Some Dems Willing to Repudiate MoveOn.org

[Adam's Apple]

Pandering on the Left
By Jeff Jacoby, Boston Globe
September 19, 2007

Today, political discourse has become so toxic that some politicians are happy to exploit a slander like MoveOn's. "No one wants to call [Petraeus] a liar on national TV," one Democratic senator anonymously told the Capitol Hill newspaper Politico a few days before Petraeus testified. "The expectation is that the outside groups will do this for us." MoveOn didn't disappoint.

To their credit, some Democrats and prominent liberals repudiated MoveOn's slur. Former New York mayor Ed Koch labeled MoveOn "vile" and urged "decent people . . . to come to the general's defense." Washington Post eminence David Broder called the ad "disgraceful" and "juvenile." The chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Michigan's Carl Levin, was equally blunt. "Totally inappropriate," he said. "There is no place for that kind of personal attack on our military people."

The only Democratic presidential candidate unafraid to tell off MoveOn was Senator Joseph Biden. Queried on "Meet the Press," he replied forthrightly: "I don't buy into that. This is an honorable guy. He's telling the truth."

for full article:
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/09/19/pandering_on_the_left

 

[jasendorf]

I think General Petraeus is telling as much of the truth as he can.. We all saw what happened to General Shinseki when he told the truth that 300,000 to 400,000 troops would be necessary to properly secure Iraq (right now we're doing it with 160,000 troops and 100,000 civilian contractors (hell, contracted civilian security forces make up th third largest part of the "coalition" after the U.S. armed forces and the British).

The general's assessment is what every military commander does with a high-level assessment... that doesn't make it a lie nor does it make it the blunt, unabridged truth. Both side have been using this guy as a political hacky sack since the day it was announced he'd give a report on the progress of the troop increase.

Generally, I'm disappointed General Patraeus was forced to do the Commander-in-Chief's job. But, the President has done what I expected of him which was to foist his responsibilities of Commander-in-Chief and reporting the war's progress to Congress onto a well-respected General because the President no longer wants to be associated with the war and definitely no longer wants to be "the decider."

 

[doniston]

I think General Petraeus is telling as much of the truth as he can.. We all saw what happened to General Shinseki when he told the truth that 300,000 to 400,000 troops would be necessary to properly secure Iraq (right now we're doing it with 160,000 troops and 100,000 civilian contractors (hell, contracted civilian security forces make up th third largest part of the "coalition" after the U.S. armed forces and the British).

The general's assessment is what every military commander does with a high-level assessment... that doesn't make it a lie nor does it make it the blunt, unabridged truth. Both side have been using this guy as a political hacky sack since the day it was announced he'd give a report on the progress of the troop increase.

Generally, I'm disappointed General Patraeus was forced to do the Commander-in-Chief's job. But, the President has done what I expected of him which was to foist his responsibilities of Commander-in-Chief and reporting the war's progress to Congress onto a well-respected General because the President no longer wants to be associated with the war and definitely no longer wants to be "the decider."

But if he is hedging the truth, AND KNOWS IT, he then becomes the betrayer.

 

[Shogun]

To their credit, some Democrats and prominent liberals repudiated MoveOn's slur.

 

[jasendorf]

But if he is hedging the truth, AND KNOWS IT, he then becomes the betrayer.

I don't know if you're quoting others or if that's your view... but that view is overly simplistic and moronic and deserves no countenance.

The reason people were writing "betrayer" articles before he even gave his testimony is because they knew what a general does and that's shade the situation in the best light possible. It wasn't that they were stupid... they knew his report, being a report from a high level general, would be optimistic about the current situation and forward-looking in its scope. This makes it possible for them to pre-write about what he said to support their rabid partisan nature. Which, quite honestly, is what I expected from them as well.

You know, come to think of it... anyone who was surprised by either the tenor of the general's testimony OR the response of rabid partisans is pretty much stupid. And, any political whack who claims that they are ***outraged*** and ***aghast*** by either Patraeus or MoveOn is simply putting on airs.

 

[doniston]

I don't know if you're quoting others or if that's your view... but that view is overly simplistic and moronic and deserves no countenance.

The reason people were writing "betrayer" articles before he even gave his testimony is because they knew what a general does and that's shade the situation in the best light possible. It wasn't that they were stupid... they knew his report, being a report from a high level general, would be optimistic about the current situation and forward-looking in its scope. This makes it possible for them to pre-write about what he said to support their rabid partisan nature. Which, quite honestly, is what I expected from them as well.

You know, come to think of it... anyone who was surprised by either the tenor of the general's testimony OR the response of rabid partisans is pretty much stupid. And, any political whack who claims that they are ***outraged*** and ***aghast*** by either Patraeus or MoveOn is simply putting on airs.

Who has said it was a surprise? IMHO, it was a forgone conclusion even before he took on the Job. he was destined to be Bush's lap-dog (Yes-man) I have covered this all before in previous posting on this issue.

as for MOVEON, I joined, --- and almost imediately resigned because they were so far from the playing field on most issues.