policy conducive to relieving that over the long term, or is it just making the situation worse? That’s the question that has to be asked.
-
In her very next blogpost, Reporter Sweet regurgitates some GOP press releases feigning apoplexy over a very few words in one of Obama's replies... Indeed, as with
Sen. McCain's campaign recently mistaking an Obama dig over Mac's foundering moral compass as a dig on McCain's age (of which McCain himself jokes he is "
older than dirt"), it's clear that Cantor and Boehner have
deliberately misinterpreted Obama's response here.
Obama was obviously calling the lingering Israeli-Palestinian conflict a "constant wound," which, if Reps. Cantor and Boehner were being honest, they would acknowledge it is.
Indeed, Minority Leader Boehner clearly agrees with Dem Presidential candidate Obama on Israel. In 2006, the American-Israel PAC quoted Boehner as saying:
"Israel and the United States have a unique friendship based on our mutual commitment to democracy, freedom and peace. And as the new House majority leader, I can assure you that under my leadership, legislation that is in any way perceived as anti-Israel will not be considered in the House of Representatives."
Gee, that kind of sounds like Obama's own thoughts on Israel:
"... but understand this: if you’re waiting for America to distance itself from Israel, you are delusional. Because my commitment, our commitment, to Israel’s security is non-negotiable. ... Israel is a vibrant democracy, the only one in the Middle East, and there’s no doubt that Israel and the Palestinians have tough issues to work out to get to the goal of two states living side by side in peace and security ..."
Now, Ms. Sweet entitles her parroting post "GOP hits Obama over Israel" which is inaccurate. A more germane title would've been something like ABC News' report "House Republican Leaders Twist Obama Statement on Israel" from Jake Tapper.
Congrats to Ms. Sweet who, unlike her journalistic compatriot Mr. Tapper, has just helped slide our 2008 election that much further into the gutter.
The least Ms. Sweet could do now is meekly add the latest round of he-said/they-said/he-said by quoting and linking to Rep. Robert Wexler's (D-FL) strong statement condemning the Republicans' weak-kneed distortion.
Or, maybe she could actually do some research to question whether or not Boehner's deliberate misrepresentation of Sen. Obama's statements may have something to do with Republican President Bush's support for the very Israeli West Bank settlements that Sen. Obama suggests may be a source of the problem between Palestinians and Israelis...
and that such support from conservatives is often based on a desire to bring about the End of Days sooner rather than later...
or something like that...
What else would you expect from a guy who "leads" his party to vote against honoring Moms in the week before Mother's Day...?
You can let Ms. Sweet know your feelings on the Republicans' intentional lies by emailing her here: lsweet3022@aol.com (that's the email listed on the Sun-Times website).
Likewise for Minority Leader Boehner with a click to his Contact page here.
--
Update: In the next blogpost after egregiously regurgitating the lies from Boehner and Cantor does Ms. Sweet redeem herself by explaining just how the Republicans lied about Obama?
No.
She toots her own horn about another MSNBC appearance of hers.
What happened to the Lynn Sweet that was willing to go around the table to pepper a Senator and presidential front-runner with pointed questions?!
--
Update 2: Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic (the original interviewer) declares Boehner "is a terribly busy man, with many burdensome responsibilities, so I have to assume that he simply didn't have time to read the entire Obama interview, or even the entire paragraph, or even a single clause."
Mr. Goldberg further calls out Republican Minority Leader Boehner by stating:
If he had [read the entire interview], of course, he would have seen that Obama was clearly calling the Middle East conflict, and not Israel, a sore. Why, there's no one who would disagree that the Middle East conflict is a "sore," is there?
I have no doubt that Mr. Boehner will issue a correction to his press release in which he states the obvious, which is that Obama expressed -- in twelve different ways -- his support for Israel to me.
If he doesn't, however, I would, sadly, have to agree with my colleague, the less-forgiving Andrew Sullivan, who called Boehner's statement a "flat-out lie." In fact, I would add to Andrew's post, by calling Boehner's statement mendacious, duplicitous, gross, and comically refutable. So Mr. Boehner, do the right thing, and correct the record. I'll be happy to post the correction right here.
(emphasis added, h/t onanyes in comments)
--
Update 3: So subtle it pretty much slips by... Ms. Sweet has a "Note" on her Boehner/Cantor post saying Obama, "referred to the plight of the Israeli people as a 'constant wound' and a 'constant sore' that 'does infect all of our foreign policy.'"
Given the tone of most of the initial comments Ms. Sweet (and/or her Sun-Times blog administrator) have approved for this post, it's clear most readers are ignoring that and simply blasting Obama based on Boehner's fibs.
--
(c/p Illinois Reason)