Funny You Should Ask

California Yankee asks:

"Just how stupid do the New York Times, CNN and the Associated Press think the American people are[?]"

Mr. Yankee (along with two other Redstate regulars--strieff and haystack)accuses the media outlets of trying to pull a fast one in their reporting on a Senate resolution opposing the President's plans to send more troops to Iraq. Says he:

"The biased media wing of the Democratic party was so shocked that Reid's Democratic majority in the Senate could not pass a motion to cut off debate on “a resolution of irresolution,” criticizing the revised strategy in Iraq, that it misleads lies stating that by voting against the motion to end debate, Republican Senators block debate. Just how stupid do the New York Times, CNN and the Associated Press think the American people are."

After leading with the accusation, Mr. Yankee follows with the snark:

"First, a little civics lesson. As you have surely heard by now, yesterday there was a 'Motion to Invoke Cloture on the Motion to Proceed to S. 470; A bill to express the sense of Congress on Iraq.'"

Mr. Yankee may recite his civics lessons correctly, but he flunks on basic reading. Even though he correctly copied the description of the Senate vote, he doesn't seem to grasp its meaning.

The issue at hand was whether or not the Senate should begin debate on S. 470, not to end debate on the measure. Senate Republicans, with just two exceptions, held ranks and prevented the Democratic leadership from moving the measure to the floor.

So, in fact, the New York Times, CNN, and the Associated Press are all exactly correct: Senate Republicans did block debate on the Iraq resolution by voting not to allow the measure to come to the floor. Mr. Yankee misleads his readers by substituting the vote to to keep debating whether to let the measure come to the floor for the debate over the resolution itself.

How stupid do the New York Times, CNN, and the Associate Press think the Ameican people are? A little less so than Mr. Yankee does, apparently.

UPDATE: Unlike his colleagues, Mark Kilmer gets it:

"The Republican blocked the Warner-Levin anti-Bushie sense of the Senate resolution (S.CON.RES.7) from a floor vote..."

Mr. Strieff also comes around and starts talking sense:

"Upfront I think the Warner-Levin Resolution is a monumentally bad idea. The resolution takes Congress into an area in which it has no authority whatsoever, to wit, the conduct of military operations, and even less competence than in most areas in which it legislates. Its non-binding nature brands it as a political stunt."

Given all this, it becomes something of a mystery why Senate Republicans are fighting the resolution so fiercely.