Senate Democrats cave in to wing-nuts on MoveOn resolution

Published on September 21st, 2007

On the eve of the Petraeus hearings, I wrote that if the Democrats didn’t call out the general on his partisan, politically motivated spin of the events unfolding in Iraq, they would prove their irrelevance on the issue of the ongoing occupation once and for all.

In the end, it was much worse than that. Senate Democrats took the time to join their Republican colleagues in condemning an ad produced by MoveOn.org that — accurately — pointed out Petraeus’ previous spin about progress in Iraq and warned that the general would “Betray Us.” The resolution passed by a vote of 72-25. Among the presidential contenders in the senate, Hillary Clinton and Chris Dodd voted against the resolution and Barack Obama and Joe Biden abstained.

In the real world, this is all beyond idiotic. That the Senate would take valuable time to debate something as trivial as an advertisement in the New York Times is an indication of just how unserious the discourse about the war has become in Washington.

With such a boneheaded move, Senate Democrats showed again that there is no limit to their Pavlovian responses to military issues. They stand petrified that they’ll be called dirty, America-hating hippies who “oppose the troops” by Republicans, that they’ll invite a conservative back-lash if they show spine on ending the open-ended occupation of Iraq or that they’ll appear “soft on terror” or anti-military. It is the same unique paranoia about military issues that will likely keep a U.S. occupation force in Iraq until the Iraqis force our hand.

After the Petraeus smokescreen; but, before the Move On advert, Reuters commissioned an updated poll on Bush and Congress. Bush ended up with 29% approval – Congress with 11%. Both of these the lowest numbers since the beginning of Bush’s War.

Here’s a list of the Democrats who did Bush’s bidding. Someone buy each of them a wheelbarrow so they can stand up on their hind legs.

58 users responded in " Senate Democrats cave in to wing-nuts on MoveOn resolution "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 Misanthropic Scott said, on September 21st, 2007 at 8:21 am

I love it when our two parties can work together on something important like this. Anyone have a suggestion for someplace with a nice temperate climate, nationalized health care, and easy immigration laws?

# 2 Gregory said, on September 21st, 2007 at 8:22 am

Someone needs to start a sensible, viable, 3rd party. Start at the grass roots level. Screw the presidency – look for the local elections and eventually the state level.

Plus – get rid of the stupid Primary bollocks. It’s just a media circus and it doesn’t help any – it just fractures the party.

A 3rd party could be “left wing” without being crazy libertarian (again, usually in name only), or being center right like the dems. A little bit left of the dems and less authoritarian than either party would work well…

Plus – they’d need to have enough backbone to call out bullshit like this.

# 3 OhForTheLoveOf said, on September 21st, 2007 at 8:28 am

Move-On is a non-profit political action organization that exists to promote its own somewhat left of center agenda. It is no different that the NRA, The NAACP, The ACLU, The Southern Poverty Law Center, The Sierra Club, PETA, PFLAG, The Christian Coalition, or The People For The American Way….

In other words… They can say whatever the fuck they want about whatever issue they want with absolute impunity, as stated by the supreme law of this land.

And any Congressperson who wastes valuable time and money on this issue should be getting their resume together.

I’ll agree with anyone who says MoveOn’s add was essentially a bad pun and poor conceived from a political strategy angle… And I’ll support anyone’s right to be personally and vocally critical of MoveOn… But I say “Go Straight To Hell” to anyone who thinks there should be an official, government condemnation of a political action group in response to a political idea (and I happen to agree with this on) even if it is expressed as third rate joke.

# 4 Cinaedh said, on September 21st, 2007 at 8:31 am

As mere paid shills for wealthy special interest groups, politicians as a rule don’t really need to be particularly intelligent members of our species and they tend to prove this thesis each and every day.

Still, now and then they display their stupidity in such a spectacular manner, they take my breath away.

General Petraeus was personally selected by the President to present a September report on how the President’s most recent military plan is working out. What did anyone, anyone at all, think he was going to say about the President’s plan?

Senate Democrats, if you were thinking at all, what exactly were you thinking when you voted to condemn this ad? Get a grip! Adjust your priorities! Resign or something!

# 5 MikeN said, on September 21st, 2007 at 9:08 am

I guess now they’ll have a resolution on whether Ahmadenijad gets to come to America and visit the World Trade Center.
I guess then they can have a resolution about whether this blog adds to the public debate. Then a resolution about whether Congress is spending too much money.

