MyDD :: Sirota - looking for a job on Faux?

Sirota - looking for a job on Faux?

by JoeCoaster, Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 03:36:52 PM EST

You found a nice hit piece David. Let's see... repeat Clinton false talking points and then spin (lie) like a Republican.

Barack has been very consistant on his 'get-out-of' Iraq strategy. Pass bills with firm withdrawal dates. He does not think congress will pass a troop de-funding bill and if it does he does not trust Bush not to put the troops in danger for political gain.

David, if you don't like his strategy fine but don't lie about it.

Tags: barack obama (all tags)

Permalink :: 18 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Sirota - looking for a job on Faux? (3.00 / 2)

Obama wants to weaken the supplemental because he believes Democrats will be hit with the "playing chicken with the troops" mantle. It's 2003 all over again, and Obama is the new Kerry.

The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK

by Vox Populi on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 03:45:30 PM EST

Re: Sirota - looking for a job on Faux? (3.00 / 0)

Two points:

1)The AP mischaracterized Obama. They never quoted him as saying what he said and took the word "playing chicken out of context." If you read his comments yesterday and today his position is no different than edwards'. keep sending back bills with constraints if bush vetoes.

2) No, going back to 2003 would be nominating someone who voted for the Iraq war. Oh wait!

I have no issue with john edwards. i have issue with people who pile on Obama with fake talking points.

Sirota links to his own artcile and includes a Cliton talking point that has been thouroughly debunked. Why doesn't anyone call Sirota on this?

Kos called Clinton when CLinton tried to pull this shit. But when Sirota does you jump onboard.

by dpg220 on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 04:19:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sirota - looking for a job on Faux? (3.00 / 1)

Your claim that the AP is misquoting or mischaracterizing Obama's comments is based only on your faith in Obama. But the fact is, after the initial "playing chicken" claims, he didn't repudiate the story, he didn't say he would send back a bill with withdrawal in it, he didn't say he would restrict funding, he did what he does best and provided a vague "constraints" message.

Just what constraints? What side will he be on if Democrats choose to send back a bill with withdrawal and eventually de-funding? Edwards supports Congress sending back withdrawal bills tied to, not seperate from, the supplemental. So no, that's not the same position as Obama.

The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK

by Vox Populi on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 04:25:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sirota - looking for a job on Faux? (3.00 / 0)

He tells you right in the article.

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx? headline=Obama+denies+position+change&am p;articleId=b32363ba-e062-4194-b2a3-62ba 80dcbeae

Here:

He said it would be unacceptable for Congress "to fold up tent because the President vetoed the bill." But he also said troops should have "night vision goggles and armored Humvees and other equipment they need."

He said that "because we're in favor of a timetable doesn't mean we aren't committed to making sure the troops have the resources they need to complete their mission and come home safely."

Obama's campaign said Obama's Iraq De-escalation Act has now attracted 60 co-sponsors in the House and three in the Senate.

"We have now provided adequate funding for the troops in a bill that contains timetables," he said. "None of us are interested in playing chicken with the well-being of the troops on the ground. So, we are going to do what it takes to ensure they have the equipment that they need."

He said he never suggested that after a Bush veto, Congress should pass a funding bill without timetables.

"There are a lot of options we should explore," he said. "We could put a very tight leash on the President and say that we're funding troops for a much shorter period of time. If he won't accept a timetable that's written into a bill, then we may not be willing to fund the operations there for an indefinite period of time or a full year. We might fund for a shorter period of time and reassess based on whether some of the benchmarks that were outlined in my bill have been met.

Obama also says it is tied to the supplemental.

"He said that after a veto, Congress should "keep on ratcheting up the pressure to try to make the President see we're on the wrong course and have him respond to Congress and the American people."

"Obama said that since there are not enough in the House or Senate votes to override a veto, "My object at that point would be, explore passing a new version that also has some sort of constraints on the President's actions."

by dpg220 on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 05:09:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

reality based? not so much... (3.00 / 0)

Weaken the supplemental? The supplemental that passed follows Obama's suggestion (from January). He is looking for something that will work. Maybe that's not important to you.

Good sound bites do not equal leadership.

Good spin does not equal reality.

by JoeCoaster on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 04:25:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Joe, get this! (3.00 / 0)

what's even better:

he didn't find a hit piece, he wrote it himself. see the byline of the article at the bottom.

nice trick.

by dpg220 on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 04:14:58 PM EST

Re: Joe, get this! (3.00 / 0)

Yeah, I just noticed that too. It whole premise is just so Rovian. I'm suprised it was selected for myDD.

