"Can you take a few minutes to write a letter-to-the editor reminding folks that the "surge" didn't work -- and that the responsible thing to do is bring our troops home?"

Moveon.org instructions 091107.0
http://video1.washingtontimes.com/fishwrap/2007/09/moveonorg_softening_petraeus_a_1.html

Hugh, don't know what your point is. No matter who recommends it, we all need to continue to write letters pointing out the errors of this war and most of the "good news".

However, I have been writing letters, signing petitions, talking to people, blogging, hanging ribbons in memory of those lost in Iraq, etc. All I have accomplished is making myself feel that I have done what I can. It is very discouraging to be so helpless in our democracy. I feel as powerless as the people of Saudi Arabia (our great ally who makes a mockery of democracy and freedom in the Middle East)

`

Carol,
As always, good to see your post!

It has become very apparent that the 24-26% of Americans who walk lockstep with Bush, have no comprehension of the problem.
The real crime is when a sitting President shoves all responsibility off on a military leader---for the PRESIDENT'S failed policy!!! The same ones who continually support Bush, do not even realize how the President is causing long term harm to our military--both physically and in the court of public opinion.

`

Hey folks,

Is it possible to discuss this without calling everyone who opposes you a "liar" (see the letter) or implying that they are effectively puppets (post by hugh)?

Why should anyone be ashamed of being associated with Moveon.org?

Hugh:

You would be in a better position to explain why a link to moveon.org's call for letter writing was relevant, as you introduced this.

Dave,

You come off as biased by who you choose to call out.

"The real crime is when a sitting President shoves all responsibility off on a military leader....."

Crime? That's overstepping it a bit.

Although I see what you are saying, TLC, we also have a President who could not please you no matter what he did. Quite frankly, the media have been unrelenting on Bush since the first few weeks of him taking office. It has never ceased. The democrats and the media have worked lockstep for the most part to discredit, embarrass, and paint our President in the worst matter possible.

For all the stupid things that have been said such as "Mission Accomplished", I can point to a 'scandal' of the day that was overblown and later proved to be fabricated or, at best, indulged in with no concern about the evidence. (can anyone say Dan Rather?)

Fact is, I think most folks don't know who to believe anymore. You've got Bush handpicking Generals to say what he believes, you've got democrats with a more than happy media to paint whatever picture they desire.

Who knows what the truth is anymore? You can point to 10 websites that show the exact opposite of what my 10 websites say. And they all seem credible. How do you fact check when the facts are written by biased people?

I agree that stay the course is not the answer. However, I also know that no matter WHAT Bush decides to do, there's a good percentage of folks who just aren't going to like it. There's another percentage of folks who are going to sway in the wind with whatever the media spoonfeeds them.

Okay, I've ranted enough for one time.

Hugh:

My take is Move-On is simply playing the same ugly game the Republican party invented a decade ago ... while the Democrats, to their loss, are starting to play it too.

Am I "ashamed"? That's maybe the correct word - I cringe at all the partisan dividing BS we're constantly subject to, but the Republicans have MASTERED the game .. and frankly you are one who seems to enjoy this splintering so "Your Team" can win, right or wrong for America, 'cause well hell you're smarter than the rest of us anyway.

A person who bought into the "surge" and loves to talk about it as if it were a good thing is, well... dumb.

Good Lord, it's bad enough that our political debate has been reduced to worthless sound-bites. But to do the same with military strategy?!?

It only indicates that much more that this war has been waged not for the greater good, but for the political advantage of a few. The "surge" was propaganda. That's all it ever was. And we've been fools to even tolerate it as serious discussion.

Proof the Republicans have MASTERED the game ?

Well consider the 2004 national elections, when a virtual flood of Swift Boat Ads and "Flip Flop" rhetoric derailed an admittedly terrible candidate.

Meanwhile "Stay the Course" was the call of the day, when it was PLAIN to all who looked that things were rapidly getting worst in Iraq. We could have put this whole thing to bed in 2005 had we simply PAID ATTENTION and in fact Changed Course .. as the Bushy surge finally did - perhaps too little too late - but due to the Mastery of the Game .. America is currently in a no win pickle jar.

You want hate, there it is. Those bastards played with you and I and here you are defending them. Sorry - I'm pissed.

Nit:

How is calling out both the letter writer for using the term liar and hugh for implying that her letter was spawned by moveon.org (or anybody else for that matter) biased?

The point of the post, which could have been made clearer, was that we won't get very far if we start every discussion by assuming that EVERYONE who disagrees with us is a liar, has some other character flaw, or suffers from evil motivations.

