FOX NEWS twists the Senate Iraq vote
By John Amato Tuesday Jul 17, 2007 1:53pm
Looks like 52 Senators voted against it, doesn't it? (h/t Anthony)
Sister Sites
Awards
John Amato’s virtual online magazine…OK, It’s a blog!
©2009 Crooks And Liars
Login or Register to post comments.
All the spin that's fit to spew
I wish I could say I was surprised. But I'm not.
Faux suxs
Flawed and imbalanced as always.
BTW, CNN is playing the same 52-47 card as FOX (making it seem as if the 52 votes were against the bill).
Fix the words to create your facts. That's what they do. I think bush holds classes for them twice a week. He tells them how he's done it for six and a half years.
Fingerbo @ 5:
Hey, the media is just protecting their investment. They paid all that contribution money to these political hacks...on BOTH sides of the aisle.
Fox News is complicit in war crimes.
May only get worse since R. Murdoch has been approved to buy the DowJones,
which as most know, owns the Wall Street Journal. Look for even more conservative
articles in the Journal soon.
Doggiebobo @ 9:
You are being far to kind. Conservative? You mean far rifgt wing propaganda.
Meanwhile, smart people find ways to sneak the truth to the public . . .
[Try it on another site-Sitemonitor]
No surprise in the way Fox twists the truth. Republicans managed to prevent the 60 votes needed all the same. It is time to ignore Fox and the other media outlets. The people who work in that industry are all liars. It doesn't matter if it is national, International or local news. They don't seek the truth, they seek what ever currency that can bulge their wallets.
Heh, no surprise. They always pull this shit. Tony Snow and Hannity are text buddies.
Color me shocked.
Holy shit. They actually, literally, spun the truth.
OK...I am confused. I see spin and fox in the same sentence, which is supposed to clue me in that I am supposed to read it opposite from what it says.
Which would mean the democratic action worked, that a majority of elected government representetives voted for the withdrawal plan..
but noting other comments and thier characterization of what happened it appears that fox reported correctly???
I'm as dense as a rock today... somebody break out the chisel..
Drudge is linking to the AP report on BB which reads the same. I had to read it a few times to see where the vote netted out. So 60 yes votes is the new 50 yes votes? Inflation is everywhere.
I vote 1-0 to tell FoxNews to kiss my ass.
"we Pravda, you decide"-Faux
And I haven't seen a single MSM story correctly labeling the "60-vote procedural hurdle" that Senate Republicans are using to stall every piece of Iraq War legislation: FILIBUSTER.
Except, of course, for the lying liars like Diane Sawyer who's taking a page straight out of the Fux News Handbook of Dishonest Journalism and claiming that it's the Democrats who are filibustering.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the destruction of our dollar rolls on.
The Euro sets new records every day against the greenback, ending trading today at over 1.38 while the British Pound has risen to over a whopping $2.05.
In addition, oil is up above $75 a barrel while the DJIA is down over 100 points.
Have a splendid afternoon, everybody. Enjoy the continuing descent toward oblivion of our nation.
They are literally broadcasting straight up GOP propaganda. Isn't there an election law against that?
"We report. You decide."
Well, I have decided that Faux News is not credible and a waste of time. I watch it a little to see what they are up to but NEVER for any real news. I could never trust that the news or commentary they report is true or fair or balanced even though I know they are neither fair nor balanced. There are too many errors. Whether they are mistakes or by design does not matter even though I am sure they are by design.
What they failed to mention is that Harry Reid has pulled the Defense Authroization bill off the floor until the Republicans are willing to allow a vote on the withdrawal amendment. That's going to make FOX look reeeeaaaalllllyyyyyy stupid (as if they needed any help);.
duncanidho @ 16:
They needed 60 votes to break the filibuster. So to say it is 52-47 means they didn’t have the 60 they needed. I hope this makes sense. If not I will explain it further.
They also failed to mention that the vote wasn't really on the bill, but it was to end debate on the bill. You need 60 votes to pass closure, and they just didn't have it.
It's just like how the original vote on war with Iraq wasn't specifically that, but to give the President authorization to attack Iraq if he felt he needed to. Once you learn what the bill was really asking for, you realize the pundits and media are screwing with you.