# 6 Phillep said, on September 21st, 2007 at 9:18 am

ROTFLMAO

What he says is not in line with your beliefs, therefore he is a liar?

# 7 Sounds The Alarm said, on September 21st, 2007 at 9:33 am

Democrats are cowards – they have shown this over and over again.

# 8 Mr. Fusion said, on September 21st, 2007 at 9:42 am

#6, Philleep,

Yes, Petraeus is a liar.

Petraeus didn’t give a report to Congress before he testified. Instead he gave an oral “status”. That way Congress couldn’t challenge him on what he had written. The numbers he used disagree with the General Accounting Office’s report. The GAO backed up their numbers with references about where they came from. The Petraeus verbiage didn’t.

It is the piss poor General that chooses the political track over the safety and well being of his troops.

# 9 pedro said, on September 21st, 2007 at 9:43 am

#1 yeah, kuzcolan. All you have to do is hail to the king.

#4 said: “As mere paid shills for wealthy special interest groups,”

You’re talking about moveon, right?

#7 I give you that.

# 10 Mr. Fusion said, on September 21st, 2007 at 9:44 am

#6, And if you like, I’ll say it again.

Yes, Petraeus is a liar.

Well phuk you anyway, I said it again.

# 11 We The People said, on September 21st, 2007 at 9:45 am

We have the technology now to have a ‘We The People’ government system without the flailing failing bobble heads ‘leaders’ (over paid & lead us wrong) Just have just enough government to enforce the will of the people without tazing grandma for waving a flag…

# 12 BryanP said, on September 21st, 2007 at 9:48 am

That’s okay. You feel free to echo Moveon’s 4th grade level logic.

“General Betray-us is a poopyhead!”

# 13 ArianeB said, on September 21st, 2007 at 9:58 am

#3 I agree,
With Presidential apprval ratings in the mid 20s and Congressional approval ratings in the mid teens, it is clear the vast majority of Americans are disgusted by the “Washington” party as a whole. The primary issues we are dealing with that Washington seems to care less about are:
1. End American Imperialism in Iraq and elsewhere or We want our Army back!
2. Reverse the Patriot Act, warrantless wiretapping, and Military tribunals, or We want our rights back!
3. Major cuts in Immigration, Globalization, corporate welfare, or We want our good jobs back!
4. Healthcare reform and universal coverage (we dont care how), or We want to see a doctor without declaring bankruptcy!

While the details are debatable, these issues have wide support from rank and file members of BOTH parties and independents. Populists candidates like Republican Ron Paul and Democrat Dennis Kucinich agree on this stuff too, but their respective parties will not support them.

Where is Washington?

# 14 Cinaedh said, on September 21st, 2007 at 10:08 am

#6 Phillep

“What he says is not in line with your beliefs, therefore he is a liar?”

No, he said what he got selected and paid to say. Why is that so difficult to understand? What he actually believes is not material to this topic.

#9 pedro

“As mere paid shills for wealthy special interest groups,”

You’re talking about moveon, right?

I don’t know about anyone else but I was talking about Democrats and Republicans being shills so yes, of course that would include moveon, in addition to Republican organs.

Why is it so difficult for liberals, conservatives, neocons, etcetera to understand the concept of neutrality? They always assume you’re attacking them personally for something. Is this due to guilty thoughts or what?

Cripes!

# 15 GigG said, on September 21st, 2007 at 10:11 am

“Barack Obama and Joe Biden abstained.”

That’s the way to show leadership.

# 16 Greymoon said, on September 21st, 2007 at 10:35 am

The democrats in office failed you? Will wonders never cease. As I have said before the problem in the United States is that BOTH parties have failed the citizens they so proudly swore an oath to serve. Hillary is an attention seeking idiot as bad as Britney or Paris. Obama? Yeah right thats going to happen. He stands for as much as Hillary does, in other words himself. Any republican candidate could be switched with baboon and a voice recorder blathering on about ‘values and protection and paranoia and blah blah blah’ could be turned on. All they want is more consolidated federal power for their own greed, What happen to great Americans? What happen to Jeffersons and Franklins and Hancocks and Kennedys and Eisenhowers and Lincolns. What happened was the growth of the media and the sorry state that our schools are in.

# 17 ECA said, on September 21st, 2007 at 11:46 am

3-4….
Joke? Pun??

