Jeopardize This

WaPo: "President Bush used his Easter weekend radio address to suggest that while Americans are "blessed" to have so many brave, volunteer military service members, congressional Democrats are jeopardizing their safety by refusing to sign his $100 billion war funding bill."

Obviously, Democrats aren't refusing to sign anything. Democrats passed a bill that will fund the troops. Bush is threatening to veto this bill, thus denying the troops money, because he's refusing to back off an open-ended, accountability-free committed to Iraq. So who's endangering whose safety?

4/7/07 4:52PM del.icio.us this incoming links

Comments

The Washington Post's ever more obvious and frequent distortion of facts and common sense is endangering our safey --is that a good answer?

Posted by: anon on April 7, 2007 05:05 PM

Recall the intro to "I'm Just A Bill" where he sings about being begotten by the president? No? Maybe Bush doesn't understand the process. He thinks he proposes and disposes.

Posted by: md 20/400 on April 7, 2007 05:14 PM

I really wish the Democrats would start calling Mr. Bush on his dishonesty.

The lies from the president and his republic party are so childish as to not be worthy of a junior high school student.

Posted by: billy b on April 7, 2007 05:22 PM

The Washington Post evidently supports the idea of a authoritarian presidency, not subject to the will of Congress or the people.

That is very disturbing indeed.

Posted by: Richard on April 7, 2007 05:22 PM

They updated it changed signed to endorsed.

Posted by: trifecta on April 7, 2007 05:27 PM

They changed the first paragraph but left the "sign" in further into the story.

Quote:
"A clear majority of Americans oppose the war, which has cost more than $300 billion so far. But Bush said the Democrats' delay in signing his bill, which does not have a troop pullout deadline attached, will soon deprive U.S. military personnel of the equipment and training they need to do their jobs."

Here's "I'm Just a Bill" for those wanting to re-live a little schoolhouse rock:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEJL2Uuv-oQ

Posted by: Mike in Houston on April 7, 2007 05:38 PM

Will lil' Debbie or Howie Kurtz mention this? Hopefully, Howie will get asked about it on next week's chat.

What a joke. How could any paper make a mistake so basic?

Posted by: DBJ on April 7, 2007 05:44 PM

WaPo changed the first paragraph, from "sign his ... bill," to "endorse his ... proposal," but neglected to change that wording later in the article: "But Bush said the Democrats' delay in signing his bill..."

Where to find a transcript of W's radio address?

Posted by: chrislee523 on April 7, 2007 05:49 PM

Even better than the "I'm Just a Bill" clip is this Simpsons parody of it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqzP1yt4WGY

Posted by: Reader on April 7, 2007 05:55 PM

The WaPo editorial board is very clever. For the past six years we all thought they were in the tank for the administration. It turns out they've simply been trying to discredit the Bushies by appearing as stupid as possible. Sadly, they've run up against the actual stupidity of the right, and have been unable to break out from the pack.

Posted by: MikeJ on April 7, 2007 06:04 PM

Why doesn't the Washington Post just sign the bill so our troops can be funded? I mean, wouldn't that be a positive step forward?

Posted by: El Cid on April 7, 2007 06:07 PM

Thank you, chrislee523 @ 5:49, for noting the change--someone must have been reading blogs or comments. teehee

Posted by: jawbone on April 7, 2007 06:08 PM

What's tellig about the statement highlighted here by Matt is not just how skewed it is from politial reality, but that it is Constitutionally impossible. Congress signs nothing. It passes or doesn't pass legislation. The President signs or doesn't sign. Writers at the newspaper of record for the nation's capitol ought to know this. No student of political science would make such an obvious gaffe in a published essay. The fact that the Post's editorial page makes such a huge error shows 1) this opinion went straight to press without fact-checking or proof-reading and 2) utter indifference to accuracy in the haste to disseminate pro-Bush spin. It's a twofer for Post-haters which I hope receives wide dissemination through the blogophere this coming week.

Posted by: W Action on April 7, 2007 06:09 PM

Hmm, so by 5:38, according to Mike in Houston, the WaPo took out the blunder in the first graf, but had left in (or added?) this blunder further down:

"A clear majority of Americans oppose the war, which has cost more than $300 billion so far. But Bush said the Democrats' delay in signing his bill, which does not have a troop pullout deadline attached, will soon deprive U.S. military personnel of the equipment and training they need to do their jobs."