Headline should read "Vote proves that Republicans are weak on national security". Then the story line can continue to illustrate how the Republicans voted to keep our troops in a death trap and how Republicans don't care about the returning troops and their loved ones. Add to this that the Republicans only care about their lord and master, little Bush and place him above and before the American people. And, by not returning the focus to al Qaeda and Osama bin Laudin, the Republicans are making it easier for al Qaeda to obtain Pakistan's nukes and missles.
Looks like the Republicans will not only be losing the 2008 presidential election, they will also be losing Senate seats.
There is no solution to the Iraq War. If Americans really want the war to end, and they truly care for their ‘Soldiers’, then they will immediately, without hesitation, cease and desist from driving their cars. Other than that, you have no one to blame but yourselves. Also, I have news for you folks. Bush is ‘The Leaker’.
In the Name of Brutus
Dames and Gents,
In times unprecedented and tinged with despair, it is appropriate to reflect on the founding of our great nation. It was not with George Washington, but with Brutus, and not the one who killed Caeser. There was another who rebelled against the tyrant monarchy of Rome, The Tarquins. He wrote the Roman Constitution that would stand for 500 years. His sons sided with the monarchy. The monarchy lost. So to punish his sons and found a perfect union, he immolated his own sons.
Machiavelli speaks fluently and voluminoulsy and voiciferously on this subject, in ‘The Discourses’, and yet is proved wrong on several counts by the miracle of America. He says that a nation founded in servitude, as America was a colony, will never win its freedom. He also says that a nation founded on fertile soil that is easily defended, will in time loose all of its freedoms because it will become, eventually, inevitably, sloth and sated, and will forget to protect them.
As regards ‘The DC Madam’, I am personally involved. You can view my involvement at http://www.maytheygetwhattheydeserve.com/KAT.html
Sometimes a mouse will lead you to a kat, and a kat can lead you to a rat and a rat, ironically, can lead you to the truth. And the truth, as they say, and as it is written, will set you free.
May all those who sincerely and patiently wait for freedom be free and may all those who desire to steal those freedoms find instead the dire consequences that accompany contempt for a great man like Brutus.
As regards Machiavelli,
eram sapiens tamen nefas
And again,
vox vocis publicus est vox vocis deus
May The Republic stand forever and bring the Glory Of The World, with Dignity, into Its Treasury.
Purple
Virtue
All of ‘The Troubles’ of America will be solved if every Senator is required to wear and adhere to ‘The Tradition of The Toga.’
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toga
Purple
Virtue
quisquam pro era
Perk runs the numbers.
488 Madison Avenue
The War goes on.
The fate of the World.
duncanidho @ 16:
Well, not exactly a majority of support fer the Levin/Reed Bill. Only insufficient support fer cloture on the debate.
Maybe the (4?) Republicans who voted fer cloture would have voted fer the bill. Or, perhaps, those Republicans simply made an astute political decision, one that would have middle-of-the-road voters believe that those Republicans voted against the war when, in reality, they might actually support the war.
Either way, the MSM is purposely mis-leadin' the hoi polloi.
Captain Kangaroo @ 25:
This vote was to break the filibuster so that it could go to the floor of the Senate so that the Senate could “Official” vote on it in which case a 52-47 vote would have made the bill pass. The Republicans were filibustering and it takes 60 votes to break the filibuster. If you need further explanation I will try more later but I have to run right now. Maybe somebody else can help here.
I agree with Cats. By not representing the will of the vast majority of Americans and their constituents, they are cutting their own throats. One positive benefit may be an even larger landslide in the 2008 elections.
This is one of many reasons why Democrats should boycott FOX.
Rat bastards.
Everybody, but the ignorant and truely uneducated Rethugs., know that Faux Noise does nothing but spin all truths, lie and can't ever be believed or taken seriously.
This is not just a spin it's a lie. 52-47 didn't vote to REJECT it, 52-47 voted to APPROVE it. 47-52 voted to REJECT it. These media organizations could be very well asked to correct it as a factual error, it's not irrelevant in which order the numbers are given. The voting results are never reported in NAY-YAY order. So this is not a spin it's a lie.
spin spin spin spin spin ...and to think the aussie freak now owns dow jones
Virtue
quisquam pro era
The War goes on.
