SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home The Spanish-american War

THE PLANK SEPTEMBER 18, 2008

The Spanish-american War

BY AUTHOR INFO NEEDED

Jonathan Martin at Politico has a characteristically level-headed reading of the evident McCain gaffe regarding whether or not he'd be willing to meet with Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Zapatero:

John McCain pointedly declined to commit to a meeting with Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero in a radio interview this week, sparking a major story in Madrid. Talking to a Latino-oriented radio station in Miami Monday morning,
McCain would only say: "I would be willing to meet with those leaders
who are friends and want to work with us in a cooperative fashion."

It seems, however, like McCain was uncertain about the country and leader in question. After an extended interview dealing with countries to our south, McCain
used the question about Spain to allude back to Mexico, note his work
"with leaders in the hemisphere," and our relationship with "Latin America and the entire region." McCain also never makes any mention of Spain or Zapatero.

Further, the individual conducting the interview has a thick accent and McCain appears not to understand her at times. "Ok, what about Europe, I'm talking about the President of Spain?" she asks. "What about me, what?" McCain responds, believing she said "you" instead of "Europe."

Having listened to the interview a few times now (you can find it here), I think it's abundantly clear that McCain wasn't paying close attention and misunderstood the question. Moreover, I don't think it's a terribly embarrassing mistake: The interviewer did have a pretty strong accent, and her followup questions weren't very well framed.

What's shocking is that, rather than own up to this excusable error, the McCain camp has dug in, claiming that McCain understood every word and meant exactly what he said. As McCain foreign policy adviser Randy Schuenemann wrote in an email to the Washington Post: 

The questioner asked several times about Senator McCain's willingness
to meet Zapatero (and id'd him in the question so there is no doubt
Senator McCain knew exactly to whom the question referred). Senator
McCain refused to commit to a White House meeting with President
[sic] Zapatero in this interview.

Really? That's clearly not how McCain felt back in April when he explained, "I would like for [Zapatero] to visit the United States. I am
very interested not only in normalizing relations with Spain but in
obtaining good and productive relations with the goal of addressing
many issues and challenges that we have to confront together." And even if McCain had for some reason cooled to the idea of a Zapatero visit over the past few months, it would not explain his repeated references to Latin America when asked about the possibility of a meeting.

The evidence seems pretty overwhelming that John McCain made an excusable mistake in the interview, but his campaign has tried to cover it up with an inexcusable falsehood, one that may significantly complicate relations with a NATO ally should he be elected.

--Christopher Orr

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 34 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

34 comments

"Latino"?!?

J***s C****t. Lord, how long?

- tomeg

September 18, 2008 at 3:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

First the attempt to spin the "fundamentally sound" economy gaffe, and now this.

It's perfectly clear.  McCain doesn't make mistakes.  Why does this all sound so sickeningly familiar?

- WayneJM

September 18, 2008 at 3:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Have they just become conditioned to lying?

This is equally ridiculous but potentially more dangerous than the claim that when McCain said the fundamentals of the economy was strong, he was really talking about American workers. It is like he is unable to admit he ever makes a mistake, and instead makes transparently false claims. So if he is elected, are we going to form or break an alliance based on his misunderstanding of a radio interviewer?

- JEFF FREY

September 18, 2008 at 3:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Whoops, I didn't get as far as Miami. I thought we were still in Madrid.

Lord, I take it all back?  No....???

- tomeg

September 18, 2008 at 3:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think McCain is still bitter over his experiences in the Spanish-American War, when his dirigable was shot down over Havana Harbor.

- wildboy

September 18, 2008 at 3:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

POWs don't make mistakes, much less excusable mistakes. Stop dishonoring POWs, Chris, it's shameful, dontcha know?

- tomeg

September 18, 2008 at 3:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Wow. This is a Wolfson/Penn-style fuck-up.

The sensible thing to do: confess to a mistake, let the non-story die, and move on the next day. The Wolfson/Penn/Schuenemann thing to do: deny the mistake, dig in one's heels, and insist, against common sense and/or facts on the ground, that your candidate was right all along.

In the end, good for Obama.

- ralphnelle

September 18, 2008 at 3:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Spanish participation in the NATO force in Afghanistan has led to the deaths of 85 Spaniards (23 in Afghanistan and 62 in a plane crash on the trip back to Spain)

Who needs friends like Bush and McCain?

en.wikipedia.org/.../Coalition_casualties_in_Afghanistan

- ndmackenzie

September 18, 2008 at 3:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

As I say, Obama needs to attack McC on grounds of age and health. Then again, if the markets don't ease up soon, Obama will win this thing by default (as it were).

Another thought: McCain's obviously been rattled by the market meltdown, at some fundamental level-- not his portfolio, which he couldn't care less about, but I'd guess because of a fundamental distaste for money matters.

