So the Democrats create and pass worthless crap huh?

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by article

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A MoveOn.org political advertisement that criticized the top U.S. commander in Iraq was "disgusting," President Bush said Thursday, accusing Democrats of being afraid to criticize the anti-war group.


Bush told reporters at a White House news conference that MoveOn.org's ad in The New York Times about Gen. David Petraeus was a "sorry deal." The September 10 full-page ad was titled "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?"

"I felt like the ad was an attack, not only on Gen. Petraeus, but on the U.S. military," Bush said. "And I was disappointed that not more leaders in the Democratic Party spoke out strongly against that kind of ad."

Bush said that "most Democrats are afraid of irritating a left-wing group like MoveOn.org" and they "are more afraid of irritating them than they are of irritating the United States military." Video Watch Bush condemn the MoveOn.org ad »

He said, "It's one thing to attack me. It's another thing to attack somebody like Gen. Petraeus."

Many Democratic lawmakers immediately criticized the ad after it was published.

Eli Pariser, executive director of MoveOn.org, reacted quickly to Bush's comments.

"What's disgusting is that the president has more interest in political attacks than developing an exit strategy to get our troops out of Iraq and end this awful war," Pariser said. "The president has no credibility on Iraq: He lied repeatedly to the American people to get us into the war. Most Americans oppose the war and want us to get out."


MoveOn.org and other war critics have accused Petraeus and the Bush administration of "cherry-picking" data to make it seem that military success is being achieved in Iraq.

During testimony last week before Congress, Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, U.S. ambassador to Iraq, said they believed the U.S. troop increase in Iraq has had some success, an assertion that critics of the war have questioned.

A Senate GOP amendment to repudiate the MoveOn.org ad passed Thursday 72-25 as Republicans tried to force Democrats to distance themselves, on the record, from the controversy.

Among Democratic presidential candidates, Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York and Sens. Chris Dodd of Connecticut voted against the resolution. Sens. Joe Biden of Delaware and Barack Obama of Illinois didn't vote.
advertisement

In a 51-46 vote, Democrats failed in a bid to condemn "personal attacks" on then-Democratic Sen. Max Cleland of Georgia in 2002 and Sen. John Kerry, the 2004 party presidential nominee. Sixty votes were needed to proceed.

The Democratic amendment about Cleland and Kerry also included language condemning the "unwarranted personal attack" on Petraeus. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend

CNN's Dana Bash contributed to this report.

I am glad the Republicans are creating this GREAT legislation. It will help the country in many ways.

[Rouger2]

Funny gave me a goood laugh.

[RMNIXON]

Why shouldn't they make a statement about our military commander being slandered in war time? The Senate did confirm him without a single Nay vote ya know.




But my real question is how many liberals don't get that this ad hurt their cause and drives a further wedge between the far left and the more moderate Democrats and independents who they will need in the next election?

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

Why shouldn't they make a statement about our military commander being slandered in war time? The Senate did confirm him without a single Nay vote ya know.

Just because someone was confirmed doesn't mean they did a good job. (see most of the Bush appointments.)

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

But my real question is how many liberals don't get that this ad hurt their cause and drives a further wedge between the far left and the more moderate Democrats and independents who they will need in the next election?

Because I believe most people believe the comments in the ad?

[garbagemanlb]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

Why shouldn't they make a statement about our military commander being slandered in war time? The Senate did confirm him without a single Nay vote ya know.




But my real question is how many liberals don't get that this ad hurt their cause and drives a further wedge between the far left and the more moderate Democrats and independents who they will need in the next election?

I'd look to see proof of that claim. From what I've seen, the polls indicate that this report basically did nothing to change opinions on the war, and this moveon ad didn't do any damage either.

[Stylerod]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Because I believe most people believe the comments in the ad?

You think so, huh?

This was a good line

"And that leads me to come to this conclusion: that most Democrats are afraid of irritating a left-wing group like MoveOn.org, or more afraid of irritating them, then they are of irritating the United States military," Bush said Thursday.

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by garbagemanlb

I'd look to see proof of that claim. From what I've seen, the polls indicate that this report basically did nothing to change opinions on the war, and this moveon ad didn't do any damage either.

