Big News Orgs Start Picking Up Boehner "Small Price" Remark. But...
September 14, 2007 -- 10:28 AM EST // //

Okay, so Boehner's remark a few days back -- that the loss of troops in Iraq is a "small price" to pay for defeating Al Qaeda -- is starting to gain a bit of traction with the big news orgs.

Unfortunately, the early coverage of it has been pretty dismal, either thoroughly lacking in context or letting Boehner skate with a bogus explanation for the reprehensible remark.

The most embarrassing performance was turned in by USA Today. Here's what the paper wrote today about it:

Speaking from Iraq, while leading a congressional delegation, House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, told CNN U.S. forces are having success. He argued "the investment that we're making today will be a small price if we're able to stop al-Qaeda here."

...and that's it. No mention of the fact that this was a controversial remark. No mention of the fact that Boehner had said this in response to a question about troop losses. No mention of the multiple Democrats who condemned the remark yesterday.

To its credit, today's New York Times did frame Boehner's remarks as controversial. The paper wrote:

Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the House Republican leader, on his way back from a two-day trip to Iraq, continued to herald signs of success he saw. But Mr. Boehner himself became part of the bitter debate over Iraq, saying in response to a question posed on CNN that “the investment that we’re making today will be a small price if we’re able to stop Al Qaeda here.”

Democrats seized on the remark, accusing him of demeaning the death toll in Iraq, which as of Wednesday stood at 3,765, though aides said he referred only to the financial costs.

The problem here is that the Times didn't report the fact that Boehner had said this in response to a question about not just the financial cost of the war, but also about troop deaths. Result: The pushback by Boehner's aides -- "that he referred only to the financial costs" -- sounds perfectly reasonable, whereas if you look at the whole exchange it's obvious that the explanation is totally bogus.

By contrast, The Politico's John Bresnanan, to his credit, posted the full transcript. Thus, readers could understand what actually happened.

The best coverage of the sorry episode was done by MSNBC's Keith Olbermann. He made it completely clear that Boehner was answering a question about troop deaths, and even fact-checked the ridiculous premise of Boehner's assertions, pointing out that our Iraq policies are doing nothing to defeat Al Qaeda or to stabilize the Middle East. Enjoy:

Meanwhile, no coverage in The Washington Post, the Associated Press, Reuters, or on any of the major networks today, according to Nexis. But more on that in a bit.

---

---