Looking over his career,one gets the impression that McCain, like his pal on the left Russ Feingold, deep down really doesn't like the money guys, or money matters in general, and given his druthers would fob off the job of fixing these markets to someone else. McCain is into what Kagan and Kristol used to call "national greatness" and "national honor." When it comes to moneyfiddling, there's precious little honor and not much national greatness left for daylate/dollarshort Uncle Sam.

- teplukhin2you

September 18, 2008 at 3:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Never surrender, never retreat...haven't we seen that somewhere? Just about every time Palin opens her mouth...and doesn't blink.

- dbhuff

September 18, 2008 at 3:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Prime Minister, dude. The McCain folks need to learn how to use the innernets before writing the WaPo.

- mpatrickhendri

September 18, 2008 at 3:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Holy mother of God. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. This is just too absurd.

So Americans are willing to elect a President that not only is incredibly goofy in his answers (I'll believe that he knew that Spain is not in South America, but only forgot the name of the PM, which is excusable), but IS WILLING TO "STAND BY HIS GAFFES" and thus damage the alliance with a NATO country?

Where and when will this stop?

- luispc

September 18, 2008 at 4:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Apparently the Bush Administration has a long-standing unofficial policy of snubbing Zapatero, since he was elected on an anti-Iraq War platform.

"Senator McCain, how does your policy in respect to speaking with the head of the government of Spain differ from the Bush Administration's?"

Bonus points if McCain forgets that the head of state of Spain is actually the king.

- jfelliott

September 18, 2008 at 4:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think the campaign either had to concede that McCain's hearing isn't all that good (something I can sympathize with and I am only 56) or resort to another fib, and chose the latter as being less harmful to the campaign.   Since fibbing has proven not to be important to the base, I can see why the campaign made the decision they did.  To me this episode captures how celebrity has captured the McCain campaign, for in celebrity hearing loss is deemed much more negatively than fibbing.

- raylward

September 18, 2008 at 4:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This reminds me of when Cheney shot that old dude in the face. The guy got in front of the cameras and basically apologized for getting in the way of the veep's shotgun. Cheney didn't mistake an old man for a quail -- it's the old man's fault.

- rozenson

September 18, 2008 at 4:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think Gerald Ford had a similar moment in '76 when he didn't seem to know that Eastern Europe was under Soviet domination.

That was rather worse, however.  It seems silly of McCain's team not to just say he misheard.

- ironyroad

September 18, 2008 at 4:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't want to concede anything to the McCain/G.O.P. campaign, but in fairness, in the past 40 years how many U.S. Presidents *haven't stumbled* the way McCain now has? Embarrassing, yes, but not extraordinarily so? Example: Mexico. I believe there have been no U.S. Presidents who haven't tripped over some detail or other.

(Unfortunately, faux pas, misfires and downright insults have been characteristic of every area of U.S.'s relationship with Mexico. It isn't a NATO member, I grant you, but that's not my point. Americans are simply insensitive with regard to other cultures and nationalities.)

- tomeg

September 18, 2008 at 4:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When is the fibbiing going to stop?  It's getting to the point of lunacy.

I just hope that Biden uses the term fib in his debate with Palin when she inevitably starts fibbing.  Simultaneously calling her a liar and drawing attention to the fact that she's like a child out of her depth.

- woland

September 18, 2008 at 4:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This doddering old fart has officially become an embarrassment..

- csmiller

September 18, 2008 at 4:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

FYI...the Spanish refer to their Prime Minister as "presidente Aznar" o "Presidente Zapatero," so that part, at least, is not a gaffe.

- ryanmacd

September 18, 2008 at 4:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm with Ralyward,  seems to me that McCain may be a bit hard of hearing.  They might be reluctant to fit him with a hearing aid because it will make him look old.  However, the tradeoff in that is that he will look like a bonehead in situations where he doesn't hear all the words.  They'd better fix that before the debates.

- poldpf

September 18, 2008 at 4:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think they are very afraid of anything that might trigger the Grandpa Simpson image in people's minds, and McCain going "What -- what?  Speak up!" is exactly what they need to avoid.

- ironyroad

September 18, 2008 at 5:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ryan: I doubt if the goofball from the McCain campaign has any idea that "presidente Zapatero" refers to the "President of the Council of Ministers" rather than "President of the Spanish Republic".

Whatever the reason for McCain's idiotic answer, the covering up in THIS instance is far worse.  

Ralph: "This is a Wolfson/Penn-style fuck-up." Nah, this is a Penn and Teller fuck up by the new comedy duo, POWPOW and the Palin.

- icarusr

September 18, 2008 at 5:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh yes, my faith in the Unity of Hope nailing, and I mean nailing, the debates is rekindled.