Damage to your party? The Congress just got an 11% approval rating. I think you need more re-elections of incumbents with a majority than Republicans?

That is the problem with the far left.

Concern for the war, which I share by the way, does not equal the notion that the General is a liar and is scripted by Bush. That is what I am talking about. You act as if the majority is now in solid with the anti-Bush anti-war political camp and I am telling you it is not.

[garbagemanlb]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

Damage to your party? The Congress just got an 11% approval rating. I think you need more re-elections of incumbents with a majority than Republicans?

That is the problem with the far left.

Concern for the war, which I share by the way, does not equal the notion that the General is a liar and is scripted by Bush. That is what I am talking about. You act as if the majority is now in solid with the anti-Bush anti-war political camp and I am telling you it is not.

The majority of Americans are STILL against this war, even with the report. As Republicans fall all over themselves getting in line behind Patraeus's flawed report, and ignore all the other reports that paint a dark picture over the situation, they only deepen their own hole.

Americans want change, and I frankly don't see any GOP candidate that truly means change (other than Paul).

[RMNIXON]

General David Petraeus' popularity and approval is on the rise since his appearances before Congress, despite criticism from Democrats and the now-famous MoveOn.org ad calling him "General Betray-Us."

A Gallup Poll shows Petraeus' favorability rating at 61 percent — up from 52 before his testimony. A survey from the Pew Research Center indicates 57 percent of respondents who read or heard about the general's remarks approve of his plan. And 51 percent say they believe Petraeus was presenting an accurate picture of the conditions in Iraq.

FOXNews.com - Congressional Democrats Tear Into One of Their Own - Brit Hume | Special Report


Moveon BETRAY US is working real magic alrighty!

[garbagemanlb]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

General David Petraeus' popularity and approval is on the rise since his appearances before Congress, despite criticism from Democrats and the now-famous MoveOn.org ad calling him "General Betray-Us."

A Gallup Poll shows Petraeus' favorability rating at 61 percent — up from 52 before his testimony. A survey from the Pew Research Center indicates 57 percent of respondents who read or heard about the general's remarks approve of his plan. And 51 percent say they believe Petraeus was presenting an accurate picture of the conditions in Iraq.

FOXNews.com - Congressional Democrats Tear Into One of Their Own - Brit Hume | Special Report


Moveon BETRAY US is working real magic alrighty!

I like how you conveniently ignored the fact that the report itself is flawed. Can't make up a defense for that now, can we?


I have yet to see proof of your claim that the ad hurt our cause.

While doing some research I found this little gem:

Last week's congressional testimony by General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker, followed by President Bush's address to the nation, has not changed bottom-line public attitudes toward the war in Iraq. However, there has been a modest increase in positive views about the U.S. military effort, accompanied by largely positive public reactions to General Petraeus' recommendations.

The mostly stable opinions about the war and U.S. policies toward Iraq are consistent with this assessment. In the current survey, a 47% plurality says the United States will probably or definitely fail to achieve its goals in Iraq, which is largely unchanged from July (49%). Most important, opinions about whether to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq have not changed at all over the past two months: 54% believe U.S. forces should be brought home as soon as possible while 39% say U.S. troops should remain in Iraq until the situation is stable.

There is a similar pattern in views of whether the troop increase President Bush approved earlier this year is improving the situation in Iraq. Overall, 31% of Americans say the troop surge is making things better in Iraq up slightly from 24% in April. But the prevailing view, held by 46%, is that the troop increases are having no effect, while 20% say it is making things worse.

The partisan divide in ratings of the surge is, if anything, larger today than in the spring. Currently, 59% of Republicans say the troop increases have improved the situation in Iraq, up from 47% in April. Just 11% of Democrats say the surge has made things better, up only slightly from 7% earlier in the year. Instead, most Democrats (60%) and roughly half of independents (49%) say the surge is having no effect on the situation in Iraq, views that have not shifted much since April.

http://people-press.org/reports/disp...3?ReportID=355


Looks like things aren't as rosy as you are making them out to be concerning the effects of the report.

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by garbagemanlb

I have yet to see proof of your claim that the ad hurt our cause.

Depends on who "our cause" involves and what the ad intended to prove?