CK - we'll have to agree to disagree. While one of the early ones to challange going into Iraq, I'm actually OK with the surge .. although it should have happened in 2003 after we were no longer "greeted with flowers", and even more clearly when Chalabi was rebuked - a clear indication that out one and only plan was being rejected by the Iraqi people, so we'd better clamp-down early on the then rising Insergency (the Adminstration call then Terrorists, you know, the fight 'en there crap), and MOST certainly after the Golden Dome Mosque was bombed or ... Jesus how blind can the average American be.

Of course, NOW, after a three year delay arguing over "Timelines" we send in a "Surge" that by definition IS a "Timeline" ... and this administration that for three years so dissed the Military now all of a sudden wants to stop "Managing the War from Congress" (I guess they figured if Rummy can't "Managing the War" then neither than The Wide Eyed Queen.

Hum, it does seem as though someone is sending out talking points for letters to the editors. Compare these two paragraphs in two different letters published recently by the News-Record. Can we have some letters that are at least original material?

Robert Ouradnik, Greensboro
Posted by News & Record on September 18, 2007 3:00 AM

"For example, deaths by car bombs don't count. Assassinations were included if the shot was to the back of the head, not to the front."

Lee Baker. Greensboro
Posted by News & Record on September 20, 2007 3:00 AM | Permalink

"For example, deaths by car bombs don't count. Assassinations only count if you're shot in the front of the head, not in the back."

I became a "member" of Moveon when I signed a petition. Now I get tons of emails from them. I agree with some, think some are too much. I am not ashamed or proud...just am.

I have seen many people who treat being a Republican or a Democrat as a religious experience...you must have faith and believe all that is said by your party, facts be damned. Really scary to me.

I don't have faith in or believe anything that comes from our current administration. Their party affiliation has nothing to do with it. I think they are evil and manipulative and very self serving. JDR continues to be kind to Bush. If he is truly doing what he beleives is right, then I think he truly is very uninformed and not very intelligent. Neither do I think the Democrats in office are saints or truly looking out for what is good for America. Getting and staying elected is the name of the game.

ORR:

Those phrases (which do not accurately reflect the original Washington Post report) have been repeated over and over. Today's letter writing IS using phrasing that is identical to portions of the moveon.org ad: "Yet the General claims a reduction in violence. That’s because, according to the New York Times, the Pentagon has adopted a bizarre formula for keeping tabs on violence. For example, deaths by car bombs don’t count. The Washington Post reported that assassinations only count if you're shot in the back of the head -- not the front."

However, the same phrases have since been echoed and even appear on the GOP's web-site in two rebuttal pages.

Given the repetition that we see on the blogs each day (e.g., I'm still waiting statements about the "defeatocrats" being "invested in failure" to appear), it's not surprising to see it on the LTTE page.

ORR,

To carry on Daves point since General P generally used stats to make his case it seems that evidence that he was cooking the books would be appropriate to bring up.

Or is it only acceptable if Cheney cooks the books? ('-)

Rufus,

I guess that's kind of my point. What evidence would they use to say he's cooking the books? He's provided 'evidence'. Is somebody else's 'evidence' going to be any more objective?

Is there even such a thing as objectivity any more? If there is, it's hiding itself pretty well.

Dave,

I misread what you said. My apologies. In my defense, however, anytime someone mentions name-callings and insults and omits THE LIBERAL CONSERVATIVE from the sentence, I automatically think something is going on. I guess some things just go without saying, though. Again, after reviewing what you said, I can see no bias.

I like the title given to this LTTE (knowing that it is done so by the editorial staff)!

I find it creative.

As for the comments, well in some cases I agree. In others I disagree. I guess I am just like the others who have posted.

Shalom

NP,

I think General P. did an OK job & was reasonably honest but he was critiquing his own work so I think some skepticism is healthy. I think it's fair to say he spent a fair amount of his time putting lipstick on a pig. We should bear in mind he is a soldier & a commander & it is his job to say his people are doing a great job and his great temptation to say that he is doing a great job. That's why it is inappropriate to put so much store in what he says. There should be an independent (I know: who is independent?) authority do an evaluation of "progress". Perhaps the GAO.

On objectivity, I'm probably the only objective person I know.

Of course I could be biased on this opinion.

The defeatocrats were calling General Petraeus a liar even before he began to speak. It didn't matter what he had to say, they were determined to discredit him from the get-go. Their minds were made up. Nothing he could have said would have pleased them unless he vowed to surrender immediately and see to it that Bush was tried for war crimes, preferably before the UN where Mahmoud Ahmadinejad could sit on the court.

Komrade Tom Lantos (D Kalifornia) told the General that what ever he had to say he 'deed not buy eet'...even before Petraeus said one word.

