« Joe Wilson Speaks at a Burner Event | Main | DCCC Buying Ads for Goldmark »

October 16, 2006

McGavick Shaving the Truth Again?

Senator John Warner of Virginia quickly disavowed the report of the contents of a conversation that Mike McGavick reported having with him recently. Dave Ammons, writing for the AP, reports that Senator Warner took issue with McGavick's implication that he, Warner, agreed with McGavick about the administration's handling of the war.

In what seems like an obvious attempt to move closer to the Washington state electorate's position on the war in Iraq, McGavick told the AP that "things are not getting better in Iraq and a course correction is needed". McGavick called today for replacing Rumsfeld and creating a bipartisan panel to propose new directions for the war in Iraq. Well and good. Almost all of us would agree, although most of us are not Johnnie-come-latelys to this position. But McGavick seemed to feel the need to try to ally himself with the national Republicans who are perceived to be the most independent Republican thinkers on the war - Senators John Warner and Chuck Hagel. Trouble is, Warner didn't remember the conversation in quite the same way as McGavick implied. As Ammons writes:

But Warner quickly distanced himself from McGavick's proposal.

"In our conversation, I shared with Mr. McGavick my views on the challenges that remain in Iraq," Warner said in a statement released by his Senate office. "I did not expand my views beyond the parameters of my prior public comments on the issue.

"Secretary Rumsfeld did not come up in any way in our conversation."

Five weeks ago, Goldy discussed the real implications of McGavick's less than fully truthful report of the DUI he received in Maryland in 1993 and said: "what Mike?™ wants is for the media to report on the moral of his stories while ignoring the details". With the addition of this incident of differing reports of an important discussion, I have to wonder if we might have a pattern of careless communications in situations where it truly matters. Not a character trait we really want in a person who would like to be our Senator.

Posted by Lynn Allen on October 16, 2006 at 10:23 PM in Candidate Races, National and International Politics | Permalink


Perhaps McGavick is channeling an adjusted course by the WH. As one of the few still well funded by GOP machine. The upcoming generation of ads we haven't seen yet may well foreshadow a changing WH posture. I only say this because it's hard to see McGavick come up with this new stance on his own and considering how much GOP dollars are filling his coffers, his words bought and paid for.

Posted by: mainsailset | Oct 17, 2006 7:40:59 AM


That makes perfect sense to me (aside from the Rumsfeld part) and makes me think about preparing some "flip-flopper" rebuttals. But clearly, they didn't bring Warner into the picture. It's so nice to see the Republicans in disarray. I know. I know. It may change. They've cleaned our clocks in previous elections because we weren't paying attention but it sure appears as if they've lost control of the message here.

Posted by: Lynn | Oct 17, 2006 10:08:55 AM

I don't think the Rs are counting on "message" -- I think they are counting on "machine" -- or, in my more cynical moments, "the voting machines."

Posted by: Jon Stahl | Oct 17, 2006 11:10:57 PM

Post a comment