Once again you are trying to insert people who have a legitimate concern for progress in Iraq with far leftist who question the honesty of the military commander involved. They are not one and the same.

But if you are that confident please e-mail your member of congress today in light of this setback:


Senate Democrats lose on Iraq pullout plan - Yahoo! News

[JaJae]

It's definitely bullshit legislation, but I do think it is very important for Congress to show they don't support the left-wing propaganda, extremism and dirty politics surrounding the war in Iraq. I can understand voting present or refusing to vote. I can't understand voting against it as many Democrats had done.

Bills like this is part of the reason Congress's approval rating is so low. Politicians refusing to condemn moveon.org is another one...

[garbagemanlb]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

Depends on who "our cause" involves and what the ad intended to prove?

Once again you are trying to insert people who have a legitimate concern for progress in Iraq with far leftist who question the honesty of the military commander involved. They are not one and the same.

But if you are that confident please e-mail your member of congress today in light of this setback:


Senate Democrats lose on Iraq pullout plan - Yahoo! News

It's okay, considering the public still has a strong preference for Democrats in '08, there is at least some light at the end of the tunnel. It's just going to be a long year with the obstructionist GOP, but I think we'll manage.

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by JaJae

It's definitely bullshit legislation, but I do think it is very important for Congress to show they don't support the left-wing propaganda, extremism and dirty politics surrounding the war in Iraq. I can understand voting present or refusing to vote. I can't understand voting against it as many Democrats had done.

Bills like this is part of the reason Congress's approval rating is so low. Politicians refusing to condemn moveon.org is another one...

So it is obviously ok that they don't condemn the right wing spin sites, right?

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

So it is obviously ok that they don't condemn the right wing spin sites, right?

I don't recall right wing spin sites taking out full page ads in the front of the NY Times essentially calling someone who is considered an honorable general a traitor.

The bill wasn't to condemn the moveon.org website which has been posting asinine propaganda for some time now. It was to condemn the act of claiming our war general in Iraq is betraying our country in the NY Times.

The Democrats had two options. They could have ignored it and walked out like Obama did and abstained from voting. They could have voted present in protest to calling up a useless bill. OR, they could have decided to vote against condemning this action. Sadly many Democrats took this action, the money and publicity from moveon.org was more important than displaying good character. I don't know what's necessarily worse, spending time on this bill or going against its principle. In either case, this is why they have such horrible poll ratings right now.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

I am glad the Republicans are creating this GREAT legislation. It will help the country in many ways.

Why not also condemn the Democratic version of this bill that they voted on the same week criticizing Moveon.org as well the Swift Boats?

I think it's also ironic that they called out the Swift Boats by name, but only referred to the moveon.org incident and didn't mention their name in the bill... the lengths they go through..

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by garbagemanlb

It's okay, considering the public still has a strong preference for Democrats in '08, there is at least some light at the end of the tunnel. It's just going to be a long year with the obstructionist GOP, but I think we'll manage.

But Osama says it is bad what the Democrats are doing. Being such weak babies!

[Stylerod]

The NYT's is finally admitting they broke two Policies with this add.

After two weeks of denials, the New York Times acknowledged that it should not have given a discount to MoveOn.org for a full-page advertisement assailing Gen. David H. Petraeus.

The liberal advocacy group should have paid $142,000 for the ad calling the U.S. commander in Iraq "General Betray Us," not $65,000, the paper's public editor wrote yesterday.

Clark Hoyt said in his column that MoveOn was not entitled to the cheaper "standby" rate for advertising that can run any time over the following week because the Times did promise that the ad would run Sept. 10, the day Petraeus began his congressional testimony. "We made a mistake," Times spokeswoman Catherine Mathis was quoted as saying.

MoveOn, saying it had no reason to believe it was paying "anything other than the normal and usual charge," said yesterday that it would send the Times $77,000 to make up the difference.

The Times also violated its own advertising policy, which bars "attacks of a personal nature," Hoyt reported. He wrote that the episode "gave fresh ammunition to a cottage industry that loves to bash The Times as a bastion of the 'liberal media.' "

Oh, woops. And, of course, he couldn't just say we made a mistake he had to put a jab in there how now people have more ammunition to bash their paper. So sad.....