The last thing they want to hear at this point is ANY good news from Iraq. Of course if Hussein Obama, Hillary, or both are successful in their bid for the wh, good news will be welcomed with open arms by our lamestream media. We will read and hear of the number of school children have started attending classes, or how smooth the Iraqi elections are going, or how many households now have electricity and running water.
Hell, we may even hear of a good deed or two being done by our *gasp* military.

"We will read and hear of the number of school children have started attending classes, or how smooth the Iraqi elections are going, or how many households now have electricity and running water."

.. kinda like we heard about Aghanistan, huh?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296349,00.html

btw - Lawrence Wright's "incredible, 2006 Pulitzer Prize-winning book, 'The Looming Tower' " .. referenced in this FOX NEWS Report .. is highly recommended by little-ol'-me.

We Report, You Decide

And what would the correlation be between the fox news link about Afghanistan and the subject at hand...General Petraeus' testimony before congress?

Nothing whatsoever.

`

Nit,

As far as the media goes, they have been terrible during this entire war fiasco! We all thought maybe they had gotten their spines back after Katrina, but now we see the same "lazy" coverage of an obviously corrupt administration.

Where was the Sam Donaldson or Dan Rather types asking the tough questions of the President? Absent, because they cozied up too much to the administration to do their jobs properly.

And don't EVEN mention FoxNews Channel! They edited out Sally Field's comments on Bush from the damn Emmy Awards!! FoxNews is little more than an extension of the Bush White House, and the other networks are just plain wussies!

Keith Olbermann is the only television journalist who has had the balls to call the President out! Where are the Daniel Schorr's of the world, or the Eric Severied's who would actually analyze and confront a sitting President?

So Nit, spare us the idea that there is some kind of "Liberal Media" out there somewhere.

Next time you have that kind of brain fart, think about the fact that this is the ONLY sitting U.S. President who has screened his audiences for anyone who is NOT a Republican!!

LBJ at least had to face the hecklers! Nixon had to face the hecklers! Carter and Clinton faced the hecklers! We are all Americans, but we have a President who has taken the office of President and turned it upside down. The VP reports to NO ONE! Does that not bother you? Does any of that bother you?

So you can shut your trap with:
"Quite frankly, the media have been unrelenting on Bush since the first few weeks of him taking office. It has never ceased. The democrats and the media have worked lockstep for the most part to discredit, embarrass, and paint our President in the worst matter possible."

That is simply bullsh_t and you know it!

Bush's worst enemies are himself and the sand in the hourglass.

Did the media make up the war?

Did the media say "Mission Accomplished"?

Did the media wait for days before sending in FEMA to New Orleans?

Did the media utter the words, "Brownie, you're doing a heckuva job"?

Did the media nominate Harriet Meirs to the Supreme Court?

Did the media call Donald Rumsfeld the "greatest Secretary of Defense in the history of the United States"? (Cheney did!)

Nit, it seems you are enamored with mediocrity, hubris, and incompetence. I don't know where you've been for the past 7 years, but obviously, you have not paid a lot of attention. :)

`

`

JDR,

Good link.
I'll bet FoxNews doesn't carry his columns anymore! Besides, he's an editor at Reason Magazine---and name which doesn't lend itself to association with Fox!

`

Senate votes 72-25 to condemn moveon.org ad.

The usual suspects were in the 25 "nay" vote crowd: Hillary, Kerry, Dodd, Boxer, Byrd, Teddy, Harkin, Reid. O'bama and Biden didn't even have the balls to show up and vote.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00344

These Senators vote to support moveon.org rather than a 4 star general. No surprise. At least some Dems see the light.

Here is what the 25 voted against:

"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."

Despicable but predictable.

`

Oh, that's really a powerful vote there Dan. Right up there with Brittany and O.J. as far as importance goes. Try to focus on the relevant issues here.

In fact, here's an article from Newsweek Magazine that is relevant.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20892483/site/newsweek/

Dan,
As for this drivel, "O'bama and Biden didn't even have the balls to show up and vote." Guess you've never heard of the upcoming caucuses in Iowa and primaries in Northeastern states--Oh, that's right! You think this was IMPORTANT stuff! Yeah. Important like impeaching a man for getting his knob shined and lying about it. Yeah. That's really the business of the people.

Get real, Dan. You go Postal when I point out your hypocrisy using abortion and "seatbelt" arguments, but then you try to act like a vote on
an A-D-V-E-R-T-I-S-E-M-E-N-T is something important.

You are such a hypocrite or to paraphrase you, "Stay on topic"!!! You are truly funny.