The fate of The World.
Does the vote REALLY matter? Busholini would veto it anyway.
Oh yeah, there's always symbolism.
Orwell's Illegitimate Son @ 21:
Paper has almost no value and oil is invaluable. Our paper is just falling faster than other paper. Until the paper is connected to real stuff . . . do a little research on the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 . . . yes . . . I'm one of those conspiracy nutjobs who reads books and likes facts . . . ok . . now I'll leave.
I thought the vote was reichwingers voted against bringing the bill to the floor for an up/down vote.
They'll claim it was a mistake but we all know better.
Dr. Acula @ 37:
It matters that we should have been able to bring it up for vote. Then if the republicans had any guts they would have voted 67+ to make it veto proof.
I understand Lieberman's motivation regardin' this vote...
But why did Harry Reed vote against cloture?!?!
Also looks like they were actually voting against the bill. They weren't. They were voting for cloture to end the Republican filibuster, on on the bill itself. Ending a filibuster requires 60 votes, which the YAYS almost had. The actual bill itself only requires 51 votes.
So yet again, Fox Noise Channel LIES.
It matters that we should have been able to bring it up for vote. I agree. Then if the republicans had any guts they would have voted 67+ to make it veto proof. Would never happen.
E in MD @ 43:
According to the vote tallies from the senate, why on earth has Harry Reid D-NV voted as Nay!?!? Isn't he the one leading this march?
Ron @ 41:
Well, slightly mistaken assumption there.
Let's say the cloture vote passed and 67+ votes were cast to pass Levin-Reed. I think we can agree that Stupor Mundi would then veto the bill.
At that point the Senate would have to- again- cast at least 67 votes to override the veto. How many of the Republicans who voted to pass the bill would then vote against the override?
Enough, ya gotta believe, to allow the veto to stand.
And we haven't even touched on the pocket veto. If Reed-Levin had passed, Bush could have pocketed the bill. The Senate bein' adjourned, at this point, would be unable to override the veto.
I gotta believe every senator was aware of the potentiality of a pocket veto.
rekroc @ 47:
ahhhhhh.....interesting move.. Thanks for the info....
48 Andy K
It's the Japanese. They make everything pocket sized now.
Iraq is our Vietnam:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/07/16/in_iraq_bills_a_vi...
Andy K @ 48:
I was assuming they would vote for the override. You are correct.
Ron said: I gotta believe every senator was aware of the potentiality of a pocket veto.
I wonder how many Senators are aware of the pocket rocket?
ysabddaden @ 50:
:)
As always, I appreciate yer levity.
Question: Is there a drummer who follows ya around fer the sole purpose of providin' rimshots? 'Cause I can picture it...
ysabddaden @ 50:
LOOK! IT'S POKEVETOMON!!
Dr. Acula @ 53:
Actually, Doc, I said that.
And, in answer to yer question, I'll say 98. Not to be mean, but I'm not sure how much Tim Johnson is aware of right now(thus the failure to vote). And, with the stated purpose of simply player-hatin', Senator "InterTubes" Stevens ain't real bright. Eh?
My sister in law just called to tell my wife that they voted to withdraw the troops....The average American has no idea what is going on they prefer to be stupid and just let things happen to them.
Hey I love all these blogs but I've only seen one talk about hill,obama and edwards taking money from news corps.I think im being played by all these people.
Andy K @ 56:
Name one republican that is real bright.
Ron @ 59:
I will reserve my Constitutional Right- provided under Amendment 1.75- to get back to ya on that. ;)
Ron @ 60:
I take the fifth.
Glug glug glug
Now wash tha qwestion agin?
rekroc @ 56:
Children break their toys all the time though.
Like Bush, they LIE.
Dr. Acula @ 38:
Busholini - good name. I keep calling him boy Bush. But Busholini works or maybe Bushbino or Bushette. Maybe we can start a contest.
Andy K @ 55:
No I expect rimming from my dates.
May explain why I don't have many.
Cats are fly fishn @ 65:
Bush baby?
No, that's not Kindanasty's nickname.
Andy K @ 61:
Admit it, you're stumped.