As of 6:11 EDT, that graf now reads:

"A clear majority of Americans oppose the war, which has cost more than $300 billion so far. But Bush said the Democrats' delay in passing a bill with no troop pullout deadline will soon deprive U.S. military personnel of the equipment and training they need to do their jobs."

There's no note on the story documenting either correction.

Posted by: Jamie McCarthy on April 7, 2007 06:14 PM

The new time stamp for the WaPoop article is 6:00pm--was it a change to the second "signing" paragraph?

A clear majority of Americans oppose the war, which has cost more than $300 billion so far. But Bush said the Democrats' delay in passing a bill with no troop pullout deadline will soon deprive U.S. military personnel of the equipment and training they need to do their jobs.

If funding for the war is delayed much longer, Bush said, "some of our military families could wait longer for their loved ones to return from the front lines. And others could see their loved ones headed back to war sooner than they need to."

Posted by: jawbone on April 7, 2007 06:16 PM

What Bush and the Post meant to say was not "sign" but "rubber stamp" - the way it used to work. As Speaker Pelosi said, "There's a new Congress in town." Just GWB and WaPo keep forgetting...

Posted by: John K on April 7, 2007 06:17 PM

On the weekends, the WaPo news room is run by 17 year old interns; no editors.

But it hardly matters, as aWol's legacy is all that counts. He will keep us bogged down in Iraq until he leaves office, conveying the war to the Dems.

Posted by: Rula Lenska on April 7, 2007 06:25 PM

Is it April Fool's Day? Or has Fred Hiatt taken over the news pages, too?

Posted by: Hank Essay on April 7, 2007 06:58 PM

The Washington Post's dedication to disinformation is a clear and present danger to the republic.

Posted by: della Rovere on April 7, 2007 07:00 PM

Matthew, do you really think you're fooling anyone with this idiotic play-dumb charade?

Here's a suggestion for you: how about Congress prepare two separate pieces of legislation: one to fund the military and one to set the withdrawal schedule.

If not, why not?

Posted by: a on April 7, 2007 07:03 PM

If not, why not?

Stop playing the ingénue yourself, 'a'.

Posted by: pseudonymous in nc on April 7, 2007 07:20 PM

a asks: Here's a suggestion for you: how about Congress prepare two separate pieces of legislation: one to fund the military and one to set the withdrawal schedule.

If not, why not?

Because Congress's power to spend is utterly uncontroversial, while its power to direct troop movements is not. You probably know that already, and are "playing" dumb.

Posted by: dj moonbat on April 7, 2007 07:21 PM

How much did Moon pay for the Post?

Posted by: M on April 7, 2007 07:22 PM

The article doesn't actually endorse any of the shifting formulations it attributes to Bush. Indeed, the third paragraph begins with a sentence saying explicitly that the House and Senate have passed bills giving Bush the funds he's asked for.

Posted by: SqueakyRat on April 7, 2007 07:28 PM

Did the President (of the Greatest Democracy Evah) actually say that Congress won't sign the bill?!?

This would be a noteworthy and remarkably subtle demonstration of his grasp of the Constitutional foundations of the American political system.

But if so, don't be too hard on WaPo - it was a catch 22. Imagine the thought process in the office: the Commander said 'congress signs the bills'; to correct the commander is ... (aw my Gawd!) unthinkable; but to leave it as is makes us look like ... ass-licking boot-wipers. Oh eeeegy weeeegeeey ooohhhhhhhh!

Posted by: scudbucket on April 7, 2007 07:35 PM

Bush is holding the troops hostage: pass the bill he wants, or he'll block funding for the troops. And as usual with hostage takers, he spins it so it's all the fault of the victims . . .

Posted by: rea on April 7, 2007 07:38 PM

Heh. The Post corrected that paragraph. Here's v. 2.0:

President Bush used his Easter weekend radio address to suggest that while Americans are "blessed" to have so many brave, volunteer military service members, congressional Democrats are jeopardizing their safety by delaying passage of a $100 billion war funding bill.

Posted by: Julie on April 7, 2007 07:56 PM

It's an obvious point, but surely what really endangers the troops' safety is sending them off to a stupid war in the first place...

Posted by: william on April 7, 2007 08:29 PM

"he's refusing to back off an open-ended, accountability-free committed to Iraq."

I think you mean 'commitment'.

Glass houses, stones, etc.

