McCain's Interview on CBS

When CBS's Katie Couric interviewed John McCain on Tuesday, her producers edited one exchange to include part of McCain's answer to a previous question on Iraq -- and, in the process, deleted comments that have touched off a controversy.

The "CBS Evening News" interview began with Couric quoting Barack Obama as saying that "there might have been improved security even without the surge. What's your response to that?"

But what viewers saw next was not what the Arizona senator said next, an out-of-order sequence that news organizations generally do not allow. It was McCain's earlier comment that "Senator Obama has indicated by his failure to acknowledge the success of the surge that he would rather lose a war than lose a campaign." That was spliced into the second part of his subsequent answer, the editing break covered by a still photo of McCain with Gen. David Petraeus.

Left on the cutting-room floor was McCain accusing Obama of "a false depiction of what actually happened. Colonel MacFarland was contacted by one of the major Sunni sheiks. Because of the surge we were able to go out and protect that sheik and others. And it began the Anbar awakening. I mean, that's just a matter of history."

But the official, Col. Sean MacFarland, has said that Sunni leaders began cooperating against al-Qaeda months before President Bush's surge began. McCain aides say Couric did not ask him about the chronology. "Senator McCain is correct," said spokesman Tucker Bounds. "As General Petraeus has made clear, the surge is the reason why the Anbar awakening was so successful in tearing up al Qaeda."

I have a rabid DU/Kos friend who is going ballistic over this, and is basically accusing CBS of being in cahoots with the McCain campaign, blah, blah blah. Imagine that, if you will. The mind boggles.

I work in "reality" television, and my response is that the editor in charge of this story was either a bit lazy mentally screening the two comments, or was gravitating toward an answer he thought was more clear and on point.

Just my guess. I'm an editor and I cut people's sound bites every day and I know I occasionally suffer from both lapses :-)

It is this kind of BS that keeps SeeBS and Perky Katie Couric in the news ratings black hole.

A lot of times, it’s better to let the chips fall where they may than to tinker with facts and create a major storm.

Well, personally I prefer the original transcript. I think the editing hurts McCain and makes it look like he's avoiding her question entirely.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/22/eveningnews/main4283813.shtml

Saying the Anbar awakening happened before the surge is like saying the American Revolution started in 1773 at the Boston Tea Party or 1765 when Americans started grumbling about the stamp act. What McCain actually said in response to her question, and it is true and accurate to the question is:

"I don't know how you respond to something that is such a false depiction of what actually happened. Colonel McFarlane (phonetic) was contacted by one of the major Sunni sheiks. Because of the surge we were able to go out and protect that sheik and others. And it began the Anbar awakening. I mean, that's just a matter of history. Thanks to General Petraeus, our leadership, and the sacrifice of brave young Americans. I mean, to deny that their sacrifice didn't make possible the success of the surge in Iraq, I think, does a great disservice to young men and women who are serving and have sacrificed. "

Which is true. Grumbling of a sheik and his followers is nothing. Giving them the backing to turn that complaining into action required the surge.

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.