Daily Kos got it wrong Again.

[illinoisprogressive]

I don't know if you have been following the story of today that Obama is suppose to have caved into Shrub.
Kos wrote a scathing front page story about it and Mydd picked it up.
Turns out they were wrong.
Here is a diary from Dailykos that has the CNN transcript. Seems AP put words in Obama's mouth to make him sound like
he was full of s***. Can you say swiftboated?

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/4/1/152416/1097

[Kagemusha]

1. I just caught up. I don't think Kos will be sorry or anything but...

I'm like.... people, you just watch what happens once Bush vetoes that bill, and tell me Obama was wrong about what Congress is gonna do. People are entertaining fantasies of Pelosi and Reid playing chicken with the troops like Obama is saying bluntly is just NOT gonna happen. Obama's being realistic; Pelosi and Reid will be very realistic once realism slams them in the face and they stand to be blamed for troops dying for want of supplies. Kos considers such realism to be a concession and a mistake. To me, this is the "we make reality" school of liberal activism, little different from the "we make reality" school of neoconservatism.

Obama wants to keep the issue a thorn in Bush's side, but doesn't see actually cutting off funds (with Bush ordering troops to remain in the field despite the fund cut-off so he can make a gigantic political issue out of it, let's say) as the way it's gonna happen. He's not wrong, IMHO, but people aren't gonna wanna hear it. I understand that but, you just watch after the veto.

[illinoisprogressive]

4. You are so right and I have thought this way as well

I get tired of pie in the sky and unreality thinking. The world just doesn't work that way.
And, people are so quick to judge and condemn someone before the whole story comes out. How many times have
people jumped down Obama's or Edwards's throats on a fake story without waiting to see if it's true and totally trash them. We all should be aware that the msm wants to stir up trouble and get the non establishment candidates out of the way and dismiss them.
I think the lesson here is dont' just go off the deep end and not see if the information is correct before you slime someone. How many here have had untrue rumors about you and people believed it and it was so hard to make it right.
Now the rightwingers and the msm are going to repeat this as fact forever.

[aquart]

5. Your belief in the naivete of experienced congresspeople is amusing.

The freshman is Obama. And he thinks he knows what's up the sleeve of people who have been eating dirt for six years?

[LSK]

29. Rumsfeld was "experienced", Cheney was "experienced"

Obviously this "experienced" stuff is way overrated.

[Morgana LaFey]

38. Yes, Obama is rather too convinced of his talents

for my taste as well.

[ComerPerro]

25. but its not "playing chicken" with the troops

For one thing, a lot of the operation and their equipment is already paid for. The funding is going to private contractors who pass very little in services to the troops.

Moreover, if there isn't funding, yet Bush keeps them there, who is the one endangering them?

Bush is the one "playing chicken" and risking their lives for politcial gain and his own image.

[Kagemusha]

26. I never said it doesn't take two to play chicken.

It essentially comes down to this: Bush is playing the "Crazy Man" role and people expect him to be a hard case. People expect the Democrats to be more sane and reasonable. If the end result is the troops being in want of supplies, moderates may conclude that this result occurs because Democrats had a choice to ensure the funding would continue, but did not, since Democrats knew Bush would be unreasonable.

Kos' approach is for the Democrats to show the public it can be just as crazy as Bush. This is... not necessarily how Democrats want to be perceived in the long run, regardless of the short term benefits (which I would call dubious - the Dems can't override Bush's veto, so only utter and complete obstructionism would achieve anything, and that looks quite bad).

Just because DU members would blame Bush for the result doesn't mean Dems would look good consciously joining Bush in his irresponsibility. That's not fair, but that's how it is.

[ComerPerro]

27. moderates are idiots, anyone that stupid will vote GOP anyway

[sandnsea]

2. The senate won't vote to cut funding

I don't get the issue. :shrug:

[Old and In the Way]

6. Bush won't sign it with the exit date attached.

I'd tell him too bad...you have the funds the troops need now. If you wish to play politics with the lives of the troops, you will be held accountable for your actions.

[papau]

10. I agree with that approach - pass the same bill again - and again n/t

n/t

[sandnsea]

17. But that's not what Obama said

He simply stated reality. Congress isn't going to cut funding. It doesn't mean Congress won't attempt something else to get the deadline though. I really don't get why people are upset that Obama stated the obvious.

[Old and In the Way]

24. I agree.

To be honest, I only read Kos's post and another site that mentioned Obama's back peddling.....I think it's clear that he was underscoring that the monies would be available. He didn't say the date would be rescinded.

We've drawn a line in the sand...I expect the Democrats to defend it.

[saltpoint]

3. I'm reluctant to visit the Kos site anymore, but can be persuaded when

there's something to see.

I just don't get his vitriolic posts against Democrats. Today it's Obama.

Certainly I don't go to that site for information. Because Kos himself posts all these half-assed smear jobs on people in my political party.

Who needs it.