What was posted by MoveOn was Correct information…
AND NOW they are aiming AT MoveOn.. To close them down..

HERE is what has been said…

1. You can see the resolution text here and the roll call of who voted for it here. Absurdly, it claims that MoveOn “impugns the honor and integrity of … all the members of the United States Armed Force”—despite the fact that MoveOn includes hundreds of thousands of veterans and military family members, who’ve led our campaign to bring our troops home.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=2988&id=11268-8116653-j.AVdT&t=7

2. “Effort to Shift Course in Iraq Fails in Senate,” New York Times , September 19, 2007.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/20/washington/20cong.html?hp

3. You can read the ad text and why we ran it here:
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=2987&id=11268-8116653-j.AVdT&t=8

4. “McCain To MoveOn: Get Out,” CBS News, September 14, 2007.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=2973&id=11268-8116653-j.AVdT&t=9

5. “Poll: Most Say Bush Iraq Plan Falls Short,” CBS News, September 17, 2007.
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=2974&id=11268-8116653-j.AVdT&t=10

# 18 ECA said, on September 21st, 2007 at 11:53 am

http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?p=736

Dont under estimate WHAT this general said…And REMEMBER this is the 3-4th General in CHARGE…

# 19 MikeN said, on September 21st, 2007 at 12:20 pm

Repeat after me… There is no success possible in Iraq. All successes you may be hearing about are propaganda, plain and simple. George Bush cannot win in Iraq. This would be a disaster for the Democratic Party. Geroge Bush must lose in Iraq. America must lose in Iraq so lon as George Bush is President. There is no success possible in Iraq.

# 20 Gareth Thomas said, on September 21st, 2007 at 12:27 pm

#2 – Couldn’t Agree more, im British and don’t get me wrong, we have problems but what you have is ridiculus.

In the UK on Facebook there is a Group Jermy Clarkson for Priminister. Perhaps you could start one, Dvorak for President.

# 21 pedro said, on September 21st, 2007 at 12:37 pm

In the meantime, welcome the new strong currency: the Canadian dollar.

I hate to say it, but the US looks everyday like a country that was.

# 22 mxpwr03 said, on September 21st, 2007 at 1:04 pm

Haha Alternet and CommonDreams “Breaking news & Opinions for the Progressive (in name only) Community”, scroungen’ for opinion pieces. Closure votes are a bitch aren’t they Senator Reid.

“In the week just concluded, the Senate has debated a variety of measures related to the war in Iraq. The only measure which passed was one to denounce MoveOn for for its attack on General David Petraeus. By that measure, it was the most productive week the Senate has had on Iraq in months.”

# 23 OmarTheAlien said, on September 21st, 2007 at 2:07 pm

American leadership (huh?) has finally entered full disconnect stage from the electorate. November’s vote gave the Democrats a mandate to pull the plug on Iraq, and they’ve failed miserably. The media, shrill and irrelevant, scream on about TV, sex and the bizzare happenings in Tinseltown, while many of us shake our heads and mutter “Why bother?”
My thoughts?
Retain our representational form of government at the state level, disband the federal Congress, allow the Governors to appoint/elect the president, and shake down the federal monolith to where it exists strickly to maintain infrastructure. We are too big and diverse a people to be governed from a central location, and if we don’t change then there is gonna be one hell of a crash.

# 24 ECA said, on September 21st, 2007 at 2:41 pm

19,
there COULD be success, BUT, its all being done WRONG.

Pull the men out of the city.
Cordon off the diff sections, and LET THE AREAS police there OWN sections…THEY know who lives in there area.
SET our men OUTSIDE and monitor ALL incoming and OUT going…

Those militants INSIDE that want to fight the USA, have to come OUT to shoot at us. We control the roads IN/OUT of the city.
LET them have their civil war…LET THEM decide what they wish to do…

But even as a police action, this could take YEARS…probably LESS then the ‘No mans land’ of Korea and vietnam…but STILL along time.

# 25 Gary Marks said, on September 21st, 2007 at 3:30 pm

What are the criteria for determining which ads by political action organizations are worthy of Senate debate? Is it the size of the ad, the amount of money spent, or its message that makes it such an important item of business for the American people and their elected representatives?

I think #15 GigG actually would have been right on the money if he had not said the following with sarcasm…
“Barack Obama and Joe Biden abstained.
That’s the way to show leadership. “

Refusing to participate at these lower levels may indeed have been the wisest course of action.

