Anchor on CNN is implying Murtha called for immediate pullout.

[onehandle]

Bad dye job woman on "Live From". She was asking correspondent in Iraq if he got a feeling that the troops wanted to pull out right away. She said this a breath away from talking about Murtha's "controversial" comment.

Live right now....

Now they went to commercial.

[ComerPerro]

1. That's how it works. And why am I not at all suprised?

[mandyky]

2. Was it Kyra Phillips?

She has become such an ass I don't watch when she is on.

[onehandle]

6. Yes. I just found a photo of her and confirmed. nt

[Rick Myers]

10. Kyra has NO BUSINESS being on TV

She is a complete idiot, with a nasty streak to boot.

[MrModerate]

3. They've been saying "pull out immediately" . . .

For several days -- like all 150,000 should start lining up at the airport to fly home.

Which, of course, is not what Murtha said at all.

However, since I'm in a charitable mood today, I'm attributing it to reportorial laziness and incompentence rather than libel.

[jobycom]

4. You can't expect them to know what's going on. They're just actors.

Journalism has retreated to the underground these days.

[blm]

5. That's how they do it. They misstate Murtha's plan to radicalize it and

marginalize his voice from any further debate. They won't speak to the common ground offered in all the withdrawal plans on the table - Murtha's Kerry's, Casey's, or Korb's.

Murtha's plan is barely a 6 month difference from Kerry's withdrawal plan, but forces on the right and the left are pretending that they are vastly different so to marginalize both of them.

[welshTerrier2]

13. i see Kerry's plan and Murtha's plan as "vastly different"

i've asked this question numerous times on DU and never seem to get a clear answer ... i know you study these matters very carefully so i'll ask you ...

i am sincere when i tell you that i've read Kerry's plan in detail ... and i saw Murtha's speech when he first announced his position and held his press conference ...

i guess there are two questions here ... one is what the essential differences between the two plans are and two, are the essential differences significant ...

the essential difference i see, specifically focussing on the withdrawal of troops, all troops, from Iraq is that Murtha's plan says we need to get the troops out of Iraq without conditions and Kerry's plan calls for the achievement of benchmarks ... the 6 months versus 12 - 15 months is not the only issue; it's Kerry's "linkage" to events and benchmarks that differentiates the two plans ...

so i'll ask you two questions that directly focus solely on the withdrawal of troops ... the first is, have i correctly stated the Murtha's call for "immediate redeployment" of US troops outside Iraq is "without condition" and that Kerry's call for the withdrawal of American troops is contingent on events and the achievement of benchmarks that he wants bush to define? is there anything unfair or misleading about those two characterizations as they pertain to the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq?

and second, do you consider these differences significant ...

my view is that the characterization is fair and that the differences between the two plans are significant ...

[blm]

15. No, Murtha's plan was based on safety conditions at the time not pull out

now unconditionally. And I notice it is the RW who is trying to assert that Murtha's plan is for immediate pullout when Murtha never made that demand. He only suggested that his plan might be able to be accomplished in 6 months.

Kerry's has us pulling out a significant number of troops with each positive step, like elections in Dec., the training of troops (trained by the MANY countries who offered but Bush ignored). He sees opportunity for success by turning over the permanent bases to the Iraqis, and pulling out the American corporations so Iraqis can benefit from the reconstruction, and show cultural sensitivity by pulling our troops out of the streets and let the Iraqis police themselves and their homes.

The reason I prefer Kerry's is that it doesn't require pull back to the borders so we can be close enough to get back in when all hell breaks loose. Kerry's emphasizes political measures over military action during his one year draw down to specifically prevent the chaos up front. Murtha's plan has this as well, but it seems Kerry places greater emphasis on this.

And I answered you in the appropriate threads. Sorry you missed my replies.

Do you not see any similarities in their plans at all? I would be very surprised that anyone can read their plans and not see any common ground in them. Especially when both have even used the same wording in their appearances, that military force will never succeed at this point but political force can.

[BOSSHOG]

7. Controversial? I bet the Soldiers think exactly that.

A retired Colonel said in the house of representatives that we should stop being killed. How fucking controversial is that?

[blm]

16. As controversial as the GOP mediawhores can spin it.

.

[emulatorloo]

8. anything to make dems look bad n/t

[onehandle]

9. It continues. CNN is interviewing badly wounded soldiers.

Only soldiers who are "against an immediate pullout".

Only soldiers who are "for getting the job done".

[AlinPA]

11. That's airhead Allison. She keeps winking her left eye to look cute.

[beaconess]

12. They're doing it across the board - they all buy the Pub talking points

From yesterday's Today Show interview by Katie Couric with Jim Carville and Laura Ingraham - fortunately, Carville didn't let Couric get away with it.

COURIC: Laura, let me start with you. What did you think of Congressman Murtha's sort of whole take on the situation, a call for an immediate withdrawal of US troops? As you well know, there was a vote on the Hill on Friday and it failed, asking for an immediate withdrawal, and it failed 403-to-3. The Democrats calling it a political stunt meant to embarrass Murtha. Who came out ahead on this?

Ms. INGRAHAM: Well, I think the Republicans came out ahead because finally Democrats had to do more than just slam the Bush administration. That's what's been happening for weeks and months, and partly to blame is the Bush administration for not doing a very good job of conveying what's really going on on the ground in Iraq beyond just the IEDs exploding, talking about the political progress, the context of the Middle East, why it's so critical to win in Iraq. The administration left a big vacuum. The Democrats stepped in to fill it with accusations of misleading before the war, prewar intelligence.

COURIC: Mm-hmm . . . And would you agree, James, that Republicans came out ahead and Congressman Murtha was sort of embarrassed by all this?

Mr. CARVILLE: Not at all. I think the American people came out ahead, and I think what they need to do is pin a medal on Congressman Murtha, a man I've been knowing for almost 20 years. It's time to start this discussion, and I think yesterday in the president's remarks, you see that he almost thanked Congressman Murtha for doing this. Now we have this issue front and center. It should be part of the political process, and by the way, to be fair to Congressman Murtha, he didn't call for immediate withdrawal; he called within six months. But that's not the case. The case is, is that the American people need to have this debate. The person to bring it in the forefront was somebody like a Congressman Jack Murtha of Pennsylvania. And now we--we're going to have this debate. And, by the way...

COURIC: Mm-hmm.

[...of J.Temperance]

14. The ONLY reason that we're EVEN in this mess in Iraq is...

Because in 1945 Poppy himself didn't have an immediate pullout.

Jaysus, Poppy had two choices, one was Coitus Interruptus and the other was he could have worn a "hat"

This is the lowdown truth.

:spank:

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

17. I heard that too, and so emailed her with the stuff from

this post.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2263714

[Loonman]

18. So does CNN report the news or make the news?

Which is it?