Greg Mueller responds to my post yesterday about the misuse of the term “Swift-Boating:”
Hi Michelle — I just saw the post you had on me about SBVT and I deserved the ding. Bad use of term on my part — I was trying to make the point that they still had it out for Republicans given how sour they still are over their view that the Swift Boat Vets prevented the Presidency from them and John Kerry. I was trying to say that they were doing their version — i.e. “trying” to do what they consider to be “Swift Boating.” After I said it, I realized it was not comunicating that way and dropped it in subsequent interviews.
Obviously, the difference is stark — SBVT were heroes once again coming forward to tell the truth and blow the whistle on Kerry. The New York Times used anonymous sources to have yet another “Jason Blair moment,” no evidence, no truth, just, as Rush would say, a drive by hit job.
We were so proud and honored to have played a role in the Swift Boat Vets for Truth, working side by side so many true American heroes. John O’Neill, Bill Franke and I have grown to be terrific friends as I have with the other true heroes that were involved in the effort.
Very poor communication on my part. I made the comment to my friend Jonathan Martin at The Politico early in the AM and realized it was not reading as I meant it. He did not misquote me. He is a very good reporter and always quotes me accurately. In subsequent interviews throughout the day the following statement was distributed and used in a number of stories.
“I think this story backfires because, put simply, this is a bad gossip column. There is no evidence of anything in it.
“It was a poor and revealing attempt by the New York Times to try and smear McCain at a time when he is starting to define Obama as an inexperienced liberal, so the New York Times takes up for Obama’s defense. If anything, this helps energize conservatives to come to McCain’s aide in beating back attacks by The New York Times and other liberal media outlets.
“Rather than coming from MoveOn.org or some other Soros bankrolled liberal group, The New York Times has launched the first real negative attack of the general election phase of the campaign. Certainly, the Times cannot complain about a negative general election campaign in upcoming articles and editorials since they have fired the first shot.”
Thanks, Greg.blog comments powered by Disqus
January 13, 2016 07:52 AM by Doug Powers
July 23, 2008 01:25 AM by See-Dubya
June 30, 2008 12:12 PM by Michelle Malkin
February 21, 2008 02:18 PM by Michelle Malkin
September 19, 2007 04:00 PM by Michelle Malkin