At a campaign rally on Saturday with Vice President Cheney, House Speaker Dennis Hastert declared that al Qaeda “would like to influence this election” with an attack similar to the Madrid bombings that occurred days before the Spanish national election last March. Asked by a reporter whether he thought al Qaeda would operate with more comfort with John Kerry as president, Hastert replied, “That’s my opinion, yes.”
Hastert is entitled to that opinion. But his view is so politically charged, and so nakedly partisan, that you wouldn’t expect it to be endorsed by a supposedly neutral political analyst on a major cable news show. But that’s exactly what happened on CNN yesterday. Asked by anchor Carol Lin whether Hastert really meant to say that al Qaeda is rooting for Kerry, political analyst Bill Schneider responded:
Well, I can guarantee you, they don’t like George Bush. Do they think there’s a difference? I think Osama bin Laden, the al Qaeda network, who I am certain follow American politics, look at the messages coming out on their tapes. They seem to follow politics very closely.
They would very much like to defeat President Bush. But the question is, can they pull off the same trick that they pulled off in Spain?
What Dennis Hastert said is, “They’d better not try that. It won’t work here.” And my guess is, he’s right about that.
Let’s look a little closer at this. First, Schneider — whose own credentials as a “neutral” include his employment as a fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute and a book co-authored with the now largely discredited foreign policy analyst Richard Perle — makes clear that he agrees with Hastert. Al Qaeda, Schneider says, “would very much like to defeat President Bush.” Schneider, like Hastert, can believe whatever he wants. But in his alleged role as a supposed non-partisan analyst, he might think twice before endorsing a charge as incendiary as Hastert’s in front of millions of viewers.
To be sure, in the latter part of his comments, Schneider seemed to realize this, and tacked abruptly to the left, claiming that Hastert was merely trying to argue that, in the event of a terror attack before the election, voters would rally around the president. That’s a far cry from saying that al Qaeda wants Kerry to win. Unfortunately, it’s also a far cry from what Hastert actually said. In short, after first endorsing what Hastert had to say, Schneider completely reinvented Hastert’s point — to make it seem less objectionable.
More than one John Kerry partisan has argued that al Qaeda might want President Bush re-elected, given that his prosecution of the war on terror has been a boon to terrorist recruitment efforts. But it’s hard to imagine a “neutral” political analyst on any major news outlet feeling confident enough to express agreement with such a darkly conspiratorial view. For some reason, though, the reverse is perfectly acceptable.
–Zachary Roth
Bill Schneider responds:
I am not a Bush supporter or a Kerry supporter. I have done plenty of stories critical of both candidates.
In answering a question about Speaker Hastert’s remarks, I was trying to make the point that, if al Qaeda wants to defeat President Bush, another attack on the U.S. would probably do just the reverse. I entertained the possibility that an attack might allow Democrats to argue that Bush’s policies have made the U.S. more vulnerable. But I think the immediate reaction — fear and anger — would drive voters to Bush. The terrorists might believe otherwise because of their misreading of what happened in Spain.
I was arguing by analogy to the 1980 campaign, when the Iranian hostage-takers aimed to defeat President Carter. I do not believe their goal in 1980 was to elect Ronald Reagan. It was to defeat the President of the United States because of his symbolic value, not because of any partisan preference. The day Carter left office and Reagan took over, the hostages were released.
I believe al Qaeda may have similar goals: to defeat the President of the United States because of his symbolic value, especially one who has waged war against two Muslim regimes. Some viewers took that to mean al Qaeda favors Kerry — something I did not say and do not believe. I never imagined I was making any kind of partisan statement and would not intentionally do so.
–Bill Schneider
Zachary Roth is a contributing editor to The Washington Monthly. He also has written for The Los Angeles Times, The New Republic, Slate, Salon, The Daily Beast, and Talking Points Memo, among other outlets.