# 26 OhForTheLoveOf said, on September 21st, 2007 at 3:50 pm

#15 – “Barack Obama and Joe Biden abstained.”

That’s the way to show leadership.

That’s a way to say, “you guys are scrapping in the mud. We aren’t coming down to your level.”

#16 – What happen to Jeffersons and Franklins bla bla bla…”

Jefferson and Franklin were statesmen and patriots and as founding fathers, they are worthy of great respect… but let’s quit holding these guys up like they were gods… They were capable men who answered the call to serve, not unlike many of those who serve today. And like everyone today, they were flawed and they also made mistakes.

I guarantee that if Jefferson and Franklin were alive today, Hannity and Limbaugh would call them traitors, and the press would be hounding Jefferson about his adulterous affair with a black housekeeper while Republicans would be moving to impeach Franklin amidst scandal over his almost 65 illegitimate children.

# 27 MikeN said, on September 21st, 2007 at 4:09 pm

According to Dan Rather’s new 70 million dollar lawsuit, even CBS caved into the Bush Administration, so why should Senate Democrats be any different? And of course, courage Dan Rather caved into CBS.

# 28 doug said, on September 21st, 2007 at 4:18 pm

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again – democracy just doesn’t work.

-Kent Brockman

# 29 Greg Allen said, on September 21st, 2007 at 5:47 pm

Sounds The Alarm >> #7 Democrats are cowards – they have shown this over and over again.

I think it took more than a little guts for MoveOn to call-out Petraeus for putting Whitehouse policy above the troops.

What have Republicans done that takes more guts than that?

# 30 Li said, on September 21st, 2007 at 6:11 pm

The behavior of many Dems, let alone Reps, in our legislature simply makes no sense, What could cause men to cast away their political power to a transparent fool, while utterly ignoring the will of the people, who are obviously going to cast them out for their performance? Is there something in the water? Or have they been so psychologically damaged by years of fear mongering, years of promises that Anthrax is the least of their troubles if they don’t submit, that they are suffering from some unique form of collective Stockholm syndrome? I don’t know, but I’m a little sorry that I can’t vote against any of those men who think it’s a good idea to violate their oath to the constitution by censuring the speech of the citizenry, no matter how vile they might think it to be. Obama might have had the right idea, in that this is not the Senate’s concern at all.

# 31 Independent Political Thought ? said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 12:00 am

These events should be the real test for the voters
Not stale tv debates
Not talk shows – leno or letterman
Not inverviewers like Charlie Rose who don’t follow through on questions asked
But the inability to take a stand when something is wrong and say so and not be intimidated by George Soros
If there is one thing about George Bush at least he takes a stand rather than all of these and even Hillary Clintons – change the subject don’t answer the question approach
As they say ” the silence is deafening”

# 32 joshua said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 12:48 am

Here’s a novel thing for me….Obama stated that he abstained because he felt that the Senate had no business having this vote, period. Biden also gave the almost same reason. They at least made a real stand. Obama has nothing to prove on the war issue….he may not be someone I would consider voting for, he at least has been consistent on the war….opposing it from the begining.

The General isn’t lying either. The only people that haven’t acknowledged that the surge is working are the die hard far left and Harry Reid. Unfortunatly, and the General mentioned this in his report, the political situation has not improved, and both the surge had to work and the goverment had to resolve important issues or it would all be for naught. If you can’t do the research to find the truth, that more and more of Iraq is becoming more and more safe(as opposed to a complete disaster), then you don’t want to find the truth.
What is looking more and more like the end to this part of the war is this…..there will be enough security and the Iraqi troops will be trained enough to hold off the al quida forces……after we leave, but the goverment will collapse completely and we will be stationing troops in the Kurdish areas to keep Iran from overrunning them. The country will split between Iranian controlled shia areas and Saudi controled sunni areas and the Kurds will declare independence.

# 33 bobbo said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 3:08 am

13–ArianeB, could it be “only” because I agree 100%, or is this in fact your best post to date?

I have seen/heard NO ONE comment (blog wise or national news) that the Betrayus Report to the Senate’s most famous line was completely flawed. The Exchange: “WARNER: Does that make America safer?

PETRAEUS: Sir, I don’t know actually. I have not sat down and sorted out in my own mind. What I have focused on and been riveted on is how to accomplish the mission of the Multinational Force in Iraq.”

