• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

"Betray US" amendment passes

http://www.senate.gov/legislat...0&session=1&vote=00344

To express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces.

All 25 Senators voting Nay to this amendment were Democrats including Clinton, Dodd, Reid, Durbin, and Kerry. It's sad commentary that they refuse to condemn the ad. I could understand the far-lefties voting Nay but here are Democratic party leaders still pandering to the fringe. Ridiculous.
 
You are the fringe, ideologically. That's not entirely measured by polls/public opinion.

The ad was excellent in pointing out some of the less known facts about Patraeus. You object to it out of ideology, not accuracy.
 
Originally posted by: Craig234
You are the fringe, ideologically. That's not entirely measured by polls/public opinion.

The ad was excellent in pointing out some of the less known facts about Patraeus. You object to it out of ideology, not accuracy.

Smearing a 4 Star and war hero in the NY Times is about as low as you can get. The man is a career officer in the US military. If MoveOn wants to smear politicians and the like so be it, but they stooped to a new low here.
 
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Originally posted by: Craig234
You are the fringe, ideologically. That's not entirely measured by polls/public opinion.

The ad was excellent in pointing out some of the less known facts about Patraeus. You object to it out of ideology, not accuracy.

Smearing a 4 Star and war hero in the NY Times is about as low as you can get. The man is a career officer in the US military. If MoveOn wants to smear politicians and the like so be it, but they stooped to a new low here.

Why/How is he a war hero? Seriously, people cheapen the word "hero" too much. And, believe me, you can get quite lower than that.
 
Then how about congress does the same for a certain triple amputee, Vietnam veteran who served in the Senate that was compared to Osama Bin Laden.



 
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Originally posted by: Craig234
You are the fringe, ideologically. That's not entirely measured by polls/public opinion.

The ad was excellent in pointing out some of the less known facts about Patraeus. You object to it out of ideology, not accuracy.

Smearing a 4 Star and war hero in the NY Times is about as low as you can get. The man is a career officer in the US military. If MoveOn wants to smear politicians and the like so be it, but they stooped to a new low here.

War hero? Put down the Koolaid. :roll:
 
Originally posted by: michaels
These same Dems were praising the guy when he took over
Exactly. Bush did not just place Gen. Petraeus in this position. These same Senators unanimously approved him to do this job. Yet when he's smeared by some fringe left-wing group they don't even have the courage to step up and condemn the slur.
 
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: michaels
These same Dems were praising the guy when he took over
Exactly. Bush did not just place Gen. Petraeus in this position. These same Senators unanimously approved him to do this job. Yet when he's smeared by some fringe left-wing group they don't even have the courage to step up and condemn the slur.

They can't because then the donations will stop coming in.
 
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: michaels
These same Dems were praising the guy when he took over
Exactly. Bush did not just place Gen. Petraeus in this position. These same Senators unanimously approved him to do this job. Yet when he's smeared by some fringe left-wing group they don't even have the courage to step up and condemn the slur.

They can't because then the donations will stop coming in.
Soros has billions. Surely he can come up with some kind of scam to stuff their pockets full of donations? Seems to be the fashion among some Democrats today.
 
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: michaels
These same Dems were praising the guy when he took over
Exactly. Bush did not just place Gen. Petraeus in this position. These same Senators unanimously approved him to do this job. Yet when he's smeared by some fringe left-wing group they don't even have the courage to step up and condemn the slur.

They can't because then the donations will stop coming in.
Soros has billions. Surely he can come up with some kind of scam to stuff their pockets full of donations? Seems to be the fashion among some Democrats today.
And wraping your BS around a flag seems to be in fashion with you fringe Right Wingers these days.

Before you start up with your mock indignation why don't you try to find out why they voted against it instead of doing your best impression of Sean Hannity.

 
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: michaels
These same Dems were praising the guy when he took over
Exactly. Bush did not just place Gen. Petraeus in this position. These same Senators unanimously approved him to do this job. Yet when he's smeared by some fringe left-wing group they don't even have the courage to step up and condemn the slur.

They can't because then the donations will stop coming in.

Right, b/c then the donors will give it to....who?
 
Don?t they have better things to do there is a war going on and the country is going bankrupt, that?s why their approval rating is 11%.
 