`

`

Carol, Darryl, Rufus, James et al.

This really is quite a revelation on how the war is being waged and how the "mercenaries" are not held responsible for ANYTHING. Michael Hirsch has been very good at investigative journalism and this is very powerful.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20892483/site/newsweek/

Of course, some are too worried about congress not "dissing" moveon.org to care about deaths in Iraq. :)

`

TLC and to think this is what the US invaded Iraq to save them from! Wonder which evil the Iraqi people prefer; the one the knew or the one they now have?

Shalom

"Try to focus on the relevant issues here."

"Stay on topic"!!!"

Uhh, Demon Deacon....read the title of the LTE. Here it is again:

Gen. Petraeus on Iraq: Same song, new verse.

Read this which I posted:

"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."

Notice that BOTH the LTE title AND the Senate vote contain "Petraeus"??????????

And my post was not on topic?

This week you morphed seat belt use into abortion. Recently you morphed global warming into abortion. THAT is not staying on topic. Spin away, I can't wait.

***********************************

I agree this vote is symbolic, however it is revealing indeed.

These 25 voted FOR "personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces."

At worst it shows disdain for the military. Even worse, at least for Dems, it will make good political hay come election time.

I gotta give Hillary credit for showing up, voting, and voting her conscience. Obama was probably hiding behind his office curtains.

These people are deathly intimidated by moveon.org and the their far left cronies. Look what happened to Lieberman if you doubt it. Fine by me, the further left they move the better.

I realize calling a 4 star general a betrayer, in your mind, is comparable to reporting on Britney and OJ. Thanks for making the point.

Dan:

I'm not really following all this, but your last post caused my to learn a bit about the ruckus. I went here (link by you):

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00344

No I do not begin to understand the maze of Senate protocol .. but think Vote 344 was about Cornyn Amdt. No. 2934. Ignoring the "Statement of Purpose" .. which for all we know was written by Karl Rove .. I clicked on the actual amendment, which did verbatim confirm the "Statement of Purpose" .. but when I clicked on the "TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S11770" then "Printer Friendly Display" .. I found this "http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?r110:./temp/~r110SM4zVP
which I THINK is what they were actually voting on:

This appears to be the Same Time Off as Time in the War Zone Bill that was recently defeated (a few votes short of 60). Inside this is a "Waiver by the President.--The President may waive the limitation ... "

So who knows .. my point while I agree most in Congress are voting for the purpose of getting re-elected, is also believe these tallies have been GROSSLY oversimplified, and for you to hang your hat on the soundbites you have created does not serve you not your country well.

Your friend, JDR

TLC, thanks for the link. How terrible things have become, how totally out of control. It seems we can avoid the draft and hire thugs to fight for our "freedom", the phrase so overused by those who defend our invasion of Iraq. I always ask how Iraq threatened our freedom. Well, you know everything changed after 911 is the moronic answer I get. God Help America.

I think it was wrong to scapegoat General P.

It's not his war. It's his battle to fight not to defend. He has fought this war as well as anyone so far but that doesn't change the fact that it is a stupid war.

It's his boss that is responsible & his boss that has betrayed us.

The Senate vote was just one of those stupid things that our congress does. It's meant for campaign ads. Nothing else.

`

Dan,
Do me ONE favor? Watch this short clip and watch the entier thing!

http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?f=00&g=b9c7a6d8-3453-47a9-b211-e498c8722cb2&p=Source_Countdown&t=m5

That, at the very least, should give you pause for all your "ranting" about moveon.org

Unless, of course, you are buried so deep in the GOP you can't even hear it.

`

`

Carol, Rufus, JDR, Dave Ribar,

The link above is not just for Dan and the "head in the sand" group. It is powerful in that it uses facts to contrast the President's words with his past. Powerful indeed.

http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?f=00&g=b9c7a6d8-3453-47a9-b211-e498c8722cb2&p=Source_Countdown&t=m5

I think it's one of the best I've seen or read.

`

Another scary link, TLC. Listen to the Diane Rehm show today...Bush has played his hand masterfully...keeps enough Rep supporters to prevent a vote on ANYTHING the Dems propose from having enough votes to prevent a veto. Have to say those in power are the most skilled manipulators I have ever seen...

`

Carol,
Thanks for the word about DR show. I love that show! I only wish she could get the President or VP to appear on her show, but we all know, they ONLY go on Fox or Rush Limbaugh.

Sad.

`

~

Carol,
The DR show was fantastic! In fact one of her guests was the one who wrote the Newsweek piece about Blackwater and Bush's legacy--Michael Hirsch. Wish some of the "Head in the Sand Gang" would listen in sometime.

`