Is America Safer? NO ONE should care what Petraeus answer would be, its not his job. YES, Petraues betrayed us. While his answer was quite honest and correct in every regard, he “should have” said “I’m a General. I do what I am ordered to do. Whether we are safer or not is a determination to be made and acted upon by the Congress==not your generals, and not the President. YOU fuckwits are in charge. If you were in my army, you’d be in the stockade.”

# 34 Rabble Rouser said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 4:42 am

This bill does NOTHING! It isn’t binding, nor is it a law. It is merely a statement that the Senate does not condone criticism of the militray. It does not name MoveOn.org, or any other group.

This is merely grandstanding by hypocritical Republicans. I understand why some Dems voted the way that they did. This legislation is MEANINGLESS!!! The Republicans who put this up for a vote, have criticized the military in the past themselves. Can you say Max Cleland?

This only helped MoveOn.org raise more much needed money, in people’s outrage with the Senate, which is really ill founded.

Time to move on now!

# 35 pedro said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 5:09 am

#32 you call that “excuse” a real stand?????

# 36 pedro said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 5:40 am

And I’m sorry for a lot of you, but you really have no idea what it’s really like when your military betray you and your country.

# 37 MikeN said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 6:56 am

Rabble Rouser, this is a bill, and it does criticize MoveOn. They cvouldn’t get support for a general criticism of the military supported by Democrats(watch what you say?) This is the defense appropriations bill. One question, suppose the resolution called for throwing MoveOn in jail, would you agree that the President should sign it and issue a signing statement that he will give the resolution the attention it deserves consistent with the Constitution?

# 38 Mr. Fusion said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 7:50 am

#37, MikeN,

Sheet, if brains were made of dynamite, you wouldn’t have enough to blow your own nose. You are too effen retarded to be a moran.

It was a non-binding resolution.

# 39 HMeyers said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 7:58 am

Free daily Bush whine!

What are half of you guys going to do when he’s gone? Sheesh.

I can barely stand the guy myself, but geez some of you just can’t get enough the man or something.

Why do you spend so much time thinking about him? You should be relieved he’s gonna be gone soon and focus on the positive.

# 40 Li said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 8:33 am

Oh, but it get’s better. Now, the Dems, against their interest and against public opinion, are going to give blanket immunity for all the lawbreakers in the Administration and the Tel-Co industry!

http://tinyurl.com/3dvkp2

Is there any rational explanation for this behavior? They are either willful traitors to the rule of law and their oath of office, or they are so terrified of defying the boy-king and his goons that they will do anything to meet their twisted, banana-republican needs. I have to stress, that this sort of blanket immunity at the AG’s secret discretion is something that even the most decrepit and lawless of states don’t codify into law! Not Stalin’s Russia, not Hitler’s Germany; do we really want to not only emulate these states in our foreign policy and the treatment of prisoners, but actually surpass them by making these activities lawful?! This is utter madness.

# 41 Mr. Fusion said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 8:40 am

#32, joshua,

Blowing smoke out your asshole again.

The General isn’t lying either. The only people that haven’t acknowledged that the surge is working are the die hard far left and Harry Reid.

So the General Accounting Office, an independent investigation arm of the Congress, is wrong too?

If you can’t do the research to find the truth, that more and more of Iraq is becoming more and more safe(as opposed to a complete disaster), then you don’t want to find the truth.

Tell that to all the dead and injured Americans in Iraq from the past week. Tell that to all the Iraqis killed “legally” by Blackwater. Tell that to all the dead Iraqis from sectarian violence. I don’t understand your measure of success, but mine doesn’t include killing everyone until there isn’t anyone left standing.

Did you ever stop to think one of the decreases in violence is the two million internally displaced Iraqis as well as the estimated 2+ million that have fled the country? From a country that has a population of less than 27 million. Whole neighborhoods have been ethnically changed, does that count as part of your success?
http://tinyurl.com/yoa7h3

The capital now had nearly one million displaced people for an estimated total population of four to five million, it said.
The report offered no explanation for the sudden jump in Baghdad residents leaving their homes, but it coincided with the sixth month of a vast US military offensive or “surge” to try to improve security there.

http://tinyurl.com/228svn

Tens of thousands of Iraqis that used to work for the Americans are knocking down doors begging us to help them, never to be answered. They can’t get refugee visas because they can’t get the required Iraqi Government documents. The State Department doesn’t anyone they can send out into the refugee camps to help the process and the Iraqis can’t leave the camps through fear.
http://tinyurl.com/26goxe

But I really like that “If you can’t do the research …” line. Coming from you??? Sheet, you would have been a shoe-in for finalist on Last Comic Standing with that line. Listening to the Right Wing Nut Neo-con Evangelical Conservative Republican Radio-head Shut-in bobble heads isn’t research. Except for the chicken hawk crowd.