Posted by: Cy Guy on April 7, 2007 10:07 PM

um, every edumacated Amurrikkan knows the congress signs legislation that the Preznit proposes

Posted by: marblex on April 7, 2007 10:29 PM

What I would like to know is why he doesn't use his usual strategy with legislation he doesn't like: tack on a "signing statement" that rejects all the schedules and limits. Constitutionally, it would have a better chance of passing muster than most of his other "signing statements". Perhaps the White House knows that signing statements are really pure bs, and that this is one time where it would be challenged.

Posted by: kishnevi on April 7, 2007 10:51 PM

WaPo has changed the first paragraph again. No more mention of "sign" there or later in the story.

"President Bush used his Easter weekend radio address to suggest that while Americans are "blessed" to have so many brave, volunteer military service members, congressional Democrats are jeopardizing their safety by delaying passage of a $100 billion war funding bill."

Posted by: Devil's Advocate on April 8, 2007 09:15 AM

Sign, Sign, Everywhere a sign
Breaking up the scenery
Blowing my mind

Posted by: Count Asterisk on April 8, 2007 11:48 PM

Thanks
Best regards
mirc
mirç
mırc
mırç
mircturk
turkmirc
mirc indir
mirc yukle
mirch
mırch
forum
forum
turkforum
turkiyeforum
mirc

Posted by: mirc on November 23, 2007 09:04 AM

Thanks
Best regards
turkmirc
toplist
site ekle
pagerank
turkmirc
turkforum
sohbet
türk
karar

Posted by: forum on November 23, 2007 09:04 AM

thanks ;)

Posted by: firefox indir on April 1, 2008 12:46 PM

www.sexshopum.com
www.harbiarkadas.com
www.harbiarkadas.net
www.harbiarkadas.org
www.itirafet.org
www.ebedava.net
www.elektronikmarket.net
www.ameribress.com
www.clitoriacream.net
www.superspenisbuyutucu.com
www.megabress.com
www.rednightperformans.com
www.performansartirici.com
www.penisplus.tv
www.penispluspenisbuyutucu.com
www.penispluspenisbuyutucu.net
www.cinselmerkez.com
www.aseks.net
www.erotikcamasirlar.com
www.vajinatr.com
www.bakirevajina.com
www.cinselkozmetik.com
www.kozmetikmedikel.com
www.eturknet.com
www.tecavuz.net
www.yutuvideo.com
www.ponotubesex.com
www.laraperuk.com
www.sackanagimerkezi.com
www.peruksa.com
www.perukmarket.com
www.aseks.com
www.aloveshop.com
www.erotikgiyim.com
www.www.geciktiricispreyler.com
www.geciktiricihap.com
www.geciktiriciler.com
www.azdirici.com
www.bayanuyarici.com
www.fntazialemi.com
www.fantaziservisi.om
www.cinselmazemeler.com
www.cinselfantaziurunleri.com
www.erotikdakikalar.com
www.erotikmarketiniz.com
www.seksmarketiniz.com
www.sekshatlari.com
www.erotikdergiler.com
www.erotikderginiz.com
www.penisbuyutucuviprx.com
www.penisbuyutucuvigrx.com
www.penisbuyutuculer.com
www.vigrxpenisbuyutucu.com
www.sismebebekler.com
www.sismebebekshop.com
www.yemekeviniz.com
www.sanalmarketiniz.com
www.elektronikmarket.net
www.ebedava.net
www.kontortr.com
www.elaydin23.com
www.turkcellkontorcu.com
www.aveakontoral.com
www.vodafonekontoral.com
www.toptankontorcu.com
www.cinselkozmetik.com
www.bayanpartnerler.com
www.erkekpartnerler.com
www.kizarkadaslar.com
www.yonjaarkadas.com
www.siberalem-siberalem.com
www.sexpartnerler.com
www.sekspartnerler.com
www.erotikpartnerler.com
www.gencyuz.com
www.erkekarkadaslar.com
www.bayanarkadaslar.com
www.yemekeviniz.com
www.sanalmarketiniz.com
www.baskahaber.com
www.medikalkozmetik.net
www.kozmetikmedikal.com
www.zayiflamavediyet.net
www.zayiflamahapii.com
www.zayiflamabandii.com
www.kilovertr.com
www.zayiflamatr.net
www.diyettr.com
www.toksinbandi.net
www.botoxtr.com
www.botokstr.com
www.selulittedavii.com
www.selulitgiderici.net
www.selulitkremii.com
www.catlaktedavisii.com
www.catlakgiderici.net
www.catlakkremii.com
www.aseks.com
www.erotikgiyim.com
www.aloveshop.com
www.sismebebekshop.com