On the August 28 edition of MSNBC Live, while discussing the Iraq war with Jon Soltz, co-founder and chairman of the anti-Iraq war group VoteVets.org, anchor Tamron Hall claimed that Democratic Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (NY) and Barack Obama (IL) are “both saying that the new strategy” in Iraq “is working.” Tamron went on to ask Soltz: “But do you think that it will start to hurt your organization and others whose message is, you know, that you want the soldiers, the troops home, set a timeline, when you hear from, you know, the two leading candidates for president and Democrats, Clinton and Obama, saying 'Hey, things are working, so then why not stay longer?' ” In fact, as Media Matters for America has noted, neither Clinton nor Obama has claimed that President Bush's troop increase strategy in Iraq is “working,” and neither has advocated “stay[ing] longer.” Indeed, both candidates have sponsored legislation (here and here) requiring a gradual withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.

From the 10 a.m. ET hour of the August 28 edition of MSNBC Live:

SOLTZ: So, the difference is grassroots organizations like VoteVets.org, or political organizations designed by the White House to salvage the embarrassment that this president feels for misleading us into this war and mismanaging the war -- the entire phase. And now we have a situation where Al Qaeda is stronger today, and the military is destroyed, and it's a big problem for our country. And most Americans want a strong national security, and that's not where this president's taken us.

HALL: Well, Jon, though, I mean, you have to admit the strategy has changed and there are reports that the tactics are working. You even have Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama both saying that the new strategy is working. The quote from Sen. Clinton I have is: “We've begun to change the tactics in Iraq in some areas, particularly Anbar province, and it's working.”

SOLTZ: I'm so glad you brought that up, because I think that's the most important thing. Sen. Clinton's not talking about our military tactics. She is talking about our political tactics. What we've done in Anbar is we've engaged the Sunnis. We've engaged them politically against this Wahabi-Sunni extremists that have entered the country.

So, this is more of what we need to do, which is more political diplomatic work to protect the Sunni minority, to establish a Shia majority. We can't have a democracy in Iraq unless we support the Shia majority. So, look, our soldiers are the best in the world -- they're going to hold and take terrain. But to say that the surge has worked, or the escalation, is ridiculous when the Iraqi government is on vacation.

HALL: But do you think that it will start to hurt your organization and others whose message is, you know, that you want the soldiers, the troops home, set a timeline, when you hear from, you know, the two leading candidates for president and Democrats, Clinton and Obama, saying “Hey, things are working, so then why not stay longer?”

SOLTZ: That's not what Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama are saying. Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama have a commitment to destroying Al Qaeda, much like VoteVets.org does. So, we' re committed to saving the armed forces of the United States, saving the Marine Corps, saving the Army, taking the fight to the enemy. The latest National Intelligence Estimate tells us that the central front to the war on terror is in Afghanistan and Pakistan region, not in Iraq. So, I think that's what they're saying, that's what we're saying. We want to protect America.

However, in the August 20 speech from which Hall quoted, Clinton said changed “tactics” in certain areas of Iraq are “working” -- not Bush's troop “surge” policy. Indeed, in an August 21 article on the speech, The New York Times quoted her as saying: “We've begun to change tactics in Iraq, and in some areas, particularly in Al Anbar province, it's working. ... We're just years too late changing our tactics. We can't ever let that happen again.” The Times also reported that "[a]ides to Mrs. Clinton said her remarks that military tactics in Iraq are 'working' referred specifically to reports of increased cooperation from Sunnis leading to greater success against insurgents in Al Anbar Province." According to an April 29 Times article, the progress in Al Anbar “began last September” -- months before Bush announced his plan to increase the number of troops in Iraq. Indeed, as Media Matters repeatedly noted, Clinton similarly suggested months ago that the U.S. forces are achieving progress in Iraq due to better relations between tribal leaders and American military forces.

During the MSNBC segment, Hall did not cite any specific comments by Obama in claiming that he has said “the new strategy is working.” In fact, in recent speeches and statements, Obama has said the exact opposite. For instance, in an August 21 speech, he said that “there is no military solution in Iraq” and "[n]o military surge can succeed without political reconciliation and a surge of diplomacy in Iraq and the region," as Media Matters noted. In an August 21 conference call with reporters, Obama similarly stated that whether the troop increase results in short-term security improvements “doesn't change the underlying assessment, which is that there is not a military solution to the political dynamic in Iraq.” The New York Observer's blog The Politicker reported Obama's statement in an August 21 post:

“My assessment is that if we put an addition [sic] 30,000 of our outstanding troops in Baghdad it is going to quell some of the violence short term, I don't think there has even been any doubt about that,” said Obama, adding “It doesn't change the underlying assessment which is that there is not a military solution to the political dynamic in Iraq.”

Further, in response to Bush's August 28 speech at the National Convention of the American Legion, Obama released a statement saying, in part: “Now we are dealing with the consequences of that failure of candor and judgment, and the President is using the politics of fear to continue a wrong-headed policy. It's time to turn the page on the failed Bush-Cheney strategy and conventional Washington thinking, remove our combat troops from Iraq, mount a long overdue surge of diplomacy, and focus our attention on a resurgent al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan.”