Petraeus lied to Congress. Neither he nor any of those “Intelligence Reports” over the past two months have any cite-able statistics in them. He knew his numbers do not match the researched and verifiable numbers from the UN and GAO. That makes it a deliberate lie.

# 42 mxpwr03 said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 9:17 am

#41 – Frederick W. Kagan on the GAO report:

“The GAO notes against these briefs that overall attacks on civilians have remained constant (although its data appear to end in July), but its explanation for its unwillingness to accept the figures of the U.S. command is nothing short of bizarre: ‘GAO cannot determine whether sectarian violence in Iraq has been reduced because measuring such violence requires understanding the perpetrator’s intent, which may not be known.” As a statement of epistemology, this sentence is correct and worth meditating on. As the basis for denying that there has been a reduction in sectarian attacks it is ludicrous.’”

That GAO report was also a work of political maneuvering by anti-war politicians in the Congress, just as much as General Petraeus’ “White House Approved” report helped the advocates of the Baghdad Security Operation. So please, citing one report that was the result of anti-war politics to counter another “politically-biased” report does not prove you correct. If anything the two reports leave room for future study, analysis, and debate but making a claim of that someone “lied” is in fact, ludicrous.

And before you ask why the GAO report is politically biased, a work from William Kristol:

“The Democratic Congress ensured that the report would deliver negative “grades” for the Iraqi government by asking the GAO to evaluate whether or not the benchmarks have been met now–just two months after the major combat operations of the surge began. For the report from the White House, Congress asked the administration to detail if the Iraqis are making “sufficient progress.” But Congress asked the GAO, by contrast, to report if the Iraqis had “completed” the benchmarks. This ridiculous standard was a Congressional trap that forced the GAO to waste time and taxpayer money to come out with a pre-ordained and meaningless judgment, since no one ever promised or expected that the Iraqis would have met the benchmarks by now. And the GAO report doesn’t really shed light on the key question: Are the Iraqis making progress?” And nor do you, Mr. Fusion.

# 43 pedro said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 9:41 am

Numbers from the UN, that’s funny. Is Ahmedinahnut the new UN spokerperson for UN statistics on Iraq?

# 44 Gary Marks said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 11:11 am

Question: When is progress not really progress?

Answer: When that progress is a result of the increased neighborhood segregation (both voluntary and forced) and especially from the erection of high concrete barriers restricting movement and reducing interaction along sectarian lines. Baghdad is becoming a city of barriers that increasingly reflect sectarian division, yet these people will have to somehow police and govern themselves as we draw down troop levels.

Certain approaches can distort statistical measures of violence into showing an improved situation. With enough segregation and barriers, sectarian violence can even become nonexistent. Will that be an acceptable sign of progress?

Question: Will we ever be able to declare victory and get completely out of Iraq?

Answer: No, because the point of our incursion was to maintain an increased military presence in this strategic energy producing region, and we’ve already built some lovely bases in Iraq. Complete success in terms of a peaceful, self-governing Iraq with no American presence would be a disaster of epic proportions. Fortunately, that scenario isn’t anywhere on the horizon.

# 45 Mr. Fusion said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 12:59 pm

#42, chknhwk03

So how is bootcamp treating you? Did you volunteer for overseas yet?

Your post is typical crap. Again.

I have no idea, nor do I really care, who the eff Fredrick Kragen is. I assume he is some talking head. In which case, that makes his comments, which you have given us, equal crap. You are only quoting someone’s opinion, NOT FACTS. His opinions are no more relevant than if I quoted my wife, Mark Twain, or Keith Oberman.

Sheet, no wonder you joined the Army instead of continuing college. You don’t even know the basics of writing an essay.

