How's that?

Why does the WaPo insist on misrepresenting Democratic actions against the war? The headline and lede give the impression that Harry Reid caved, yet the article goes on to explain that the Dems are actually pushing back against toothless, symbolic measures intended only to give the president and the GOP caucus political cover. At least the "F-word" makes an appearance, but only further into the article and then only after being euphemized as "the GOP's procedural objections."

------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATE: Did the link on the WaPo home page just change, or did I click through too quickly and miss it? Here's how it reads:

Democrats Won't Budge On Troop Withdrawal

Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) says Senate will not vote on Iraq proposals until Republicans stop filibuster efforts, accept majority vote.

Much better. Never mind!
------------------------------------------------------------

Democrats Won't Force War Vote - washingtonpost.com

Senate Democrats halted their quest to change President Bush's war strategy yesterday after Republicans blocked a proposal to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq.

After the vote, which followed a rare all-night debate, Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) startled colleagues by announcing that the Senate would not vote on several other proposals intended to force Bush to revisit his war plans. Although war critics in both parties had supported the measures, Reid and other Democratic leaders dismissed them as too weak. Instead, they are holding firm in their bid to persuade GOP critics of Bush's Iraq policy to embrace more aggressive Democratic measures to begin withdrawing troops.

[snip]

Although Democrats won four Republican defectors, they fell eight votes short of the 60 needed to overcome the GOP's procedural objections.

After the results were tallied, Reid asked GOP leaders to accept simple-majority votes. When they refused, Reid announced that the debate would be suspended, possibly until after Labor Day or until Republicans dropped their filibuster [Huzzah!!!]. He called the 60-vote requirement "a new math that was developed by the Republicans to protect the president."

Technorati Tags: WaPo, Fred Hiatt, Democrats, Iraq, war, filibuster, GOP, OUT NOW