Why the internet rules and stinks.

In researching the previous post on Obama's speech, I came across "Faithfull Progressive", a blog that claims that Obama was criticizing the Religious Right as much as the Democrats. I don't think that that is correct, although he clearly defines ground rules for a dialogue between conservative christians and progressives that would not please the cynical exploiters that are prominent among the Religious Rights' leadership. But it seems to me that he addresses his two audiences - Democrats and strongly religious people - in a positive manner, urging cooperation. He's not trying to get the Religious Right to change what it's doing...

Fine, that is a disagreement in analysis. But, having just read the speech, I noticed that "Faithful Progressive" (FP) isn't exactly faithful in quoting the speech (which he does link to at the end). He quotes Obama as saying:
"While I've already laid out some of the work that progressives need to do on this, I that the conservative leaders of the Religious Right will need to acknowledge a few things as well."(sic)

The speech that he links to actually says:
"While I've already laid out some of the work that progressive leaders need to do, I want to talk a little bit about what conservative leaders need to do -- some truths they need to acknowledge. "

Now, I don't know what possessed FP to change the quote. Perhaps the transcript on the website changed in stead, since FP's quote is clearly incomplete and was perhaps cleaned up? Without authoritative sources, I can't judge who's right. But from the entire tone of the speech, I sincerely doubt that Obama was attacking the Religious Right, the actual political organisation. He was talking more broadly than that, I think. So I suspect that the transcript on Obama's web is more true to the actual speech.

In any case, it's a good example of why you can't trust what you read. Especially when it's on the internet...