William Kristol I have heard of. I do know he is a columnist. That means he gets paid to shoot off his mouth. It doesn’t mean he has to be correct. So what does our bootcamp guy do? He quotes someone else’s opinion then holds it up as fact. Isn’t Kristol also one of those paid Fox Spews regulars? Yes, yes, I know some people after their frontal lobotomies tend to worship such shitheads as troofers. Fox, Spews, like most conservatives, have a history of inventing crap to serve their own purpose.

Try this fact, bootcamp boy (actually I’m proud you enlisted)

GAO is an independent, nonpartisan, professional services agency in the
legislative branch of the federal government. Commonly known as the
“audit and investigative arm of the Congress” or the “congressional
watchdog,” we examine how taxpayer dollars are spent and advise
lawmakers and agency heads on ways to make government work better.

Our mission is to support the Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and ensure the
accountability of the federal government for the benefit of the
American people. We accomplish our mission by providing reliable
information and informed analysis to the Congress, federal agencies,
and the public, and we recommend improvements, when appropriate, on a
wide variety of issues. Three core values–accountability, integrity,
and reliability–form the basis for all of our work, regardless of its
origin.

http://www.gao.gov/htext/d07421sp.html
Then, to top off your obvious poor writing skills, your last paragraph is attributed to Kristol. Yet it appears to bounce about from quote to comment without clarity or distinction. So which is it? Did you add to Kristol or is he just that poor a writer too? If you get paid to write, you should learn the basics.
I’ve asked you before, if you insist on quoting someone or using a fact, produce citations. That means telling us where you got the information from. On the ‘net, that also means supplying a link instead of copying out the published source. Merely saying “Joe Blow wrote…” does not cut it. If you can copy and paste then you should also be capable of copying the URL. (NOTE, please use Tiny URL for long addresses) Your comments can’t be fact checked unless you do that, which just might be your intent.

# 46 Mr. Fusion said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 1:05 pm

RE: #45, Sorry, when I pasted that quote into my word processor I didn’t realize it was already formatted.

# 47 mxpwr03 said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 1:05 pm

Nice rebuttal.

# 48 Gary Marks said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 1:40 pm

Mr. Fusion, your limited knowledge of William Kristol only scratches the surface. He’s very well known in neocon circles not only as editor of The Weekly Standard, but also as chairman and co-founder of the “Project for the New American Century” (the neocon organization which earlier urged Bill Clinton to overthrow Saddam Hussein). Other prominent members of that illustrious organization include Cheney, Wolfowitz, and Rumsfeld. And calling Kristol a neocon is nothing he wouldn’t call himself, as one of the books he once co-edited was The Neoconservative Imagination.

Kristol is certainly not your typical impartial observer, but I’ll agree on one point concerning the GAO. No matter how impartial they are, it certainly seems possible for a GAO hamstrung by restrictive reporting guidelines (defined by Congress) to put out a one-sided report. I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss that possibility without more of the tedious details, and hopefully from a less biased source than Kristol.

# 49 Mr. Fusion said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 1:48 pm

#47,

And thought through too. Plus, my own opinions except where properly attributed (cited).

# 50 Mr. Fusion said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 1:57 pm

#48, Gary,

The GAO does their own reporting. When they can’t report, they acknowledge that fact as they did several times after being blocked by the Bush Administration on previous investigations. In this case they pointed out the Pentagon refused to share their numbers or cooperate.

The fact remains however, the GAO investigated. Even if biased, they wrote a report and documented all their findings for all the world to see and criticize. General Patraeous didn’t write a report and his statistics and conclusions remain undocumented. On just that point, who would you believe?

Discounting the GAO because you disagree with their conclusion is shooting the messenger because you don’t approve of the messege. A bullshit attribute of the right.

# 51 tallwookie said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 2:41 pm

wow – some of yall have some, what appears to be anyway, really strong feelings about this.

Me? I dont care at all. If someone wants to pay me to care, I’ll take up a sign & start doing my fair share of protesting… but until then i’m apathetic about this whole situation

# 52 MikeN said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 4:07 pm

The Senate website lists this as an amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill.

# 53 joshua said, on September 22nd, 2007 at 4:33 pm

Thats not smoke from my ass Fussy…..thats blow back from your breath when kissing my ass.

The GAO report is not only shown to be totally hamstrung by not only Kristol, but Gerald Baker of the London Times and others. Congress set the rules for the report and then had the report done BEFORE the surge was even complete, they didn’t interview anyone in any position of knowledge on the goals, one way or another.