[BlooInBloo]

7. How exactly did the kos/du animosity begin?

[TahitiNut]

11. It's the habitual feeding frenzy whenever the surface of the water is disturbed.

Frustrated piranha. :shrug:

[BlooInBloo]

14. Hm. It's of longstanding duration.

[LSK]

31. maybe when Kos denied that there was election fraud

[suziedemocrat]

39. Agreed! I lost all respect for him when he derided talk of election fraud as conspiracy theory.

There were too many glaring problems with the 2004 election to make talk of fraud nutty. I stopped going to his site right then and came here.

[Old and In the Way]

8. I read it and was disappointed....Kos wasn't the only site that got it wrong, either.

I'm glad that Obama was capitulating on this issue the way it was presented. We are going to have to be very cognizant as to how the words of our candidates are going to be distorted to fit the framing the Republican corporate media wants to project.

[papau]

13. Now I am confused - I was with you on previous post - what's made capitulating a good thing? Kos

said:

Obama caves to Bush
by kos
Sun Apr 01, 2007 at 10:57:18 AM PDT

I wish this was an April Fools Day joke:

If President Bush vetoes an Iraq war spending bill as promised, Congress quickly will provide the money without the withdrawal timeline the White House objects to because no lawmaker "wants to play chicken with our troops," Sen. Barack Obama said Sunday.

What a ridiculous thing to say. Not only is it bad policy, not only is it bad politics, it's also a terrible negotiating approach.

Instead of threatening Bush with even more restrictions and daring him to veto funding for the troops out of pique, Barack just surrendered to him.

Let me repeat that -- Obama just surrendered to Bush.
http://www.dailykos.com/

[Old and In the Way]

23. Whoops....should have been "I'm glad Obama wasn't capitulating"

I think the transcript clarifies Obama's true intent...and he's not running up a white flag of surrender. Kos probably drew his gun too fast on that one. Perhaps we'll see a semi-retraction tomorrow.

[papau]

9. Obama said Dems will cave -signaling to Bush that war can get larger if he wants - others say

they will not cave and that any bill will have training and supplies and rotation limits - killing surge and forcing pull down post beginning in August - indeed many say the Dems will pass the same Bill with a weak deadline again and again and after the second bill's veto, the third bill in July will also be the same and Bush can choose either to accept the weak deadline, or to begin ending the war immediately for lack of a supplemental.

Kos asks why is Obama promising Bush in public that Dems will cave - is he covering what he wants to do by saying everyone wants to/will do the same?

[orleans]

19. no, he didn't say that. the ap said it and kos repeated it.

show me where obama said dems will cave into bush (and then i'll tell you kos is not an idiot)

(CHECK THIS OUT)

BLITZER: Because some ardent opponents of the war, like Dennis Kucinich, for example, who is a Democratic presidential candidate...

OBAMA: Right.

BLITZER: ... he takes a principled stand. He's not going to vote to fund troops going off to this war, because he believes that would help bring the troops home.

OBAMA: Right.

You know, the problem is, is that you have got an obstinate administration that has shown itself unwilling to change in the face of circumstances on the ground.

And, in that situation, what you don't want to do is to play chicken with the president, and create a situation in which, potentially, you don't have body armor, you don't have reinforced humvees, you don't have night-vision goggles.

Now, there is a ratcheting-up of pressure on the president. And I am very pleased about the vote that took place yesterday, where a majority of the Senate for the first time said we need to have a timetable.

BLITZER: But he says he is going to veto that right now.

OBAMA: I understand.

BLITZER: And there is a game of chicken going on right now.

OBAMA: I understand that he says he is going to veto it. There is no doubt he will veto it. But what you are starting to see, I think, is a bipartisan movement in the direction of having a clear endgame.

And I am very pleased that the bill that I presented back in January calling for a phased withdrawal starting on May 1 of this year, with the aim of getting all combat troops out by March 31 of next year, that many of the elements in that bill ended up being part of this package that was voted on yesterday.

BLITZER: If the president does veto it, as he vows he will, what do you do next?

OBAMA: Well, I think we continue to put these votes up to the Senate. We put more pressure on many Republican colleagues of mine, who I think recognize that the Bush approach has not worked, but are still unwilling to put pressure on their president.

BLITZER: Because he says the money starts drying up in mid- April...

OBAMA: Right.

BLITZER: ... for the troops to head over to Iraq.

OBAMA: Right. I think that we continue to put a series of votes up and try to convince our colleagues on the Republican side that the only way that we are going to change circumstances in Iraq is if you see a different political dynamic; that there are, at this point, no military solutions to the problems in Iraq; that what we have to do is get the Shia, the Sunni, the Kurd to come together and say to themselves "We, in fact, are willing to start making some compromises around oil revenues, around the arming of militias and so on."

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0704/01/le.01.html

[Bronyraurus]

22. He says it here

"You know, the problem is, is that you have got an obstinate administration that has shown itself unwilling to change in the face of circumstances on the ground.

And, in that situation, what you don't want to do is to play chicken with the president, and create a situation in which, potentially, you don't have body armor, you don't have reinforced humvees, you don't have night-vision goggles."