Par for the course in Washington to feign fake outrage. This would be comedic if there wasn't a useless war going on.

EDIT: While they're at it, why don't they pass a resolution condemning John Doe of Canada for criticising General Petreaus.
 
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
http://www.senate.gov/legislat...0&session=1&vote=00344

To express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces.

All 25 Senators voting Nay to this amendment were Democrats including Clinton, Dodd, Reid, Durbin, and Kerry. It's sad commentary that they refuse to condemn the ad. I could understand the far-lefties voting Nay but here are Democratic party leaders still pandering to the fringe. Ridiculous.

Might as well start trotting out the fvcking freedom fries and freedom cabbage.
ffs stfu.
 
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: michaels
These same Dems were praising the guy when he took over
Exactly. Bush did not just place Gen. Petraeus in this position. These same Senators unanimously approved him to do this job. Yet when he's smeared by some fringe left-wing group they don't even have the courage to step up and condemn the slur.

They can't because then the donations will stop coming in.
Soros has billions. Surely he can come up with some kind of scam to stuff their pockets full of donations? Seems to be the fashion among some Democrats today.
And wraping your BS around a flag seems to be in fashion with you fringe Right Wingers these days.

Before you start up with your mock indignation why don't you try to find out why they voted against it instead of doing your best impression of Sean Hannity.
Let me guess? They voted against it because those 25 Democrats are completely against political ploys and grandstanding with every fiber of their being?

Erm, aren't they many of the very same Democrats that were involved in the troop funding political ploy and grandstanding back in the Spring of this year?

I do believe they were.
 
Originally posted by: Taejin
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
http://www.senate.gov/legislat...0&session=1&vote=00344

To express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces.

All 25 Senators voting Nay to this amendment were Democrats including Clinton, Dodd, Reid, Durbin, and Kerry. It's sad commentary that they refuse to condemn the ad. I could understand the far-lefties voting Nay but here are Democratic party leaders still pandering to the fringe. Ridiculous.

Might as well start trotting out the fvcking freedom fries and freedom cabbage.
ffs stfu.
If you don't like it, click the back button and that way you won't end up making an utterly useless contribution to this thread.

Thanks.
 
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: michaels
These same Dems were praising the guy when he took over
Exactly. Bush did not just place Gen. Petraeus in this position. These same Senators unanimously approved him to do this job. Yet when he's smeared by some fringe left-wing group they don't even have the courage to step up and condemn the slur.

They can't because then the donations will stop coming in.
Soros has billions. Surely he can come up with some kind of scam to stuff their pockets full of donations? Seems to be the fashion among some Democrats today.
And wraping your BS around a flag seems to be in fashion with you fringe Right Wingers these days.

Before you start up with your mock indignation why don't you try to find out why they voted against it instead of doing your best impression of Sean Hannity.
Let me guess? They voted against it because those 25 Democrats are completely against political ploys and grandstanding with every fiber of their being?

Erm, aren't they many of the very same Democrats that were involved in the troop funding political ploy and grandstanding back in the Spring of this year?

I do believe they were.

Aren't you one that complained about Congress wasting time on meaningless gestures? I do believe you were.
 
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: michaels
These same Dems were praising the guy when he took over
Exactly. Bush did not just place Gen. Petraeus in this position. These same Senators unanimously approved him to do this job. Yet when he's smeared by some fringe left-wing group they don't even have the courage to step up and condemn the slur.

They can't because then the donations will stop coming in.
Soros has billions. Surely he can come up with some kind of scam to stuff their pockets full of donations? Seems to be the fashion among some Democrats today.
And wraping your BS around a flag seems to be in fashion with you fringe Right Wingers these days.

Before you start up with your mock indignation why don't you try to find out why they voted against it instead of doing your best impression of Sean Hannity.
Let me guess? They voted against it because those 25 Democrats are completely against political ploys and grandstanding with every fiber of their being?

Erm, aren't they many of the very same Democrats that were involved in the troop funding political ploy and grandstanding back in the Spring of this year?

I do believe they were.