I don’t mind supporting things I don’t agree with, if they are or may achieve the desired goals. Unlike you Fussbutt, I want to see American soldiers home, AND Iraq have the chance to survive as a nation(even if they really aren’t) if that is what they want. Maybe Canadians have lived to long under the protection of a stronger neighbor to understand how they as well as we will be affected by a collapse of American military abilities in the world of today.

You might expand that limited, ideologue mind of yours by reading and paying attention to ALL sides of the issues, and not just your left wing friends at Moveon and the DailyKos.

# 54 Mr. Fusion said, on September 23rd, 2007 at 3:32 am

#53, joshua,

Great reply. Not one word of actual rebuttal. Just the mention that some right wing nuts have disagreed with the GAO report. Look armpit, that DOES NOT mean the report is wrong, poorly written, or even inconclusive. It means some people don’t like the message.

In your whole post, you didn’t offer up one piece of evidence that anything in the GAO report is incorrect. Like, who the fuck is Gerald Baker? Besides his mother, does anyone else care. After Murdoch bought the London Times , it has become just another right wing rag with zero credibility. Yet there you are joshua, suggesting some writer with the Times wrote or said something so therefore they are right and the GAO is wrong. Divine inspiration ???

If the GAO report is wrong, then point out where they are wrong and what is the truth. Don’t quote other fucking brainless idiots as references. YOU are disputing the report, find some documented facts.

Congress set the rules for the report and then had the report done BEFORE the surge was even complete, they didn’t interview anyone in any position of knowledge on the goals, one way or another.

That is not based upon fact but the Fox Spews crap. Congressional Members ask the GAO to investigate a question. The GAO sets the technique and assigns the investigators, not Congress. There are no “rules” for the report, again more Fox Spews discrediting crap.

BTW, there are no “goals” and there is no “surge” time line. This Administration has no idea of what or where they are or doing as far as Iraq is concerned. The Administration did not cooperate with the report nor did the Pentagon so don’t blame the GAO because there is no one knowledgeable on the goals.

And to think, you claimed to have attended college. Jesus H. Christ on a pogo stick with a smile on his face. Didn’t you learn the basics of writing? Then you went to Law School on top of that?!?!?! You’re just a fucken wannabe. Are you and the chknhwk03 related?

# 55 MikeN said, on September 23rd, 2007 at 6:21 am

You throw out lots of criticisms, but then you had no idea that this was part of the Defense Appropriations bill.

# 56 Mr. Fusion said, on September 23rd, 2007 at 7:52 am

#55, Mike N,

So who the phuk cares??? If you want to suggest it is part of the expropriations bill then post a link.

# 57 MikeN said, on September 23rd, 2007 at 7:54 am

Hey, how come the New York Times is handing out favors to left-wing groups? They got an $80,000 discount on their ad, then covered it up by giving Giuliani the same rate. I say the FEC should investigate this donation.

# 58 Gary Marks said, on September 23rd, 2007 at 11:02 am

MikeN, maybe the Senator who introduced this amendment can get the same $80,000 discount when he prints a full page apology for having wasted Senate time to repudiate a specific act of free speech by a citizens organization.

Also, it may actually be you who is confused on the “facts” that you were chastising Señor Fusion for his ignorance of. Senator Cornyn (R-Texas) introduced this both as Senate Resolution 315, and as Amendment SA 2808 to H.R. 3074. And that appropriations bill to which Cornyn tried to attach this amendment was for Transportation, H.U.D., and related agencies, not defense as you characterized it. The amendment was struck down on a point of order, and only the resolution survived to make the news and discussion circles.

Let me quote from Cornyn’s resolution:
“Whereas a recent attack through a full-page advertisement in the New York Times by the liberal activist group, Moveon.org, impugns the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all the members of the United States Armed Forces…“ (emphasis mine)

Did I misread the ad? Did it really impugn the integrity of all members of the U.S. Armed Forces, or is Cornyn just grossly distorting reality for partisan political gain? The amendment was ruled “not germane” on a point of order raised by the bill’s Democrat manager, Senator Murray. Not germane sounds like a bit of an understatement. This Cornyn clown is a waste of perfectly good oxygen.

So often I hear variations of the old saying, “I don’t agree with what you say, but I defend your right to say it.” That adage just died at the hands of the Senate Republicans and the spineless Democrats whom they managed to drag with them. They don’t seem to be great defenders of free speech.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!