Are we seeing a trend here? The power that we collectively exercise really does have the traditional media scared, because they don't miss a chance to try to put us in our place.
Take for example this WaPo article on the Dems seeking to repeal the 2002 AUMF. Not content with doing the same stenography with Harry Reid that they do for the White House, they now claim that this is "dooming" Murtha's resolution, despite the fact that these are two different chambers, and the House and the Senate can work on concurrent legislation:
House Democrats have pulled back from efforts to link additional funding for the war to strict troop-readiness standards after the proposal came under withering fire from Republicans and from their party's own moderates. That strategy was championed by Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) and endorsed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).
But wait, there's more:
After nearly four years of combat, most military units would not be able to meet (the) standards (of being fully fully rested, trained and equipped, as outlined in the Murtha proposal). Although the war would be fully funded, the policy would prevent some of the 21,500 additional combat troops from being deployed, and some troops already in Iraq would have to be sent home.
But that approach may be all but dead, according to several Democratic lawmakers. Murtha doomed his own plan in part by unveiling it on a left-wing Web site, inflaming party moderates.
That's right, WaPo would have you believe that after the 2006 election with its overwhelmingly clear anti-war sentiments and recovery of the majority, Dem moderates would rather have our troops go to Iraq for Bush's escalation than let Murtha (no lefty himself, mind you) talk to a anti-war website. And this is all based on unnamed "lawmakers".
Anyone want to bet where this whole narrative came from?