Sad.

by JoeCoaster on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 04:26:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Joe, get this! (3.00 / 1)

Yes, it's so very sad that people are able to express their views on MyDD. So terribly sad.

Too bad it's true.

The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK

by Vox Populi on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 04:36:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Breaking Blue entries should have ... (3.00 / 0)

a higher standard. I assume Breaking Blue are fact based, newsy pieces. If Sirota's hit piece was just another blog entry I could let it go.

Now it has a sense of legitimacy that it does not deserve.

by JoeCoaster on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 04:57:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Breaking Blue entries should have ... (3.00 / 1)

That's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. As we all are. I don't think Breaking Blue is any more or less "legitimate" than any diary or Front Page post.

The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK

by Vox Populi on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 05:04:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Breaking Blue entries should have ... (none / 0)

When Breaking Blue is limited to only certain people being allowed to post, there is a responsibility that goes with it. Its supposed to mainly be for news and polls, although a little Rumor and Chitchat is cool too. Posting a link to your own Opinion piece and then listing that link like a 3rd party wrote it is just wrong to me... I lost a lot of respect for Sirota today.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 06:44:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Breaking Blue entries should have ... (none / 0)

"Breaking Blue is a place for breaking news and polls, as well as rumors, chitchat, and general dishing on Democratic politics and DC. Say, you're on the Hill or inside some Democratic institution and want to snark, BB is here. If you've the inside scoop and want to get it outside DC, email us: tips -at- mydd.com, or just use our contact us form to remain annonymous. "

by Pravin on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 07:08:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Breaking Blue entries should have ... (none / 0)

Yeah, I said that... and I don't see where it says putting disingenuous links to your own articles... Taylor Marsh is just as bad; but then where once in a while I like Sirota's stuff, I pretty much hate Taylor's writing in general... No deep thought, nothing to challenge the reader...I have read very little of hers that I think is any good... Of course that is just my opinion... I am sure SHE as a person is a good person, I just don't like her blog at all nor her writing style...reminds me a bit to much of the way TV news is now... all style, no substance. But again, that's just my tastes.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 09:35:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Breaking Blue entries should have ... (none / 0)

LOL be careful using "all style, no substance." That sounds very close to what Rev. Sharpton says about your candidate... don't repeat that theme.

The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK

by Vox Populi on Wed Apr 04, 2007 at 12:30:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Troll Diary? (3.00 / 1)

Wow, what a hit job on Sirota. A lot of false accusations.

He's no Republican. Many Obama supporters are not ready for a campaign. Not everyone will worship him as you may. Get used to it.

by littafi on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 06:05:23 PM EST

Re: Troll Diary? (none / 0)

Maybe so, but I agree with them... Sirota should not be linking Breaking Blue to pieces he wrote

I don't think Sirota is a Republican, but I do think he has held a grudge since Ned Lemont over the fact Obama did not campaign personally for Lemont and this is yet another passive agressive piece by Sirota on Obama. And that is cool...

But then on the BB link, he should say... Here is an Opinion piece I wrote... or An article I wrote... Not Radar Mag has the latest on the seemingly triangulating senator from Illinois. That to me is very misleading, and a conflict of interest NOT pointing out HE WROTE IT. He could have accomplished the same thing crossposting in a diary.

He is entitled to write what he wants, however biased and wrong I and others might feel he is being... but to then link it to BB and mislead people clicking on the link in not knowing it is an Editorial he wrote is wrong... He shouldn't pretend his opinion piece is a news article... he should call it what it is. THAT is where I have the issue...

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 06:38:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Troll Diary? (none / 0)

I don't know Breaking Blue, so I don't understand the issue. People should be honest and straightforward. Not knowing the issue, I have no opinion on that apsect.

I was more focused on Sirota's substance. It seeems folks no longer debate, but attack. That is not directed at you, yitbos. You were not doing that.

The diary seeemed like a hit piece. Better to address the substance of Sirota's critique than Sirota.

Anyway, have a good night.

by littafi on Wed Apr 04, 2007 at 12:39:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Troll Diary? (none / 0)

And there really aren't any false accusations.. He said Lie like a republican... he didn't call David a republican.

http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!

by yitbos96bb on Tue Apr 03, 2007 at 06:39:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.