The AP and Kos reported it correctly. And I don't see the problem with Obama basically stating the obvious.

[w4rma]

12. I think some folks are giving smooth talking Obama more leeway than they should. (nt)

[madrchsod]

15. he`s being realistic

no one is going to cut the funding of the troops because it`s just theater. the bill will end up with the troop withdraw provision removed. everyone will get what they want and will move on.

[bvar22]

36. Not "Everybody".

*Bush/War Corporations will get their $BILLIONS$ to keep the killing going and the money flowing into their pockets.

The Democrats get to pretend like they want to end the WAR while in reality they shit on the anti-WAR voters. They get to look good on TV while collecting their LARGE Single Source contributions from the CorpoWar Profiteers.


The REAL LOSERS are our soldiers who will DIE for Political Expediency, the innocent Iraqis who will be tossed into the Privatizing Meat Grinder in Iraq, and YOUR CHILDREN who will be stuck with the BILL for the continued insanity.

So no, not everyone gets what they want.

[Bitwit1234]

16. I have said it over and over about democrats bashing democrats

Most posters on the forum don't like Hillary. Regardless they should stop bashing. The republicans do enough. Now Obama is being bashed and because a lot of people go for him they want it to stop.

Well I think it is wrong, absolutely wrong to bash the democrats. Bash republicans if you want to rant.

I like Hillary she would make an excellent president and so would Obama. But I am not wasting my vote. It is too important to get a democrat in the white house and Edwards would probably be our best bet. He wouldn't be knocked out of contention because he is a woman or black.

It is just like people who said they did not like John Kerry and voted independent or for Nader. They might have well voted for bush. There are not enough independents for their vote to count for anyway, and when you let someone like bush get in, you vote was absolutely wasted. We should not let it happen again. Vote democratic ticket. Keep republicans out of the white house.

Most Democrats are idealistic. They think that the best candidate will win. It doesn't always happen. This country still has a lot of prejudice's and people won't vote for a woman or a black.

[papau]

18. Your link does not bring up Kos- here is link to Kos saying Obama caved

Obama caves to Bush
by kos
Sun Apr 01, 2007 at 10:57:18 AM PDT

I wish this was an April Fools Day joke:

If President Bush vetoes an Iraq war spending bill as promised, Congress quickly will provide the money without the withdrawal timeline the White House objects to because no lawmaker "wants to play chicken with our troops," Sen. Barack Obama said Sunday.

What a ridiculous thing to say. Not only is it bad policy, not only is it bad politics, it's also a terrible negotiating approach.

Instead of threatening Bush with even more restrictions and daring him to veto funding for the troops out of pique, Barack just surrendered to him.

Let me repeat that -- Obama just surrendered to Bush.
http://www.dailykos.com/

[The Count]

20. I read the transcript and didn't see the surrender. Kos is probably pushing another

candidate. It maligned democrats in 2004 as well who weren't Kos's chosen - and that's all I am going to say on that subject.

[KoKo]

28. Kos site has had Gore polling as favorite. But, don't think that means

that they are attacking other Democratic Candidates without reason. Shouldn't we be pulling our Dems on message? If you are against the Iraq Occupation and polls indicate most Democratic Voters are....shouldn't you be doing everything as a Democrat to support getting our troops out of there?

Obama's problem (just my humble opinion) was in using the word "chicken" which allowed Blitzer to say "playing chicken with the troops" and AP to distort it to look like Obama said "playing chicken with the troops when in fact he said "playing chicken with the President" about funding.

Using the word "chicken" gave the RW'ers and Corporate Whore Media a chance to distort the message but also made Obama seem to be disapproving of Dems trying to cut the funding for more troops. The issue that cutting funding is only for "more troops" got lost somewhere along there by getting sidetracked into Dems cutting funding for "existing troops" where Repugs/Media can say Dems don't want body armor, etc. for the current troops.


:shrug:

[Colobo]

21. Obama didn't say anything that isn't true.

[Terri S]

30. I don't think it's kos's fault

They saw the story when I did, before AP updated it. The story was 5 paragraphs long and I posted about it here (not from kos's site). Then they updated it a bit later and it was a full page and a whole different picture emerged.

Kos is a great site. AP is more at fault posting bits of a whole picture. Probably a lesson in there to trust your own instincts a bit more. That's what I got out of the whole thing.

[lies and propaganda]

32. i find that site as difficult as FR

Im a du purist, so i dont even know about this article. But I cant stand being over there any longer the FR, the layout and the diaries are strange ;)

[The Count]

33. Kicking it for the title

[AnneD]

34. I keep feeling like...

Hillary is being crammed down my throat. Does anyone else feel that way? They seem to be strangeling Obama's campaign before it even begins and the same with Edwards.

[Scout1071]

35. Who is this "they" you are referring to?

Just like Democratic Underground, actually more so, Daily Kos is a community of thousands of participants. "They" didn't get anything wrong.

Kos might have been misguided based on false transcripts, but "they" didn't get anything wrong. Why try to defame the whole site?

[EFerrari]

37. Daily who? n/t