*Cross-posted at
Blue Texas
Was the Associated Press telling the truth when it, in fact, reported that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) had, in effect, given in to George W. Bush on Iraq war funding?
One diary in Daily Kos raises serious questions about whether the AP scribe who wrote the story took what Obama had to say so far out of context that it was taken to mean something completely different from what Obama had actually meant. A second Daily Kos diary stated, in effect, that there was no way Obama could have said the things he was quoted as saying in the context presented by the AP scribe.
From looking at the AP account, one may think that Obama would, in effect, give up the ranch and give Bush his funding without strings attached, but given what Obama has said in the past, the diarists doubt that Obama could have said what he was quoted as saying in the context presented by the AP scribe.
One of the diarists repeated the same Obama quote used in the story, but the diarist added this caveat-- the AP scribe failed to provide the QUESTION that Obama was responding to. Here's more from the diarist:
The Question is everything in a situation like this. I mean, just imagine if the question was:
Q: Some say that for the Senate to be involved in any type of defunding is to play chicken with our troops. Do you think the Senate should play chicken with our troops?
OBAMA: No lawmaker wants to "play chicken with our troops". etc. etc. etc. Another one (and this is the one that seems to really piss people off, and did me, when I first saw it): "I don't think that we will see a majority of the Senate vote to cut off funding at this stage."
Again, they do not provide the question. And I think the key phrase that Obama provides is the term "at this stage". What could the question have been regarding the notion of "at this stage"? Today? Next week? July (when the current funding runs out)? The question could have been anything. Remember sweet li'l ol' Katie Couric's interview of the Edwards' with the "some say" and "some are asking if .." type of questions, direct from the flatulent mind of Rush Limpballs. This question could have easily been:
Q: Does the Senate want to simply cut funding, so it will simply run out in July? Is there a majority in the Senate who wishes to simply shut off funding at this stage?
Obama: I don't think that we will see a majority of the Senate vote to cut off funding at this stage.
Let's face it -- the AP has a history of reckless disregard for fairness when it comes to Democrats. They have a history of blatant propagandizing for the Bush administration. I mean, my God, the story about "why are people upset with the death toll in Iraq" is enough to make you physically ill. Read the link I provided above, too, regarding how they handled Valerie Plame's testimony as well. It's disgusting.
This passage not only questions the accuracy of the AP account, it also makes one wonder if this part of a pattern for the organization's scribes of misreporting and misinterpreting what is said in an interview. This is particularly troubling given AP's main purpose as an organization designed to provide the sort of coverage for smaller newspapers that they may not otherwise get without having the budget of a larger organization like, say, the Los Angeles Times.
Should we be more apprehensive about what is presented by AP? It's bad enough we already have one big media organization that habitually presents GOP propaganda as fact in the Fox "news" channel. But for an organization with the reach of AP to fail to check out what its reporters report is very, very troubling, and it doesn't bode well for those like me who depend on accurate reporting to make the decisions we need to in our daily lives.
Along with that, I hope Obama clarifies what he was quoted as saying in the AP piece.
__________________________