Watching Obama circumnavigate the Pepsi/Coke challenge might be akin to taking too much Panadol but consuming McCain these days is increasingly like dropping bad acid.

And there's going to be three of them!

Get stuck in Audacity of Hope!

- The Ignorant Populist

September 18, 2008 at 5:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

For me, this is a Clinton-style error.  Her continued defense of the the outrageous story of entering Bosnia under fire could have been much less damaging had she just fessed up.  Instead she continued the lie until the evidence was too public and too damning to deny.  She "misspoke" her campaign said.  Now, with McCain it is even more ridiculous to deny that he made a mistake because this one is not flat-out lying it is a possible mistranslation and a very minor political gaffe.  His insistence through his foreign policy surrogate that he meant what he said is moronic because it makes this small error a big problem.

Also, it's disturbing that it seems McCain would prefer to be perceived as strong and unerring at the cost of severing ties with Spain.  No doubt he would continue this rhetoric against Spain in the White House just to keep up the idea that he does not misspeak.

- tjo2151

September 18, 2008 at 5:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This story is almost a day old and I haven't seen any references to another elderly veteran who was wary about the Spanish. I refer to Montgomery Burns:

Burns: Smithers, we're at war!

Smithers: I'll begin profiteering, sir.

Burns: And hoarding.  Leave it to the Democrats to let the Spaniards back in the pantry.

- dschwein

September 18, 2008 at 6:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Maybe McCain thinks Franco is still the Spanish Head of State.

- binkyping

September 18, 2008 at 6:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There's a long line of McCain statements in the last four years that have made it absolutely clear that, on foreign policy, he simply has no idea what he's talking about. He doesn't know basic facts, he doesn't hold firm positions (other than "put more troops in Iraq," which he maintains no matter how many troops are in Iraq at any given moment, and which he has also advocated even in the face of DoD statements that there _weren't_ more troops available to send at several points).

Which is why it pisses me off that "journalists" repeat without skepticism the myth that McCain has "foreign policy experience." He does not. He does not sit on the Foreign Relations Committee. He does not take a particularly active role in U.S. foreign policy. He changes his "position" on core national-security issues several times a decade. He is more often than not on the wrong side of foreign policy debates at the time decisions must be made. His public statements about international issues tend to be either as vague as a greeting card (he's in favor of freedom!) or wrong about basic specific facts.

No one who values the security of the United States over that of Russia, nor the security of Israel over the interest of Hamas, could possibly vote for a generic member of George W. Bush's party for president. But McCain in particular, if you listen closely to his statements and examine dispassionately his record in office, is not someone that any "national security voter" could in good conscience vote for. He simply doesn't know what he's talking about, and after 71 years it's fair to conclude that he's not likely to develop any great new intellectual capacity for nor interest in better informing himself about the world around us. If someone claims to be a "national security voter" and he favors McCain, he's either being dishonest about the primacy of his interest in American national security, or he is a moron.  

- rhubarbs

September 18, 2008 at 7:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What Rhubarbs said.

- ironyroad

September 18, 2008 at 7:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What Irony said. (Don't want to sound like an echochamber.)

But but but ... he was a POW!!!!  He was tortured in Vietnam by a bunch of Gooks, man; and he said, "we're all Georgians now"!!!!!  What MORE foreign policy experience do you need?

- icarusr

September 18, 2008 at 7:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

We need him to be able to see Russia from his house!

- JEFF FREY

September 18, 2008 at 11:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I dislike McCain and hopes he loses.

That said, good for him that he snubbed Zapatero. Have you guys forgotten that Zapatero came to power thanks to Al-Qaeda? You're TNR readers - well, TNR too said just that. Al-Qaeda helped him by bombing Madrid three days before the election he was about to lose.

Moreover, lovely Zapatero understands Nazis, likes Hamas and Hizballah and occasionally dresses like Arafat. Since Zapatero became prime minister in 2004, the proportion of anti-Jewish Spaniards grew from 23% to 46%. And this is the man who you want respected and invited to the white House?! That's why you criticize McCain?!

- sleepyavl

September 19, 2008 at 6:38am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Zapatero wouldn't have won the election if the conservative government hadn't tried to pin the bombs on the ETA when even the household pets knew that it was Al-Qaeda.

Dislike Z all you like, but don't give him credit for winning an election that was handed to him on a plate by a conservative government with a breathtaking lie that everyone saw through.

- ironyroad

September 19, 2008 at 11:36am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Also, Zapatero is a doufus in many respects, but he has beaten back the Catholic Church that was getting into the political game again under Aznar, and introduced gay marriage into Spain: no mean feat that.

- icarusr

September 19, 2008 at 12:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close