If you think Murdoch and Co. didn’t have any more tricks up their sleeves, read this article from the AP and then compare it to the version from the Murdoch owned New York Post:
‘No more will Congress turn a blind eye to the Bush administration’s incompetence and dishonesty,’ Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said in a speech in which he accused the president of living in a state of denial about events in Iraq more than four years after the U.S.-led invasion.
Bush, confident of enough votes to sustain his veto, was unambiguous in his response. ‘I will strongly reject an artificial timetable (for) withdrawal and/or Washington politicians trying to tell those who wear the uniform how to do their job,’ he told reporters in the Oval Office as he met with his top Iraq commander, Gen. David Petraeus.
Taken together, the day’s events marked the quickening of a confrontation that has been building since Democrats took control of Congress in January and promised to change policy in a war has claimed the lives of more than 3,200 U.S. troops.
Congressional negotiators for the House and Senate set a late afternoon meeting to ratify the details of the legislation.
The bill includes more than $90 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the withdrawal timetable that Bush finds objectionable and billions of dollars in domestic spending that he also has threatened to veto. Overall, the bill totals $124.2 billion.
Democratic aides said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Reid hope to clear the measure through both houses by Friday and send it to Bush by early next week for his expected veto. The Democratic leaders have not said whether they will attempt to override the veto in what would be a largely symbolic act given the number of Republicans who have said they will back the president.
There is far less certainty about the next steps in the historic wartime confrontation between Congress and commander in chief. Reid and other Democrats have said repeatedly they will not leave the troops without the funds they need, but they have not said whether they will first force Bush to veto at least one more bill before sending him legislation he finds acceptable.
In his remarks, Reid criticized Bush and called Vice President Dick Cheney the president’s ‘chief attack dog,’ lacking in credibility.
He likened the president to Lyndon Johnson, saying the former president ordered troop escalations in Vietnam in an attempt ‘to save his political legacy,’ only to watch U.S. casualties climb steadily.
Bush, he said, ‘is the only person who fails to face this war’s reality – and that failure is devastating not just for Iraq’s future, but for ours.’
Reid had made similar comments at a White House meeting last week among Bush and top lawmakers, and the president dismissed the comparison with Johnson, according to several participants in the session. This time, Dana Perino, the president’s spokeswoman fired back. She said it was Reid who was ignoring reality, not the president.
She said Reid is in denial about the vicious nature of the enemy and about the U.S.-led plan to provide more security in Iraq. ‘He’s also in denial that a surrender date – he thinks it is a good idea. It is not a good idea. It is defeat. It is a death sentence for the millions of Iraqis who voted for a constitution, who voted for a government, who voted for a free and democratic society.’
As outlined by Democratic officials, the emerging legislation would require the withdrawal of U.S. forces to begin by Oct. 1, even earlier if Bush cannot certify that the Iraqi government is making progress in disarming militias, reducing sectarian violence and forging political compromises.
Another provision in the measure would withhold foreign aid money if the Iraqi government does not meet those standards.
Also, the Pentagon would be required to adhere to certain standards for the training and equipping of units sent to Iraq, and for their rest at home between deployments. Bush could waive the guidelines if necessary. Democrats assume he would, but want him on record as doing so.
Under the non-binding timeline, all combat troops would be withdrawn by April 1, 2008.
After that date, U.S. forces would have a redefined and restricted mission of protecting U.S. personnel and facilities, engaging in counterterrorism activities against al-Qaida and other similar organizations and training and equipping Iraqi forces.
Democrats jettisoned some of the additional domestic spending that Bush has held up to ridicule, including funds for spinach growers and peanut farmers. But Reid, Pelosi and others decided to include money to help farmers hit by natural disasters as well as the victims of Hurricane Katrina.
Reid’s speech blended criticism of Bush, an appeal for patience to the anti-war voters who last fall gave Democrats control, and an attempt to shape the post-veto debate.
‘I understand the restlessness that some feel. Many who voted for change in November anticipated dramatic and immediate results in January,’ he said.
‘But like it or not, George W. Bush is still the commander in chief – and this is his war,’ Reid said.
Looking beyond Bush’s expected veto, he said, ‘If the president disagrees, let him come to us with an alternative. Instead of sending us back to square one with a veto, some tough talk and nothing more, let him come to the table in the spirit of bipartisanship that Americans demand and deserve.’
Copyright © 2007, The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Copyright © 2007, InterestAlert
By DAVID ESPO, AP
April 24, 2007 — WASHINGTON – The White House warned yesterday that Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid’s new legislation requiring the first U.S. troops to be withdrawn from Iraq by Oct. 1 is a “death sentence” for millions of freedom-loving Iraqis.
The stinging comments from President Bush’s spokeswoman came just days after Reid declared the war is already “lost” and as negotiators for the House and Senate nailed down the details of the war bill, which also set a goal of completing the pullout by April 2008.
Dana Perino, the president’s spokeswoman, charged that Reid is in denial about the vicious nature of the enemy and about the U.S.-led plan to provide more security in Iraq.
Reid (Nev.) had earlier accused Bush of being in a “state of denial” about what’s happening in Iraq four years after America went to war.
Perino fumed about Reid, “He’s also in denial that a surrender date – he thinks it is a good idea. It is not a good idea. It is defeat.
“It is a death sentence for the millions of Iraqis who voted for a constitution, who voted for a government, who voted for a free and democratic society,” she added.
As outlined by Democratic officials, the emerging legislation would require the withdrawal of forces to begin by Oct. 1, and even earlier if Bush cannot certify that the Iraqi government is making progress in disarming militias, reducing sectarian violence and forging political compromises.
Another provision in the measure would withhold foreign aid money if the Iraqi government does not meet those standards.
Also, the Pentagon would be required to adhere to certain standards for the training and equipping of units sent to Iraq, and for their rest at home between deployments.
Bush could waive the guidelines if necessary. Democrats assume he would, but want him on record as doing so.
Under the nonbinding timeline, all combat troops would be withdrawn by April 1, 2008.
“No more will Congress turn a blind eye to the Bush administration’s incompetence and dishonesty,” Reid said in a Senate speech.
Bush, confident of enough votes to sustain his veto, was unambiguous in his response: He plans to veto the bill.
“I will strongly reject an artificial timetable [for] withdrawal and/or Washington politicians trying to tell those who wear the uniform how to do their job,” he told reporters in the Oval Office as he met with his top Iraq commander, Gen. David Petraeus.
Taken together, the day’s events marked the quickening of a confrontation that has been building since Democrats took control of Congress in January and promised to change policy in a war that has claimed the lives of more than 3,200 U.S. troops.
Reid’s bill includes more than $90 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the withdrawal timetable that Bush finds objectionable and billions of dollars in domestic spending that he also has threatened to veto. Overall, the bill totals $124.2 billion.
Democratic aides said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Reid hope to clear the measure through both houses by Friday and send it to Bush by early next week for his expected veto.
The Democratic leaders have not said whether they will attempt to override the veto in what would be a largely symbolic act given the number of Republicans who have said they will back the president.
When looking at the two versions side by side it becomes obvious that the Newscorp owned New York Post version was rendered almost indistinguishable from the original AP version.
Author David Espo has said that what was printed in the Post has no resemblance to his original AP article.