Stop being so bias. The whole amendment was a political sideshow, a distraction from the real issue of a useless war that should not have taken place in the first place. If Democrats had done a similar political grandstanding, you'd attack them for grandstanding. Try to be a bit impartial here on out.
 
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Sinsear
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: michaels
These same Dems were praising the guy when he took over
Exactly. Bush did not just place Gen. Petraeus in this position. These same Senators unanimously approved him to do this job. Yet when he's smeared by some fringe left-wing group they don't even have the courage to step up and condemn the slur.

They can't because then the donations will stop coming in.
Soros has billions. Surely he can come up with some kind of scam to stuff their pockets full of donations? Seems to be the fashion among some Democrats today.
And wraping your BS around a flag seems to be in fashion with you fringe Right Wingers these days.

Before you start up with your mock indignation why don't you try to find out why they voted against it instead of doing your best impression of Sean Hannity.
Let me guess? They voted against it because those 25 Democrats are completely against political ploys and grandstanding with every fiber of their being?

Erm, aren't they many of the very same Democrats that were involved in the troop funding political ploy and grandstanding back in the Spring of this year?

I do believe they were.

Stop being so bias. The whole amendment was a political sideshow, a distraction from the real issue of a useless war that should not have taken place in the first place. If Democrats had done a similar political grandstanding, you'd attack them for grandstanding. Try to be a bit impartial here on out.
Enough with the pot/kettle remarks in here. You don't have a leg to stand on when speaking about the bias of other members in here.
 
All 25 Senators voting Nay to this amendment were Democrats including Clinton, Dodd, Reid, Durbin, and Kerry. It's sad commentary that they refuse to condemn the ad. I could understand the far-lefties voting Nay but here are Democratic party leaders still pandering to the fringe. Ridiculous.

do we really need to legislate this kind of shit?

funny how one man's "pandering to the fringe" is another "standing their ground to not support meaningless political theater"
 
The more the Rs talk about how bad it is, the more they say the words Betray Us in conjunction with Petraeus name.

Betray Us is more familiar to peoples ears. Said often enough, we hear Petraeus' name and we associate Betray Us.

By talking about it, the media reinforces the message even when they slam Move On for placing the ad.

Go ahead, ask a friend or colleague what the first thing that pops into their head when they hear the work Petraeus is...

If "they" thought that the moveon.org ad was reprehensible, maybe they should have avoided savaging John Kerry, Max Cleland, and Jack Murtha. I personally find their reaction to being on the receiving end of the kind of crap "they" put out in the 2004 election hilarious.

Then we have - Freedom's Watch: Ari Fleischer's new Smear Site

Since the Moveon.org ad, we're hearing from Ari Fleischer again, with his robotic pro-Bush, pro-War drivel. Sadly, the "Betray Us" ad gave the Republicans exactly what they were looking for, a diversion from the facts on the ground. Strong sentiment, bad timing.

But right now Ari's got a soapbox. Like we're going to heed the words of a disgraced spokesman for a failed and incompetent president? Come on, Ari, you're a joke, pontificating against name-calling and smears?

Where were you when Rove was running around telling the world John Kerry looked "Awfully French"? What does that mean, anyway? Where were you when they swift-boated Kerry?

Ari's back, along with other Swiftboaters. Here's a guy who helped out an undercover CIA agent, then slipped out the back door, unscathed.

One thing's for certain: in fighting an enemy, you do not take directions from a leadership that's been taken hostage.







 
Moveon.org may have taken some cheapshots at Patraeus but they have a free speech right to question his logic and strategy. Dressing Patraeus up as a sacred cow won't help a damn thing either. If GWB refused to step up to the plate and condemn the swift boats veterans for the truth smears against John Kerry, why should the Republicans expect to have any right to sacred cows?

In the grand scheme of things, the moveon.org ad will either stand the test of time by correctly predicting events or Patraeus will prove moveon.org wrong. And if Patraeus gets replaced by another faired haired boy, it will be because his strategy for Iraq failed and not because moveon.org questioned his strategy.

The other thing to note is that Patraeus may be the best available military man, but the military can only do so much in solving what amounts to a political problem GWB needs to be far more engaged in.

But as old Harry said----if you can't stand the heat stay out of the kitchen. And if someone else predicts failure, prove them wrong.
 
Back
Top