Grading PolitiFact: McCain reversal on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"?

The issue:

The fact checkers:

Catharine Richert:  writer, researcher
Bill Adair:  editor

Analysis:

I wonder if either Catharine Richert or Bill Adair could accurately define "contradiction" for me if put on the spot with no opportunity to look it up.  This piece makes it appear that neither is practiced at evaluating differing statements for logical compatibility.

Richert sets the stage with some background:

The military's controversial "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy is back in the spotlight after President Barack Obama pledged to repeal it in his State of the Union speech.

On the campaign trail, Obama frequently attacked the policy, which prohibits gays and lesbians from openly serving in the military.

His opponent Sen. John McCain signaled he was open to changing the policy, but made it conditional to what military leaders wanted. Here's what he had to say about the issue back in 2006:

"I listen to people like Gen. Colin Powell, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and literally every military leader that I know. And they testified before Congress that they felt the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy was the most appropriate way to conduct ourselves in the military. A policy that has been effective. It has worked. ... But the day that the leadership of the military comes to me and says, 'Senator, we ought to change the policy,' then I think we ought to consider seriously changing it because those leaders in the military are the ones we give the responsibility to." 

Richert went on to emphasize that McCain's statement occurred on the campaign trail, and it was considered possible at the time that he might be elected president of the United States.  Richert also added a handful of quotations of McCain that showed his support for "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" as an effective policy.

To summarize, McCain felt that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was an effective policy but he would consider changing it on the advice of military leaders.

Now try to follow Richert's logic as to McCain's supposed flip:

After Obama pledged to repeal the policy in his State of the Union speech, Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Michael Mullen and Defense Secretary Robert Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee, which McCain co-chairs, how they planned to fulfill Obama's promise.

During the testimony, Mullen said, speaking "for myself and myself only," that he is in favor of "allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly" in the armed forces."No matter how I look at the issue, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens,” he said.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said, "I fully support the president's decision."

Gates told the committee that a working group would review ways to properly repeal the policy, though Congress must ultimately vote to change the law. The group is due to report on its findings a year from now.

Obviously that is not all of it, since Richert has not provided McCain's statement of his new position.  But before moving on, note the context of the comments by military leaders Mullen and Gates.  Their statements come in support of the president's initiative.

Richert again:

McCain -- who had said back in 2006 that he would be guided by military leaders -- told Gates and Mullen that he was "disappointed" with the testimony. Overturning the law would "be a substantial and controversial change to a policy that has been successful for two decades," he said in his opening statement. "It would also present yet another challenge to our military at a time of already tremendous stress and strain... At this moment of immense hardship for our armed services, we should not be seeking to overturn the 'Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell' policy."

Nevertheless, McCain said he would welcome a report on the subject so long as it steered clear of politics and focused only on military readiness and effectiveness.

 Is it a flip-flop?

Richert:

We asked McCain's spokeswoman Brooke Buchanan whether her boss had experienced a change of heart on the policy, and she told us he had not.

The question appears to presuppose that the reporter perceives a change of heart on the policy.  Apparently feeling that McCain's shift self-evident based on the facts, Richert only gets around to revealing her reasoning in the final paragraph:

Three years ago, McCain said that he would "consider seriously changing ['Don't Ask, Don't Tell']" should the administration's top brass say it was a good idea. On Feb. 2, 2010, those officials showed up in McCain's committee room and said just that. Yet McCain's statements -- reiterated by Buchanan -- make it clear he hasn't budged. So we rate this a Full Flop.

I don't think I was the only reader surprised by the ending, even with the "Flip-O-Meter" graphic at the top of the page giving away the conclusion.

Richert's summary is slanted.

McCain did not say that he would considering changing the policy if  "the administration's top brass say it was a good idea."  McCain said he would consider it if the recommendation was coming from the military brass.  By all means, take time to review Richert's quotations of McCain.  I'll wait.

Richert's summary blurs the line between an initiative coming from the military and an initiative coming from the commander-in-chief.  Richert presents the statements from Mullen and Gates as though they constitute the former, but they look far more like the latter.

Mullen (Richert's embedded URL was the wrong one, by the way):

The chiefs and I have not yet developed that advice, and would like to have the time to do so in the same thoughtful, deliberate fashion with which the president has made it clear he wants to proceed. The review – the review group Secretary Gates has ordered will no doubt give us that time and an even deeper level of understanding. We look forward to cooperating with and participating in this review to the maximum extent possible, and we applaud the selection of Mr. Johnson and Gen. Ham to lead it. Both are men of great integrity, great experience, and have our complete trust and confidence.

Mr. Chairman, speaking for myself and myself only, it is my personal belief that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly would be the right thing to do. No matter how I look at this issue, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens. For me personally, it comes down to integrity – theirs as individuals and ours as an institution. I also believe that the great young men and women of our military can and would accommodate such a change. I never underestimate their ability to adapt.

But I do not know this for a fact, nor do I know for a fact how we would best make such a major policy change in a time of two wars. That there will be some disruption in the force I cannot deny. That there will be legal, social, and perhaps even infrastructure changes to be made certainly seem plausible. We would all like to have a better handle on these types of concerns, and this is what our review will offer.

(yellow and blue highlights added)

The paragraph highlighted in blue makes clear that Mullen thinks the policy change will cause disruptions in the armed services.  That expectation accounts for the proposal to study the problem for a year in order to determine the best means of implementation.  In short, the decision comes from the top (Obama), and the military leaders are following orders.  Mullen supports gays and lesbians serving openly as a matter of justice, not as a matter of optimal military preparedness.

Gates:

I fully support the President's decision.  The question before us is not whether the military prepares to make this change, but how we best prepare for it.  We have received our orders from the Commander in Chief and we are moving out accordingly.
(yellow and blue highlights added; italics in the original)

Gates' statement, as with Mullen's, emphasizes that the initiative came from the White House rather than representing an initiative from military leaders with which the White House cooperated.  McCain welcomed the latter, and if the former occurs even with the assent of the military brass under the command of the president, it should not be taken to contradict McCain's stated position.

Yet Richert and Adair apparently did just that.  Through this point, McCain appears quite consistent.  The basis of his objection to the president's move was the success of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."  McCain also based his criticism on the timing of the policy change, considering it an additional burden on the military.  Gen. Mullen expressed a similar concern.  Finally, McCain reiterated his openness to a change in policy by supporting the review process.

Can McCain be faulted for expressing disappointment in the military leaders supporting the president's policy?  I don't see how.  McCain cannot reasonably object to the military brass following the orders of the commander in chief.  But it is reasonable for him to express disappointment in the timing of the policy change and perhaps with regard to nuanced testimony from the military leaders.

The grades:

Catharine Richert:  F
Bill Adair:  F