Steve @ 47:
If Harry votes "Nay" he can bring it to the floor again. If Harry votes "Yea" and it doesn't pass, then the ammendment dies. Harry did the correct vote.
68 Ron Says:
Admit it, you’re stumped.
_____________________________________________________________________
What are you going to do, bleed all over me?
It's just a flesh wound.
Ron @ 68:
Nope. I've got one, but only one. The Governor of my state when I was a youngster:
Bill Milliken
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Milliken
But he's been retired from office fer years and he's 85 years old.
65 Cats are fly fishn Says
Thanks, Cats -- glad SOMEONE likes my coining of "Busholini".
Bush Baby
Well glorioski, Sandy, it does grow bigger when he lies.
http://www.adti.net/images/bush.baby.jpg
Cats are fly fishn @ 69:
Thanks fer the clarification! I'd fergotten that rule.
ysabddaden @ 67:
ysabddaden @ 73:
Busholini better not be touching my grandson. He's too young to be "growing".
Dr. Acula @ 72:
Admit it, Doc, ya borrowed from the Marx Brothers- or were at least influenced by 'em- when ya came up with Busholini.
Come on, 'fess up....
BOYCOTT fox's advertizers ALL of them.
Their slogan, "We report; You decide". Decide...WHAT? Whether they're telling the truth or not?????? Decide WHAT???????? Should we be "deciding" something that they report on???
That's My Bush
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHMBvP0LKwI
Another oldie but a moldie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWdHOm256N4&mode=related&search=
YES! KATE!!
I've always loved her.
Andy K - although I AM a Marx Bros fan, I came up w/Busholini ala Mussolini.
Lano @ 59:
Seems a little unfair to single out Hillary, Obama and Edwards when ALL of those
wonderful folks on the hill who represent us, likewise received substantial sums
from the news corps..
What's also messed up are the comments the FOXBOTS are leaving on their site. Pigs at the trough.
And the graphic that goes with the story are of three senators sharing a laugh, to push FOX's spin that this was a stunt.
Why no pictures of a Senator giving an impassioned speech?
Add Steve Handelsman of NBC to the list of righties pretending to be journalists. He just said Democrats are delaying funding to the troops, and could delay MRAPs from being deployed to the troops. Funny, since the Democrats are the ones pushing for the troops to be armed, supplied, armored, and safe. Dickwads.
You can always get the accurate story on the best news source for American politics:
BBC.com, of course.
it isn't news nor is it conservative, so don't confuse it with being news or representative of the right- don't watch it or watch it for its entertainment and humor value
i can't stand it so i skip that channel - but cnn is running a close second and without Countdown, msnbc, would be useless as well - take to the McClatchy Group for news(but you have to be able and willing to read).
other people like fox because it explains in the most simplistic terms how this world works
so if i pray to the christian GOD that HE will eventually do in all the weird people that Fox folks hate - I'm so glad Murdock is buying WSJ - i won't feel guilty about not being able to afford it - it won't be worth reading
Doggiebobo @ 9:
The Wall Street Journal has more "liberal" stories, i.e. stories about the working man, the disenfranchised, the self-employed, than any other broadcast or major newspaper in the U.S. The only "conservative" part of the WSJ is its Editorial/Opinion page. Of course you should be sceptical of my words, so just email a few of the reporters to discover for yourself.
Dr. Acula @ 38:
There is always putting the banality that is the modern Republican Party out on display. They were trotting out the same talking points over and over oblivious to the arguments being made by the Democrats. They simply refuse to GET IT. The Republicans need their own government in which to have a House of Misrepresentatives.
The republicans are not the only culpable group in this fiasco, my friends....How many people even paid attention to what happened during the last two days? Ask your friends, your family, people on the street. I am willing to bet that not one in four even knew such a "debate" was going on. Let's stop blaming our "leaders" and take a hard look at the public. That's where we need to focus.
Maybe it turns out that all this time, Fixed Noise made the exact same mistake in calling it for Bush in 2000.
Notice that the MSM rarely if ever uses the word "filibuster" anymore.
[...] FOX News Twists the Senate Iraq Vote - Fox News reported, “…lawmakers vote 52-47 to reject plan to bring troops home by early next year.” However, 52 senators voted to bring them home. [...]
Login or Register to post comments.