On March 9, The Washington Post published Dana Milbank's “Washington Sketch” column, in which Milbank dubbed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) “Candidate Cliche” and characterized her as “trite,” citing phrases from Clinton's March 8 speech at the Center for American Progress. However, neither Milbank's column nor any article in the Post reported on the substantive proposals Clinton laid out in her speech. Milbank did not even note that Clinton discussed a substantive proposal during her speech. By contrast, other print outlets, including the Associated Press, Newsday, The New York Sun, and the Los Angeles Times (an edited reprint of Newsday's article), all reported that Clinton proposed a new “GI Bill of Rights” to increase and enhance benefits for U.S. troops in the wake of reports of poor living conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center and bureaucratic red tape injured soldiers must navigate to get disability payments.

Milbank's column, titled “Candidate Clinton, Embracing the Trite and the True,” omitted any mention of substance, focusing instead on Clinton's word choice during the speech, sarcastically labeling her statements “provocative stands.” Milbank then pointed to past speeches to pick out the so-called “loft[y] words”:

Yesterday, the Democratic front-runner took a number of provocative stands as she spoke about soldiers and veterans at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank:

“If you serve your country, your country should serve you.”

“I'm here to say that the buck does stop with this president.”

“Let us work ... to take care of those who are taking care of us.”

[...]

Clinton reserved her loftiest words for the “blood, sweat and tears” put into the Voting Rights Act, which “gave more Americans from every corner of our nation the chance to live out their dreams,” she said. “And it is the gift that keeps on giving.” Clinton kept giving, too: “Let us join together and complete that march for freedom, justice, opportunity and everything America should be,” she said.

The Post did not publish a news article on the substantive proposals Clinton outlined in the speech. By contrast, in its report on the speech, the AP noted Clinton's “GI Bill of Rights” and offered details of the proposal:

Hillary Rodham Clinton offered a new GI Bill of Rights for men and women in uniform, arguing that Democrats can do a better job of protecting and providing for U.S. troops than the Republican administration.

[...]

The New York senator, who leads early polls of Democratic contenders for the party's nomination, said she would put together a package of proposals designed to ensure troops have all the equipment they need when they're deployed, to ensure they receive proper health care, and to provide for families.

[...]

Her proposals include pre-screening troops for physical and mental conditions before they are deployed, and giving single parents in uniform more guardianship options.

She also insisted more needs to be done for those suffering traumatic brain injuries, which she called “the signature injury of the war in Iraq.”

Newsday and The New York Sun also reported on Clinton's proposed “GI Bill of Rights,” with the Newsday article, an edited version of which appeared in the Los Angeles Times, also noting that Clinton discussed Iraq war policy during the speech:

Clinton's speech came on a day when she backed Senate Democrats' plan for a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. The binding resolution is aimed at ending major operations there by March 2008.

Clinton, who supported the October 2002 resolution authorizing the Iraq invasion, took a dim view of its chances, however, telling the audience the measure was likely to be killed by Senate Republicans.